Right now, the so-called "free trade" deal with Colombia is floating dead in the water. But, once the sniping goes away over process, the horse-trading will begin. And the Democratic freshmen in the House may end up being key votes.
By now, we know that Speaker Pelosi is blocking a vote right now, mainly because the Administration sent the legislation to Congress despite the leadership’s desire to continue negotiations over the content of the bill and its vote timing:
Ms. Pelosi and other Democrats said they had earlier beseeched the White House not to submit the agreement— which involves a small part of United States trade — without doing more to help homeowners and the unemployed as the economy weakens.
But, do not believe that this is over: as in previous votes on trade, money will play a key role:
Like Republicans, Democrats raise campaign money from agribusiness, financial services like insurance and brokerage houses, high-tech manufacturing, the entertainment business and other sectors dependent on exports. Many Democratic lawmakers agree with the administration that killing trade accords merely opens the market for American competitors.
I’ve pointed our that more money for retraining workers left jobless because of so-called "free trade" is an exercise in grand delusions, delusions meant to fool people into believing that they can "suck it up" and accept so-called "free trade" because there will be a bone thrown their way. And shame on Democrats who will be willing to vote for so-called "free trade" in return for pay-off of a few million dollars to give workers skills for jobs that will guarantee them a substantially lower wage.
So, if there is a vote, it may come down to a handful of freshmen Democrats. Here’s a list that might be useful for people to consider. Using the vote on the so-called "free trade" deal with Peru, here is how the freshmen voted:
11 Freshmen Democrats Voting Yes Peru FTA:
- Castor (FL)–(202) 225-3376 (Obama)
- Clarke (NY)–(202) 225-6231 (Clinton)
- Ellsworth (IN)–(866) 567-0227 (NC)
- Gillibrand (NY)–(202) 225-5614 (Clinton)
- Hill, B. (IN)–202-225-5315 (NC)
- Klein (FL)–(202)-225-3026 (NC)
- Lampson (TX)–202.225.5951 (NC)
- Mahoney (FL)–(202) 225-5792 (NC)
- Mitchell (AZ)–(202) 225-2190 (NC)
- Perlmutter (CO)–202.225.2645 (Obama)
- Sestak (PA)–(202) 225-2011 (Clinton)
30 Freshmen Democrats Voting No Peru FTA (a round of applause, please):
- Arcuri (NY)
- Altmire (PA)
- Boyda (KS)
- Carney (PA)
- Cohen (TN)
- Courtney (CT)
- Donnelley (IN)
- Ellison (MN)
- Hall (NY)
- Hare (IL)
- Hirono (HI)
- Hodes (NH)
- Johnson, Hank (GA)
- Kagen (WI)
- Loebsack (IA)
- McNerney (CA)
- Murphy C. (CT)
- Murphy P. (PA)
- Richardson (CA)
- Rodriguez (TX)
- Sarbanes (MD)
- Shea-Porter (NH)
- Shuler (NC)
- Space (OH)
- Sutton (OH)
- Tsongas (MA)
- Walz (MN)
- Welch (VT)
- Wilson (OH)
- Yarmouth (KY)
Braley (IA) missed vote, issued news release in opposition
I am not sure that one can count on all the "no" votes on Peru as "no" votes on Colombia. There may be a few of the Peru negatives votes who are courted, and possibly swayed (I won’t say which ones), by the idiotic national security argument being bandied about–in other words, that supporting so-called "free trade" with Colombia buttresses the war on drugs (actually, it will do the opposite since it will impoverish many farmers who will be forced to turn to coca cultivation) or that supporting Colombia provides a counter-point to that other dangerous "threat", Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez (every American political debate needs some "threat"…it’s the American way).
But, for the sake of ease, I’ve provided phone numbers for the folks that voted "yes" on Peru. I also noted on the Peru "yes" votes who has committed to one or the other of the presidential candidates, and who is uncommitted (I took this from an independent listing and so it may not be accurate–apologies
