Kerry The Environment and Freetrade

[corporatewhore]

I have attacked dean for his environmental faults now to be fair
I am going to attack kerry.He likes to tout his environmental record but how can one be for the environment and free trade he voted for NAFTAWTO andFTAA "Just last year, the Massachusetts senator tried to position himself as the leading Senate proponent of measures designed to preserve the ability of American states to protect workers, farmers, the environment and consumers in the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) agreement the Bush administration is crafting in closed-door negotiations with other countries in the western hemisphere. While Kerry sounded like a good player, he ended up breaking with fellow Democrats to back Bush's plan to establish a "fast track" process to negotiate the FTAA agreemen
"http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0930-09.htm
Some of the biggest winners from North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have been the agribusiness and biotech industries. These corporations' unhealthy grip on consumers and farmers will only advance with the implementation of the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA). The widespread implementation of Genetically Engineered (GE) crops throughout the Americas will likely accelerate corporate consolidation of the agriculture sector, provoke pervasive impacts on human health, and further destroy the environment, already on the brink of collapse.

A Bill of Rights for Agribusiness?
One of the most hotly contested sections to NAFTA has been Chapter 11, a virtual Bill of Rights for corporations. Chapter 11 allows corporations to sue governments for "damages" if a government law affects their profits. This undermined the sovereignty of democratically elected governments.
A Quebec law banning specific pesticides reveals how Chapter 11 clauses—which are set to be included in the FTAA—undermine environmental protection. Quebec laws ban a popular weed killer called 2,4-D that is considered a possible human carcinogen, and shown to adversely affect the immune system and reproductive functions in humans, among other impacts. But now a corporate lobbying group representing some of the makers of the pesticide are now threatening to challenge the law by suing the Canadian government under NAFTA's Chapter 11. The provincial government of Quebec and Canadian taxpayers has been given a harsh choice: face paying the corporations millions of dollars, or repeal the law. Similar cases could speed the introduction of GE crops. Several states and municipalities in the Americas—from Oregon to Mato Groso, Brazil—have passed anti-GE legislation. These statutes will no doubt come under heavy fire from corporations under the FTAA. Any expansion of Chapter 11 through the FTAA will further threaten local, state and national governments' ability to enact legislation to protect their citizens and environment.

Biopirates: on your mark, get set, go!
In the last decade, the Americas and its biodiversity have been targeted by "life science" corporations ((the growing consolidation of pharmaceutical, agrichemical and seed corporations) in search of "green gold." These corporations have pillaged humankind's patrimony of traditional knowledge and biodiversity to create and patent drugs and agriculture products. The quest to develop and patent biodiversity, especially medicinal plants and crops, is threatening our food security, access to health care and the biological and cultural diversity of the Americas. The FTAA Intellectual Property Rights chapter will require that member countries allow the patenting of life forms and the extension of US Life Science patents across the continent. Member countries will be unable to restrict or deny corporations' access to biological riches.


