|
Elizabeth Dole on Free Trade
Republican Sr Senator
|
|
|
CAFTA has created jobs for North Carolina
Kay Hagan slammed her rival for backing free trade agreements despite concerns about North Carolina jobs. Hagan released papers that question why her opponent, Sen. Elizabeth Dole, would support pacts such as CAFTA. Critics say the agreement accelerated
the decline of North Carolina’s manufacturing and textile industries. CAFTA supporters, however, say it does the opposite. Dole helped approve the CAFTA agreement in 2005, arguing the pact would remove tariffs in other countries and bring
North Carolina products to a new marketplace. She said sectors such as agriculture and pharmaceuticals would benefit. Dole also said it would benefit the textile industry because American fabric would be used in Central America, and her office said the
region became the second largest market for North Carolina manufacturing, agriculture and textile products in 2006, with more than $1.8 billion in exports. Dole’s office also said she has secured $57 million for U.S. Customs to enforce textile trade.
Source: By Mike Baker, Associated Press, on WRAL
, Jul 25, 2008
Supported NAFTA despite cheap textile imports
Elizabeth Dole's support for Social Security personal accounts in a state with a high concentration of senior voters proved she was a woman of principle and made clear she had depth as well as charm.
In fact, her Social Security position combined with her support for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), in a state wrecked by cheap textile imports and furniture from Asia, was really gutsy.
Source: Winning Right, by Ed Gillespie, p.123
, Sep 5, 2006
Supported NAFTA despite loss of NC textile jobs
At a Labor Day event, Bowles operatives sent union "volunteers" to hold up signs protesting Elizabeth Dole's support of NAFTA. I'm sure they thought it would rattle her.
Bowles had made a major issue of Dole's support for NAFTA in the campaign, even though as President Bill Clinton's chief of staff he had been critically involved in its enactment.
Ironically, his wife, Crandall, is a textile heiress, and part of their joint fortunes came from Spring Industries, perhaps most famous for Spring Maid towels. We had responded to his criticism that Dole's support of NAFTA cost
North Carolina textile jobs by pointing out not only that he had supported the treaty himself, but that his own family's fortunes rested partly on Spring Industries' moving their towel and washcloth production overseas.
Source: Winning Right, by Ed Gillespie, p.116
, Sep 5, 2006
China: Two-track policy: Open markets + political reforms
Dole criticized the Administration for treating China as a “strategic partner” despite human rights violations and its development of advanced weapons systems that, she said, could threaten the US. China “imprisons and persecutes dissidents and religious
believers,” she said. “It employs prison labor. It steals our nuclear and other military secrets.” It was not clear how her “two-track policy” to promote open markets and political reforms in China would differ from current goals in Washington.
Source: New York Times, Diana Jean Schemo, p. A21
, Sep 28, 1999
China: Expand trade, but linked to human rights
Dole said she supported expanding business with China while linking it to improving human rights in that country. “I think you can actually have a separate track where you actually move forward to expand trade in China,” she said.
Source: Kevin Landrigan, Nashua Telegraph
, Aug 22, 1999
An open global market helps our economy thrive
It’s a truism that we live in a global world. But history has shown that the kind of world it is, makes a world of difference. An international economic system dominated by closed markets, command economies, trade barriers and mistrust - would cripple
our economy. A world of open markets, free enterprise, free trade and the rule of law - helps us and all our friends to thrive.
Source: Remarks to the Detroit Economic Club, 29 April 1999
, Apr 29, 1999
Free trade zone for the entire Western Hemisphere
The Clinton-Gore team is still stalling on lowering trade barriers by expanding NAFTA. Meanwhile, aside from Mexico, trade is stagnant between the United States and Latin America. The impact is serious:economists calculate that Latin America’s per-capita
income will actually be less next year than it was two years ago. That’s why I’m calling for a free trade zone for the entire Western Hemisphere. Nothing could make a greater contribution to growing the economies of all the Americas.
Source: Remarks to the Detroit Economic Club, 29 April 1999
, Apr 29, 1999
Authorize “Fast Track” for trade negotiations
[We need] approval of fast track-the President’s authority, consulting with Congress, to negotiate trade agreements around the world. While we debate and delay, other countries move forward with trade partnerships that put our products at a disadvantage.
Fast track does not diminish Congress’s role - it still has the final say, by majority vote, before any agreement would take effect. But fast track does recognize the vital role of the executive in speaking for our country in world trade forums.
Source: Remarks to the Detroit Economic Club, 29 April 1999
, Apr 29, 1999
Admit China to the World Trade Organization
It’s also time [to allow] the entry of China into the WTO. History teaches that greater economic freedom moves nations down the path to political freedom. and that promotes peace. The recently negotiated agreement contains.provisions that commit China to
opening its markets on a definite schedule. Let’s now resolve our remaining differences. Let’s be skeptical and prudent. let’s watch our defenses. but let’s not lose this opportunity to promote and participate in China’s market economy.
Source: Remarks to the Detroit Economic Club, 29 April 1999
, Apr 29, 1999
Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru.
