America In Solidarity has been asking for many years for members of Congress to support "Fair Trade" not just "Free Trade." Too often, trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA limit worker's and environmental rights and merely just result in corporate subsidies while undermining local markets and economies. The end result has been that large corporations suffer, while workers (often on both sides of the border) lose jobs as the race to the bottom decimates communities. 

Call your members of Congress while they are home for Presidents’ Day recess and ask them to oppose this move by taking a public position against the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement

Our collective energy has stopped the FTA for a year. This is a victory that could be dashed by the powerful all-out campaign launched by the Administrations of U.S. President George Bush and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. With six official U.S. Congressional delegations already sent to Colombia to experience carefully staged tours highlighting the efforts supposedly undertaken to end the systematic assassination of Colombia labor leaders, five more are scheduled.

You and your kids can join schoolchildren across the US who are reversing the Halloween tradition by handing Fair Trade chocolate back to adults while Trick-or-Treating door-to-door. The candy will be accompanied by information about social justice issues in the chocolate industry, and how Fair Trade chocolate provides a solution to these concerns.

America In Solidarity is encouraging its volunteers to join us or call Stephanie Celt at Washington Fair Trade Coalition (206-227-3079) to do this in your own neighborhood.

While chocolate is sweet for us, it can be heartbreaking for the hundreds of thousands of child laborers that pick the cocoa that goes into some of our favorite treats. In 2001, the U.S. State Department, the International Labor Organization and others reported child slavery on many cocoa farms in the Ivory Coast, source of 43% of the worlds cocoa. Subsequent research by the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture revealed some 284,000 children between the ages of 9 and 12 working in hazardous conditions on West African cocoa farms. Of these children, it was reported that some 12,000 child cocoa workers that had participated in the study were likely to have arrived in their situation as a result of child trafficking.

In 2001, this unacceptable practice caught the attention of the media and the government, and the American public began to voice their abhorrence of the use of child slave labor in the production of one of their most beloved treats: chocolate. In response, the US chocolate industry agreed (via the Harken-Engel Protocol) to voluntarily take steps to end child slavery on cocoa farms by July of 2005.

By Jeff Richardson

This Saturday in his Weekly Radio Address, President Bush encouraged all Americans to support his plans to expand the neoliberal policies of NAFTA, CAFTA, and GATT to more nations, including South Korea, Peru, Colombia, and Panama. 

As you must surely know by now, we here at America in Solidarity have opposed America's entry into the recently proposed trade agreements.  As far as working people are concerned, free trade does nothing to improve our quality of life, and has led to the rapid destabilization of economies all around the world.  Factories close down in Michigan and open up in China.  Corn prices drop to record lows in Mexico. causing bankrupted farmers to move to the US to find work.  This nightmare scenario has played out again and again, ever since Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law.  If we want to have any means of saving our nation from these insane trade agreements, we have to stand up to the President and his corporate toadies in the Congress.  The time has come for all working people to make their disgust for this practice once and for all.  [Toll-free number for Congress: 202-225-3121]

Discussions of the Peru Free Trade Agreement may begin by the end of this month, and now is the time to tell members of Congress to oppose this FTA. America In Solidarity is asking you to contact your member of Congress now about why it should not be ratified.

Many in Congress didn’t vote for CAFTA and since most of the problems have not been fixed in the Peru FTA, this should mean they ought to oppose this agreement as well!

We want to make sure that our members of Congress know that we are unsatisfied with the small improvements that have been made, and we want Congress to rethink US trade policy more fundamentally.
Talking points on Peru include the following :

While the Rangel deal has brought some improvements to these pending FTAs, many problems remain.

• There is justifiable concern about the likelihood that improved labor and environmental standards will be enforced.

By Jeffrey Feldman at frameshopisopen.com

Frameshop: The Foreclosure Society

By David Sirota

This is another in a series of ongoing posts following the announcement of a secret free trade deal on May 10, 2007 between a handful of senior Democrats and the Bush administration.

