Congress approves US-Peru free trade agreement

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate gave decisive backing Tuesday to a U.S.-Peru free trade agreement, opening the way for expanded economic ties with the Andean nation and giving the administration a boost in its quest to shore up relations with Latin America.

The 77-18 Senate vote on the bill implementing the agreement followed a 285-132 House vote last month. The agreement will go into effect after the two countries adjust laws needed to abide by it.

. . .

The accord has strong backing from business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. It is opposed by labor and other groups who say the tougher labor and environmental standards won't be enforced and that Peruvian peasants won't be able to compete with cheaper American farm goods.

. . .

The administration is also pressing Congress to act quickly on three other pending trade deals, with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. No action is possible this year and the Democratic Congress has shown no inclination to renew «fast track» authority, which gives the president the power to negotiate trade deals that Congress can approve or reject but cannot amend. The authority expired last summer.

In turn, the White House has threatened to veto Democratic-backed legislation to expand a program to retrain and aid workers displaced by global trade.

Read more: http://www.pr-inside.com/congress-approves-us-peru-free-trade-agreement-r332075.htm

able to compete with cheaper American farm goods... (lol)

American farm goods are very very cheap. This is the main reason rural farmers go bankrupt in foreign nations who have FTAs with the US. Rural farmers cannot produce crops and sell them in the market for less than our heavily subsidized factory farm crops.

The sentence is not backward and it is the reason citizens in Peru and other FTA countries have been protesting in the streets.

US agricultural products are quite cheap.

I wonder how Americas will like living in thatched huts?

I usually check out Kennedy, Kerry and Boxer's votes as my bellwether --

Kennedy and Kerry voted 'yea'

Boxer voted 'nay'

So I don't know how to interpret it. :shrug:

Soon....Americans will too be working for 3 cents a day...

Passed by a large margin?
Remind me again who is on the side of the American worker.

Wheat, corn, (not sugar, which has enormous protectionism) etc. are examples of the commodities where the U.S. is a world powerhouse.

Technology, size of farms, and distribution systems are the main reasons.

t says:
"For Peru, this agreement means better conditions for its workers, strengthened protections for its
amazingly diverse environment, and greater integration into the world economy. And our
neighbors to the south can hope that it represents a first step toward increased prosperity,
transparency, and stability for the Latin American region as a whole.
This agreement demonstrates what Congress and the administration can achieve when we work
together. I hope that we can build on the success of this agreement to heal the wounds of
previous battles. And I hope that we can begin to recreate a consensus for trade liberalization
going forward.
But the Peru agreement is only one step in this process. Enactment of a robust and modernized
Trade Adjustment Assistance program should be our next focus, certainly before this Congress
considers additional free trade agreements.
We cannot expect support for trade agreements unless we fulfill our responsibility to ensure that
trade-displaced workers — whether in the manufacturing or services sector — are able to retrain
and retool for the 21st century economy. I look forward to working with my Colleagues, and
with the administration, on TAA reauthorization very soon."