Approves the Agreement entered into with the government of Peru. Provides for the Agreement's entry into force upon certain conditions being met on or after January 1, 2008. Prescribes requirements for:- enforcement of textile and apparel rules of origin;
- certain textile and apparel safeguard measures; and
- enforcement of export laws governing trade of timber products from Peru.
Proponents support voting YES because:
Rep. RANGEL: It's absolutely ridiculous to believe that we can create jobs without trade. I had the opportunity to travel to Peru recently. I saw firsthand how important this agreement is to Peru and how this agreement will strengthen an important ally of ours in that region. Peru is resisting the efforts of Venezuela's authoritarian President Hugo Chavez to wage a war of words and ideas in Latin America against the US. Congress should acknowledge the support of the people of Peru and pass this legislation by a strong margin.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
Rep. WU: I regret that I cannot vote for this bill tonight because it does not put human rights on an equal footing with environmental and labor protections.
Rep. KILDEE: All trade agreements suffer from the same fundamental flaw: They are not self-enforcing. Trade agreements depend upon vigorous enforcement, which requires official complaints be made when violations occur. I have no faith in President Bush to show any enthusiasm to enforce this agreement. Congress should not hand this administration yet another trade agreement because past agreements have been more efficient at exporting jobs than goods and services. I appeal to all Members of Congress to vote NO on this. But I appeal especially to my fellow Democrats not to turn their backs on those American workers who suffer from the export of their jobs. They want a paycheck, not an unemployment check.
Reference: Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act;
Bill H.R. 3688
; vote number 2007-413
on Dec 4, 2007
Voted NO on free trade agreement with Oman.
Vote on final passage of a bill to implement the United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement. Opponents of the bill say to vote NAY because: - International trade can confer tremendous benefits on all of its participants. Unfortunately, the Oman Free Trade Agreement fails to live up to that potential.
- In 2001, the US entered into a similar trade agreement with the country of Jordan. The agreement was heralded for its progressive labor standards. However, we have recently seen in Jordan instances of foreign workers forced into slave labor, stripped of their passports, denied their wages, and compelled to work for days without rest.
- These incidents have been occurring in Jordan because Jordanian labor laws preclude protections for foreign workers. My fear in Oman is that they have far weaker labor standards, and that would lend itself to even worse conditions than in Jordan.
- When our trade partners are held to different, less stringent standards, no one is better off.
When Omani firms can employ workers in substandard conditions, the Omani workers and American workers both lose. The playing field is not level.
Proponents of the bill say to vote YEA because: - The Oman Free Trade Agreement sends a very important message that the US strongly supports the economic development of moderate Middle Eastern nations. This is a vital message in the global war on terrorism.
- Since the end of WWII, the US has accepted nonreciprocal trade concessions in order to further important Cold War and post-Cold War foreign policy objectives. Examples include offering Japan and Europe nonreciprocal access to American markets during the 1950s in order to strengthen the economies of our allies and prevent the spread of communism.
- Oman is quickly running out of oil and, as a result, has launched a series of measures to reform its economy. This free-trade agreement immediately removes Oman's uniform 5% tariff on US goods.
Reference: United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement;
Bill S. 3569
; vote number 2006-190
on Jun 29, 2006
Voted YES on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade.
Approves the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States-Free Trade Agreement entered into on August 5, 2005, with the governments of Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua (CAFTA-DR), and the statement of administrative action proposed to implement the Agreement. Voting YES would: - Progressively eliminate customs duties on all originating goods traded among the participating nations
- Preserve US duties on imports of sugar goods over a certain quota
- Remove duties on textile and apparel goods traded among participating nations
- Prohibit export subsidies for agricultural goods traded among participating nations
- Provide for cooperation among participating nations on customs laws and import licensing procedures
- Recommend that each participating nation uphold the Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work
- Urge each participating nation to obey various international agreements regarding intellectual property rights
Reference: Central America Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act;
Bill HR 3045
; vote number 2005-209
on Jul 28, 2005
Voted NO on establishing free trade between US & Singapore.
Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the US and Singapore. The trade agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the US and Singapore. The agreement would remove tariffs on goods and duties on textiles, and open markets for services The agreement would also establish intellectual property, environmental and labor standards.
Reference: US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act;
Bill S.1417/HR 2739
; vote number 2003-318
on Jul 31, 2003
Voted YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile.
Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the US and Chile. The agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the US and Chile. The trade pact would decrease duties and tariffs on agricultural and textile products. It would also open markets for services. The trade pact would establish intellectual property safeguards and would call for enforcement of environmental and labor standards.
Reference: US-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act;
Bill S.1416/HR 2738
; vote number 2003-319
on Jul 31, 2003
Extend trade restrictions on Burma to promote democracy.
Dole co-sponsored extending trade restrictions on Burma to promote democracy
A joint resolution approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003. The original act sanctioned the ruling military junta, and recognized the National League of Democracy as the legitimate representative of the Burmese people.
Legislative Outcome: Related bills: H.J.RES.44, H.J.RES.93, S.J.RES.41; became Public Law 110-52.
Source: S.J.RES.16 07-SJR16 on Jun 14, 2007
Page last updated: Jan 13, 2017