GE contamination
GE crops are being proposed as not only the silver bullet solution to global hunger, but also the only option for agri-economic development for the hemisphere. However, GE crops have not been adequately tested by the US Department for Agriculture or the Food and Drug Administration. Impacts on the human health include, but are not limited to, allergic reactions, increased food toxicity and antibiotic resistance. As demonstrated by the genetic contamination of native corn varieties in Mexico discovered in September 2001, GE crops represent a virtual "Pandora's Box" that has already blown open. The genetic contamination of native Mexican corn varieties by genetically engineered versions was largely a result of the introduction of nonsegregated, subsidized GE corn from the United States and NAFTA.
The expansion of GE crops will accelerate environmental destruction. Aside from the environmental catastrophe of genetic contamination, GE crops are provoking more obvious environmental impacts. Greenpeace has documented the accelerated deforestation in Argentina as a result of widespread GE soy cultivation.
Centers of Origin, Mega-diverse countries Latin America is one of the most biologically and culturally diverse regions on the planet. Dozens of crops have been developed and domesticated by Indigenous peoples over the last 10,000 years, including corn and potatoes, two of the world's most important crops. Mexico alone is the center of origin and diversity for some 112 crops, including tomatoes, beans and peppers. The introduction of Genetically Engineered crops into these regions threatens the long-term viability of not only the crop itself, but the ecosystem as whole. Additionally, 7 of the world's 12 mega-diverse countries, (Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador, Costa Rica and Colombia) are found in the Americas. "Mega-diversity" countries represent the majority of the world's biodiversity and surviving Indigenous peoples, the true guardians and developers of biodiversity.
Un-kept promises, peeks at the future
"Free trade" agreements to date have been little more than code words for US business expansion across the globe. In theory, these agreements assume a level playing field between partners. However the United States has yet to follow the rules. Just recently, the US Congress approved a $70 billion agricultural subsidy for the next 10 years. This largely benefits corporate agribusiness while undermining small farmers both in the US and across the globe.
One of the most glaring attacks on food security and agribiodiversity has been US corn exports to Mexico under NAFTA. Import quotas were established under NAFTA to protect Mexico's corn producers for up to 15 years, applying high tariffs on imports exceeding those tariffs. However the quotas were lifted within three years, paving the way for millions of tons of corn to be dumped on Mexico. The corn imports in Mexico have displaced at least 500,000 farmers and is steadily eroding the genetic diversity of thousands varieties of native corn varieties. The FTAA will open up national and local markets, already vulnerable as a result of the World Bank's Structural Adjustment programs and volatile international market.
source:
http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/ftaa/FTAAWTOEnvironment.html

[DenverDem]

1. Meet the new boss

same as the old boss.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[corporatewhore]

3. This deserves its own thread!!!!

[salin]

4. that is a serious charge

is there any hard link that Kerry's campaign was behind this or just speculation? This is a really odd story (was the attempted rule change done at the last minute? how was it done? under what reasons given?) - would need more information to get a sense of it one way or another. Is there a link to any news item on this event?

[cindyw]

5. Offer proof that he did this or it should be alerted as and unfounded

remark.

[seaglass]

6. I don't know how the original rule came about but it's a lie

that it changed today - it was on the news yesterday.

[cindyw]

7. League of Conservation Voters endorsed Kerry

"LCV Endorses Senator John Kerry for President

Primary Endorsement Before New Hampshire Primary Unprecedented in Organization’s 34-Year History
January 24, 2004

Contact: Chuck Porcari (cell: [phone]) or Mark Sokolove (cell: [phone]) or [phone]

CONCORD, NH – The League of Conservation Voters (LCV) today endorsed Senator John Kerry for President of the United States.  This endorsement is the earliest ever in the organization’s 34-year history.

“John Kerry is a man whose unparalleled record on environmental issues has earned him an extraordinary lifetime rating from the League of Conservation Voters,  and he is clearly the strongest environmentalist in the field,” said Deb Callahan, president of LCV.  “John Kerry understands that the American people need a president who will never roll over to corporate contributors at the expense of the health and safety of the public.”

“I urge citizens and environmentalists in New Hampshire to cast their vote for John Kerry on Tuesday,” said Ms. Callahan.

Over the next three days in New Hampshire and later in other upcoming primary states, LCV and its local partners will be working tirelessly in a focused, independent, get-out-the-vote effort on behalf of John Kerry’s campaign. 

“John Kerry understands how to protect our water and remove mercury from our air. This a man who will stand up to the corporate interests and tell them to do what is right for their country, not their wallets. This is a man who understands that the 2004 election is about the world we pass on to our children not passing the problems of our world to our children,” said Ms. Callahan.  “John Kerry is the candidate to defeat President Bush, who has compiled the worst environmental record in the history of our nation.”

Ms. Callahan noted that LCV came to New Hampshire last month to release its Presidential Candidate Profiles, a document that states that all of the Democratic candidates would be better for the environment than George W. Bush.

“This is truly, a field of friends,” said Ms. Callahan"

this is a press release and not a copyrighted article. It should not be subject to the 4 paragraph rule

http://www.lcv.org/News/News.cfm?ID=2101&c=26

[corporatewhore]

8. even the sierra club (many think it is too corporatefriendly)was at miami

protesting the FTAA and several other environmental groups

[IrateCitizen]

9. This doesn't really mean much, IMHO.

The National LCV (which really holds an attachment to the state and local LCV's in name only) has repeatedly endorsed my (R) Congresswoman, Sue Kelly, even as she toed the (R) line on most major legislation.