Can the Clinton machine deliver another NAFTA? That is the question in Washington on trade these days, as dynamic similar to the NAFTA debate begins to take shape. The Colombian government, which has been tied to paramilitary gangs that execute union organizers, is spending lavishly to enlist top Clinton administration officials - including Hillary Clinton's top campaign strategist and President Clinton himself - to pressure Democrats on Capitol Hill to pass the Colombian Free Trade Agreement - an agreement that is part of the bigger secret deal. This campaign is being backed up by a wide array of businesses such as Wal-Mart and Citigroup. Here is today's report.

U.S. trade policy must serve the interests of America’s working families and workers around the globe. There has to be provisions for worker's rights and protections in any trade agreement. This has rarely been the case in every trade agreement since the North American Free Trade Agreement that has seen the loss of millions of American jobs and the immigration of millions of Mexican farmers into the United States as Mexican farms have been put out of business thanks to NAFTA.

America In Solidarity is urging all of its volunteers to contact their members of Congress and express your concern about what America really needs concerning its trade policy. Please take five minutes and write your Congressman or call them at 202-224-3121 (Senate) or 202-225-3121 (House) and ask them to reject the Bush-Rangel Trade deal. Here is a sample letter:

[DATE]

 

Did Congressional Democrats cut a deal with President Bush over trade agreements?

U.S. trade policy must serve the interests of America’s working families and workers around the globe. There has to be provisions for worker's rights and protections in any trade agreement. This has rarely been the case in every trade agreement since the North American Free Trade Agreement that has seen the loss of millions of American jobs and the immigration of millions of Mexican farmers into the United States as Mexican farms have been put out of business thanks to NAFTA.

In dozens of 2006 Congressional races, trade agreements followed (and in places like Ohio likely exceeded) only Iraq as the issue. Without a doubt, Congressional Democrats were given a clear directive about how the people of this country felt about trade agreements: CUT US A BETTER DEAL. We want protections for the environment, for worker's rights, protection for local industry and to end what are essentially trade agreements that amount to corporate welfare.

Economist Michael Yates, who is currently touring for his new book "Cheap Motels and a Hot Plate" recently spoke with America In Solidarity's Jeff Richardson. Here is Jeff's report:

His writings are inspiring. They tell the story of a nation gripped by real-world
crises and tumbling into economic destruction and the Ivy-League economists that
prefer to live in the fantasy world of neoclassical economics. This man is a rare
breed: an economist that cares about people and doesn't subscribe to the
soul-crushing notions of the Chicago School and its adherents. He gets it that free
trade isn't free, that it facilitates the further breakdown between people and a
good life. He understands that conservative economic policies are widening the gap
between the rich and the poor. He realizes that the only way we're going to fix this
country is if we all work together to change the laws that govern it and the systems
of thought that are used to prop up a corrupt model of economics. Like Paul Krugman
of the New York Times, Michael D. Yates understands that what America needs is not
greater "freedom" in the marketplace, but greater freedom for ordinary citizens to
work and go to school and raise their families and to pursue their dreams. In
short, Michael D. Yates is a humanitarian.

Jeff Richardson:  Michael, folks who know a little something about labor may have heard of you by
reading your book, Why Unions Matter. Can you talk a little bit about that book and
how you came to write it?

Michael Yates: I had been teaching about unions and labor movements for a long time, both to
college students and to working people not in traditional college classes. I had
helped organize unions, and I had worked for the United Farm Workers union. I had
been a labor arbitrator. 

I noticed that there were no good introductions to unions and their role in the US
labor movements. I had read an old one written by Leo Huberman, one of the founders
of Monthly Review magazine and a labor educator like myself. Inspired by Huberman, I
asked Monthly Review Press if they were interested in a book about unions, and they
said yes. Hence this book. It has been well-received and used in many labor studies
and union short courses and as general reference by working people. I always try to
write books that working people can use and also find interesting.


JR:  In a recent piece for MRZine.com, "Class:  A Personal History", you outline
your family story and describe how you came to understand the world in terms of
class divisions. Describe briefly for our readers what made you the economist you
are today.

