Lou Dobbs:Oman Free Trade agreement passes Congress

According to a report by Lou Dobbs, The House passed HR 5684, the Oman Free Trade Agreement on Fri evening.(7/21). Provisions allow a repeat of the Dubai Ports deal allowing Omani citizens the right to purchse and control port operations in The US. I have not seen this reported anywhere else. Only Pres Bush needs to sign it into law.

It's a neocon's wet dream. Allows Oman to own and operate our ports. They can even bring in Omani citizens to do what our Teamsters do. Just what Bin Laden needs to get into the US.

Watch for terrorists to come into the country unimpeded and attack major financial/military/political centers, only for Bushco blame the Democrats who voted no on the Oman free trade agreement.

to foreigners. Piece by piece. What is wrong with the US and our gov't. A country filled with apathetic brainless idiots and a country run by corporate stooges. What a joke. It would be funny if there weren't so many dead.

Most Democrats opposed. Most Republicans for it including Peter King (RNY) who was beating the drums in opposition to the Dubai deal a few months ago.

Why aren't the Democrats screaming about this little bit of Republican hypocracy?

Here's the link for who voted for it and against it.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll392.xml

jumped by a bunch of freetraders who scornfully derided me for being racist against moderate Arab states in the ME and somehow not able to understand the importance of trade to the nation. Thought I had taken a wrong turn to FR for a minute.

Free trade is the way to economic growth, international interdependence and peace.

.....the trades. Considering the huge outcry recently over Dubya I can't think of any a real American who would agree with selling out our country bit by bit??

I know the profit-loving corporate owners are the only ones I can think of that agree with selling off our country.

to lower wages as the very rich get extremely rich and the planet and society suffer.

With forced union strengthening with legal rights and passage of environmental/worker safety laws plus by country minimum wages equal to a living wage for that country, the theory that free trade is the right way to economic growth, international interdependence and peace actually works, as the lower wage economic advantage of a poor country at least is used for good - somewhere.

Born-Again Rubinomics http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/greider/2

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/071806P.shtml

and the economic strength of the vast majority of it's citizens.

Born-Again Rubinomics http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060731/greider/2

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/071806P.shtml

It surprised me completely when Dobbs announced it, and I looked it up on the 'House' voting record site. Yes, I guess there was some debate. But amazingly it wasn't reported by any news organizations that I know of. So I guess the Congressional prostitutes pulled one off. I also found out my local Rep, a 'security minded' conservative, voted for it.

could you imagine if we sold these rights to the israelis. i don't understand how or why this is allowed.

The people are wonderful and extremely hospitable...

There's a danger here of grouping all Arabs into one basket. Oman were the first Nation to open up an Israeli Trade office in the late 1990's, they only closed it because of the second intifada.

This has nothing to do with where the 'foreigners' are from. This is about security in a time of war, and borders and ports need to be controlled by US citizens who have a responsibility to this republic.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

so sweet of you :)

The American public NEEDS TO LEARN THE TRUTH ABOUT THE 'TOUGH ON TERROR' REPUBLICANS!


Yeas Nays
Republican 199 28
Democratic 22 176

Yes, reply #3 (Bklyncowgirl) has graciously provided us with the link.

As well as Kerry, Obama, Clinton, Cantwell, Baucus, Pryor, Nelson (FL), Landrieu, Salazar, and Nelson (NE).

Now THAT vote was REALLY under the radar.

Fla and the rest....Oh crap...we are in trouble.. I guess they felt they had to but Kerry voting with Repug Down the Line Landrieu and Ben Nelson?

Sheesh..

It sounds like he thought it was the best they were going to get - and better than the status quo that existed without it - and it may reflect that Oman is one of the better countries in the area. Oman is NOT like Dubai (UAE) which was a major location for terrorist funding.

Here's Kerry's statement:
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today the Senate is considering a free-trade agreement with Oman. And here we are, once again, facing a free-trade agreement with an important ally that is the product of a failed process, an inattentive administration, and a basic neglect of the will of Congress.