The LCV does not recognize in the slightest the overall detrimental effect on the environment due to "free" trade. It just means that a lot of the messes are moved, in the short-term, off of US shores. But this also doesn't mean that somehow we are not affected, in the long term, from this phenomenon.

The language in the LCV statement makes sense if you look at environmental issues only in an immediate and globally-isolated sense. It is when you make the long-term connection between "free" trade and environmental degradation that you begin to notice a stench.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

10. But the weight of Kerry's 'green' endorsements is mightily on his side

and this is the guy who goes to environmental summits in his spare time.
Kerry's 'green' credentials are clearly the best. And he lead the ANWR fight.

[IrateCitizen]

17. I'm not saying it doesn't mean much electorally

What I'm saying is that the LCV endorsement isn't necessarily indicative of a steadfast committment to the environment.

I'm an officer in my local Sierra Club -- and while the Local LCV has never endorsed my local Republican Congresswoman, the National LCV ALWAYS does. I just don't think that the national LCV is that much of a benchmark of steadfast environmentalism.

Perhaps I should also have prefaced my comments with the fact that I very much like the things that Kerry has been touting regarding alternative energy sources. But I also worry about the reminiscing he does in his speeches about a return to the Clinton years. Because, despite all of the rhetoric that Bill Clinton made on the environment, in the end analysis he really didn't do a whole helluva lot to address it as a major issue -- unless you're going to count the purely political flurry of executive orders he signed at the end of his Presidency in full knowledge that the Bush administration would simply recind them.

I just see too much of a common thread in this regard. Especially without any committment to reducing consumption and instead the lorelei song of neverending "economic growth".

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

11. Kerry's trade votes were ALSO accompanied by a strong stand with KYOTO

Why this matters is because it would have altered the manner in which multi-nationals go to other countries to escape our laws and would have forced those countries to cooperate to reduce pollution in accordance with their avaliable credits and actually CREATED an economy AROUND monitoring pollution...at least greenhouse gasses anyway.

His vote was NOT in a vacuum.

While NAFTA and GATT have serious problems I would hope you and I BOTH support trade since trade does elevate the status of other citizens around the world rather than simply just Americans.

There IS an element of FAIR trade versus FREE trade but Kerry does also have a record on this issue as well.

[corporatewhore]

13. FAIR trade In FREE trade I think not

i notice you use the repub sound bite it elevates devolping nations ha! more like a race to the bottom visit mexico some time and see how great they like NAFTA

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

14. That is NOT a Repub soundbite. Liberals invented trade

when Repubs were advocating protectionism years ago. Trade is a LIBERAL invention. Read up on your history...I am NOT suggesting laissez faire capitalism is a liberal invention but FAIR trade is.

[redqueen]

16. I would agree

if fair trade ever existed.

[MAlibdem]

52. In addition

Free/fair trade creates opportunities in other countries. It also promotes western values (as long as it is FAIR trade) and spreads our ideals of individualism. At the end of the day, we are a market economy.

Free trade greatly reduces the threat of war. Countries who have mutual interest in making money don't fight.

[IrateCitizen]

18. My biggest gripe with Kerry on this, NSMA...

... was his vote in favor of Fast Track -- which was a vote in favor of the FTAA the way that the Bush Administration wanted to push for it. Especially after Kerry pushed for the resolution to include labor rights and environmental considerations in Fast Track -- and when his resolution was shot down, he STILL voted for even more corporate-managed trade.

I'm very familiar with this issue, NSMA. I personally met with and lobbied three local Congressional reps on it on behalf of my local Sierra Club.

His support for Kyoto is definitely recognized by me -- as well as his loud support for an "Apollo Project" of renewable energy sources. And for the record, I don't support DK's stance on withdrawing from the WTO -- I instead would like to see the US kick out all the corporate lobbyists and instead take a true global leadership role on this issue. But I just look at the way Kerry sold out on Fast Track and have to wonder, where is the line drawn past which he WON'T sell out?

