Source:
The HillRep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) was pleased with the deal Democratic leaders and the Bush administration reached in May that appeared to pave the way for bipartisan votes this summer on a free trade agreement (FTA) with Peru. But a little more than two months later, Smith said he’s unsure whether the House will actually pass any trade deals this year, even if they include the tougher labor and environmental language the administration agreed to in May, which Smith hailed.
“Now I am worried about whether we’ll actually pass trade agreements with that language,” said Smith, who is a vice-chairman of the House New Democrat Coalition. The group has traditionally supported free trade and won support from industries that depend on exports.
He’s also concerned that he’s hearing no talk of an extension of fast track authority, which makes it easier for the administration to negotiate trade deals, ever since it expired on June 30.
. . .
Dooley also said Democrats could stand to lose the support of trade-friendly businesses that have traditionally been strong supporters of New Democrats, such as high-tech companies.
. . .
Lori Wallach of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch said there is a greater political downside for Democrats who support Bush trade agreements than for those who vote no and risk losing funding from corporate interests. She also said it should be seen as a surprise that any trade deals negotiated by the Bush administration are moving forward, given the opposition from core Democratic constituencies.
Read more:
http://thehill.com/business--lobby/new-dems-try-to-kick-start-stalled-free-trade-agenda-2007-07-18.html
Meanwhile, the nationwide strike and protests against free trade with the US is in its thirteenth day in Peru. New Dems don't care. They keep pushing the party to support the free trade agreement which goes against the adamant wishes of the entire population of Peru.