I think this is a decent agreement with Oman, and I am not interested in harming relations with an important Middle East ally because of my frustration with the administration. Economic integration of the Middle East is too critically important a goal and vital to our efforts in the war on terror. I understand that deficiencies remain in this agreement. I will monitor Oman's remaining commitments on worker rights very closely. We must continue to engage this volatile region of the world economically if we expect to make progress on a number of fronts.

I have said repeatedly to the administration that our trade agreements must include the basic International Labor Organization, ILO, standards within the four corners of the trade agreement and that those standards must be enforceable. I have said that we must address other abuses such as the recent reports of abhorrent working conditions in Jordan. So what have we done? On CAFTA, I offered an amendment calling on the administration to require equivalent dispute resolution procedures for workers' rights as we provide for patent violations. And even though that vote failed on a 10 to 10 tie, the administration did not even consider strengthening the standards.

On Oman, Senators CONRAD, BINGAMAN and I offered an amendment to strengthen slave labor laws. The committee adopted the amendment unanimously. Inexplicably, the administration has returned the implementing bill without the language--without an explanation--without justification. It is absolutely inconceivable that the administration would not support a ban on the importation of goods produced with slave labor. At a time when America is attempting to restore its image around the world, this certainly sends the signal that as long as this administration is in place, we should not anticipate common sense in Government.

But I will say that the intransigence demonstrated by the administration this week does not bode well for renewal of fast-track authority. Under the Constitution, Congress is empowered to manage our economic relationships. We grant that power to the administration so that we may present the world with one voice in our economic diplomacy. But we must evaluate under what conditions we grant this authority in the future--if we grant it at all. There is no doubt that the system is broken. And I will be actively engaged as we reevaluate this strategy."

I think this is a decent agreement with Oman, and I am not interested in harming relations with an important Middle East ally because of my frustration with the administration. Economic integration of the Middle East is too critically important a goal and vital to our efforts in the war on terror. I understand that deficiencies remain in this agreement. I will monitor Oman's remaining commitments on worker rights very closely. We must continue to engage this volatile region of the world economically if we expect to make progress on a number of fronts.


Couldn't Kerry have just voted "NO!" Why would he look for a "better bill" out of this Congress? Why won't our Dems just stop voting with them? Wouldn't it be better to vote "NO" or walk out that go for a Repug Bill that sells Dem values down the River?

My own Dem Rep (who I respect) says he votes with the Repug sometimes because when we win back the House he feels the Dems can overturn the Repugs Votes and "better to vote for a "compromise" where one can at least have some input. Only thing is that my Dem Rep said that before the 2004 Selection and since we have NO Guarantee (except HOPE) that Dems will take anything back (given the state of our voting machines and Bush's ramping up WAR..WAR once again) how do our Dems keep voting over and over again for Repug Bills thinking they can "overturn them" at some time in the future. WHAT IF THERE IS NO FUTURE FOR DEMS? WHAT ABOUT THE HARM DONE IN THE MEANTIME? :shrug: So...to me Kerry's answer is not a good one for me as a Dem or our Party for the Future. NO SPINE!!!!

That statement lists more reasons he's unhappy with it than reasons to vote for it. I think the paragraph you isolated is the key one for why he voted for it. It might be that he agreed to vote for some chnages they did agree to.

If he voted no, it would still pass, which answers the question about the meantime. I don't think it has anything to do with spine - voting No wouldn't require any courage. All Democrats voting No on everything they think less than perfect won't change anything. I don't know if I agree with Kerry here - it seems that he and the other Democrats on the committe tried to fix it and that the committee passed their changes. I don't understand why the entire committee didn't pressure the administration to put them back in. I do respect that he laid out his reasons.

then vote to pass all the different things people complained about in the past, but won't notice this time because their attention is focused on some other new issue or incident.