I am for Fair Trade, NSMA. I also realize that unless we do something to radically alter our patterns of consumption, fair trade won't mean a damned thing -- because we'll need five planets to provide the resources required for every nation on earth to have the same "standard of living" (meaning: consumption patterns) as the USA.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

20. I agree my friend but FAST TRACK didn't happen in a vacuum either

Clinton repeatedly asked for it as well. While it is NOT a good thing when in the wrong hands, there is some merit to giving the president trade authority.

Still, we fundamentally agree.

What I DO see in Kerry is someone who will pursue a workable remedy and will NOT pursue clandestine iundermining of governments in order to further the corruption of multi-nationals.


I also see someone who KNOWS (via his investigations) exactly WHY Latin America is as it is today. I think he is decent enough to want to DO something to correct that inequity.

[IrateCitizen]

22. I vehemently disagree, NSMA

While it is NOT a good thing when in the wrong hands, there is some merit to giving the president trade authority.

I couldn't disagree with this statement more. Trade agreements are an aspect of policy that directly affect the everyday lives of almost all Americans. To remove them from debate by the elected representatives of the people and instead place them in the sole hands of the Executive -- allowing Congress only a 90-day window to debate agreements that are sure to be thousands of pages in length with no amendment and only and up-or-down vote -- is inherently undemocratic.

Issues of democracy must always be examined from the worst-case scenario. To examine them from a perspective of "well, it's OK for our guy but bad for theirs" is to invite catastrophe.

What I DO see in Kerry is someone who will pursue a workable remedy and will NOT pursue clandestine iundermining of governments in order to further the corruption of multi-nationals.

While I would hope so, I just see him as too supportive of the status quo of militarism, jingoism and consumerism that clouds America's judgement today (even if it with a happier face than the current administration) to dare to challenge things too much.

I also see someone who KNOWS (via his investigations) exactly WHY Latin America is as it is today. I think he is decent enough to want to DO something to correct that inequity.

Once again, the question is not whether he might want to do something -- the question is whether or not he will be willing to challenge the status quo in order to actually do something about it.

[redqueen]

25. Intention vs. Action

That's the difference between Kucinich and the other candidates.

Who put the Diebold memos up? Who took action on the hill to advocate against Diebold's legal threats?

Who marches with workers? Who did not back FTAA, NAFTA, or any of the other destructive agreements which have hurt workers and their families worldwide?

[corporatewhore]

45. exactly Kucinich was at the battle of seattle because of kerrys

spinelessness

[corporatewhore]

26. umm can you say Bolivia

"I also see someone who KNOWS (via his investigations) exactly WHY Latin America is as it is today. I think he is decent enough to want to DO something to correct that inequity." olivia's Poor Proclaim Abiding Distrust of Globalization By LARRY ROHTER

Published: October 17, 2003 (NY TIMES)

A PAZ, Bolivia, Oct. 15 — The many Indian protesters who choked the streets and highways of this Andean nation again on Thursday may be poor and speak broken or accented Spanish, but they have a powerful message.

It is this: no to the export of gas and other natural resources; no to free trade with the United States; no to globalization in any form other than solidarity among the downtrodden peoples of the developing world

Source: ahref=http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/17/international/americas/17GLOB.html?8br

[Taeger]

12. More Kerry Double-Speak

If Kerry allowed FTAA to go through, is there ANY hope that he would work to repeal NAFTA???

[redqueen]

15. Nope

None at all.

Think he'll fight CAFTA? When is bush going to bring that up before Congress... does anyone know?

[IrateCitizen]

19. FTAA has not gone through

In fact, it has stalled -- due primarily to unified objection by Brazil and Argentina that they be forced to open up their financial markets, coupled by US refusal to reduce agricultural barriers.

What Kerry voted for was the Fast Track necessary to push FTAA through in unmodified form -- even after his amendment to protect workers' rights and environmental legislation was defeated.

He has also stated repeatedly in his stump speeches his continued support for NAFTA -- a la Clinton. That very fact does not give me a warm-and-fuzzy with regards to his trade policy.

[corporatewhore]

31. it doesnt give me one either

[lcordero]

21. there has been no corporate accountability for the last 24 years

Any "votes" for the environment should be considered nothing but lip service because it is just that, nothing but lip service.

[redqueen]

23. THANK YOU

I read an article a while back which outlined how Democrats had been screwing environmentalists over for decades. I can't find it now.

There's a reason the Green Party exists, people!

[corporatewhore]

24. Ditto!

[sandnsea]

27. Fast Track for FTAA is good

What it means is that Congress can't defeat parts of a trade agreement, like the Republicans generally do with the environmental, labor and human rights clauses. No more side agreements, no more amendment fights. All or nothing. Either FTAA has this stuff in them, or it's a no go. That's what people need to remember. He has said he'll vote no or veto FTAA if it doesn't have these things in them. Just like the Jordan Trade Agreement. This was a smart thing to do because we will now know exactly what something is and have a President to point a finger to when these trade agreements aren't right.

[IrateCitizen]

29. Except, of course, you're conveniently ignoring...

... that there ARE no labor or environmental rights spelled out in the Fast Track legislation. Therefore, the USTR is under no pressure to put them into trade deals.

US corporate interests, after all, have a vested interest in AVOIDING these standards in developing nations....

And an additional point is that the FTAA agreement being pushed has the same kind of investor-state clause as NAFTA's chapter 11. You know, the clause under which corporations can sue governments for trying to enact environmental legislation and those suits are settled behind closed doors by "tribunals" with no public access to proceedings or records.

Yeah, it's all that and a bag of chips, to be sure. :eyes:

[sandnsea]

33. Fast Track negotiates trade agreements

That's what it does. It takes all these amendments that we can't get through because of special interests out of the hands of Congress and puts it in the hands of the President. So if HE doesn't put this stuff in there, we know exactly who and which party to blame. I support this 100%.

[IrateCitizen]

36. Who do you think wrote the fast track bill???

Have you read it? I have -- and lobbied Congressional reps against it.

It's a special-interest piece of garbage, written by corporations -- for corporations. Labor and the environment only get vague, passing mentions with absolutely NO STANDARDS!!!

[redqueen]

38. This is starting to sound like the same kind of monster

that NAFTA is.

:(

[corporatewhore]

42. FTAA = NAFTA on Steroids

[sandnsea]

44. And we know who to blame

Exactly. Precisely. George W. Bush. Because, thanks to Fast Track, it will be HIS trade bill. Not a whole bunch of amendments and who knows what by who knows who. One bill. One President. One party. We can finally hold somebody accountable for this crap.

[corporatewhore]

49. yess we can blame w but kerry at least didnt have to put his stamp of

approval on the fast track which did not have his ammendment on it

[sandnsea]

28. Kerry Amendment - Chapter 11

http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:Gs7FVVIV9psJ:www.citizen.org/documents/Kerry%2520Summary.PDF+kerry+chapter+11+trade&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

"The Kerry amendment would prevent a foreign investor from seeking compensation as a result of any U.S. law or regulation that legitimately protects public health, safety and welfare,the environment, or public morals unless such foreign investor could demonstrate that the regulation was enacted primarily with discriminatory intent against foreign investors orinvestments. There is no comparable provision in the pending bill."

"For example, in the notorious case, Methanex v. United States, a Canadiancorporation that owns subsidiaries that produce methanol is suing the United States underNAFTA Chapter 11 for nearly $1 billion in potential profits because of California’s ban on thegasoline additive MTBE, which contains methanol."

He's not a bad guy folks.

[IrateCitizen]

30. I supported his amendment wholeheartedly

The problem was when he STILL voted for fast track after his amendment was defeated. In doing so, he said that labor and environmental considerations take a backseat to commercial ones.

Not an uncommon stance within the US Government -- America's business is, after all, business -- but something that anyone who gives a damn about labor rights or the environment should be pissed about.

[redqueen]

32. I wonder if he made a statement

explaining why he still voted for FTAA, even without his amendment.

:shrug:

[sandnsea]

34. There's been no vote

Fast Track did not pass FTAA. He is not going to vote for or pass FTAA without the environmental, labor and human rights requirements.

[IrateCitizen]

35. THERE ARE NO LABOR, ENV. OR HUMAN RIGHTS REQ'S!

If you had studied the process under which fast track passed, you would know this.

Kerry's amendment was an attempt to put them in place. It was defeated. Fast track passed with ZERO requirements for any of these items!

Nobody can be held to a standard that DOESN'T F***ING EXIST!!!!

[redqueen]

37. I got Fast Track confused with FTAA

So do I have this correctly -- Kerry voted to give bush Fast Track authority?

Did other Dems?

WHY?!

My head hurts.

[corporatewhore]

40. when it comes down to the bottom line they dont give a sh*t

[sandnsea]

41. Okay

It would have been preferable to REQUIRE environmental, labor and human rights in Fast Track. Meaning the President would have HAD to negotiate these when he negotiates FTAA. MUST.

As usual, it didn't happen because we never get this stuff through Congress anyway.

Fast Track will mean the President negotiates the ENTIRE trade bill, presents it to Congress, ONE up or down vote. We, the people, will know exactly who and which party didn't put this stuff in the trade bill in the first place.

The far left says it's a corporate give-away because it'll give Congressmen an excuse to vote for these bills without taking responsiblity.

I say, it'll let every one of us know exactly who didn't put those requirements in the trade bill in the first place.

I think it's going to be a good thing and give us alot clearer picture then we had before.

[sandnsea]

39. You don't understand

It would have been preferable to require these things be part of negotiating a trade bill. But it DOESN'T mean a final trade bill will be passed without them. What we used to have was arguments over every aspect of a trade bill IN Congress. Just like with Fast Track, the environmental, labor and human rights portions NEVER were included. And Congressmen could just go back home and say "tsk, tsk". NOW the President and HIS party are 100% responsible. No more excuses and blame games. The question will be "George Bush, where is the environmental, labor and human rights in FTAA?" There will be no amendments, so it better be right the first time.

[rumguy]

53. This is important - Chapter 11 is the most dangerous part of NAFTA

It is the most crazy and insane aspect. It gives foreign corporations the right to sue governments in secret tribunals for merely regulating a foreign corp. It makes potential future profits a "property right" and makes it very difficult for governments to regulate foreign corporations. The fact that Kerry recognizes this is a big plus in my book....

[corporatewhore]

54. but he went ahead and approved bushs fast track with out it

[corporatewhore]

43. kick !!!

[Armstead]

46. Free Trade is a scam at its heart. Kerry goes along with the scam.

"Free trade" as it is defined these days is NOT free trade. It is just the opposite.

Kerry's support of it is one of the reasons I don't like him. Kucinich is the only candidate who is on the right track on this. We need to return to more emphasis on BI-LATERAL TRADE AGREEMENRS between nations.

The NAFTA free trade model is not just a mechanism to open up trade between natiions. It is a political scam.

It takes away the ability of nations to determine their own trade policies, in favor of a global set of rules set up by the corporate and political elite. It also is an attempt to force all nations to follow a particulat CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL MODEL, regardless of its particular culture or the desires of their people.

At its core this "one size fits all" approach is unweildy and unworkable. It is the CORPORATE IMPERIALIST AGENDA written on a global scale.

It is not a case of isolation versus global trade either. It is quite possible to both stimulate international fair trade and standards for workers rights and the environment without violating the basic sovergnty of nations.

[corporatewhore]

47. well said !!!

[Virgil]

48. A very informative thread on a key issue

It all comes down to the little man is screwed. Kerry suggest amendment and when it fails, he votes for the bill. Now here we are, mills closing left and right in a race for the cheapest labor on the plantet. Not only are jobs lost, working conditions get worse and benefits do not get better. 8 million people will lose overtime as the middle class gets wiped out. The best job is a government job. It is one thing Congress knows.

[corporatewhore]

50. well said

[corporatewhore]

51. i want to hear from more kerry supporters and thier take on it

[corporatewhore]

55. come on guys

[anti-NAFTA]

56. This is why Kerry has stabbed American producers in the back

This is his agenda: 1) promote free trade with "regulations" (bullshit, read through the lies...it's all pandering for our votes), and 2) cripple our producers who are employing us by passing more regulations on AMERICAN industries.

smart move eh?

I think with Kerry attaining power, we'll all be cashiers at Walmart before the century's over.