MY: I was lucky to be encouraged by my parents to go to college; I was first in my
family to do so. I majored in economics by accident. My dad said I had to pick a
major so he could fill out a scholarship form. He read down a list, and I stopped
him at Economics; I really don't know why. I did well in my classes and found the 
subject interesting and its traditional exposition elegant. I
went on to graduate school and continued to do well. But I was becoming a bit
disillusioned with the subject, especially since none of my teachers but one would
ever talk about the war in Vietnam or about working people, racism, etc. When the
draft started breathing down my neck, I got a teaching job. As I continued to read
about the war and about the US history I had never been taught, I found the
mainstream economics I had learned to be completely inadequate. I gravitated toward
radical economics and since my mid twenties have been a radical economist. As I get
older the world seems more and more to fit the radical model.


JR: For your latest book, "Cheap Motels and a Hot Plate", you and your wife traveled
the country, seeing it the way so many desperately poor and rootless people are
compelled to. Were you surprised by anything you came across in your travels?

MY: First off, there are parts of the US that are more astonishingly beautiful than
I had imagined: Shi Shi Beach in Olympic National Park, Mt. Rainier, Crater Lake,
the dunes and beach at Florence, Oregon, Capitol Reef National Park in Utah, Chasm
Lake in Rocky Mountain National Park, all of Central Park, to name a few. On the
other hand, I was surprised to see so easily and clearly what I knew to be true from
the data. Lots of people live in cheap motels, out of necessity. Poor people and
people of color almost never visit our national parks. White people routinely made
racist remarks. There is a chasm between the housing of rich and poor. A resort
owner in Aspen urged his workers to live in the woods! One of my son�s
employers in Portland stole hours from him. Everywhere people had inadequate and
alienating employment. The exurban sprawl is worse than I thought, as is the
absolute lack of any urban planning. Waste of space and water are epidemic,
especially in our desert cities like Albuquerque, Tucson, Phoenix, and Los Angeles. I was surprised
to see pollution in our national parks. The ecological destruction of Florida
surprised me too. As did the sense of loneliness we felt among people everywhere.


JR: In a piece you wrote for the book tour site, you mention your disappointment at
the lack of visible worker solidarity and union organizing in America. Was this
universal, or did you come across any workers using their voices to make big changes
in their communities?

MY: In New York City there were signs of solidarity and fight back, among cab
drivers, greengrocery workers, and others. Immigrants in Denver and other ciites
engaged in impressive actions. The workers center in New York's Chinatown (Chinese 
Staff and Workers Association) inspired us. There were peace
groups even in small towns like Estes Park and anti-war activities in Portland,
Oregon. But really not much sense of an incipient movement.


JR: As an economist, you've seen the country go through major economic changes in
the last thirty or forty years. Can you describe what you think is the biggest
factor in the decline of the middle class?

MY: The decline of labor unions is first and foremost, some of this due to all out
assault on workers by businesses and their government allies and some due to the
failure of unions to build effectively on their post WW2 strengths. Labor�s
elimination of its left wing was most important here. Unions seem lost
ideologically, and as a result working people have no compass and are more easily
swayed by right wing and racist ideologies.


JR:  What can we as citizens do to rebuild the middle class? 

MY: As Mother Jones said, "Educate yourselves for the coming
struggles." Then form or join groups to fight for change. Don't be
taken in by personalities. Every top politician must become more or less corrupted
in this country to rise to the top, at least the way thing are structured now.


JR: In my work with America in Solidarity, I meet a lot of workers who want to
organize and who want a better life for themselves and their families, but so many
of them believe it's hopeless to struggle for better conditions, that the best they
can hope for is to hold on to their crappy jobs and get their kids into college so
they can get a better life than their parents. Can you give any advice to these poor
souls that might encourage them to be more active in the Labor Movement? 

MY:  See the previous answer!  And no matter what the situation, almost no one is
completely powerless. 

Some people do have courage and will stand up. Other less courageous workers must
support these leaders. A small spark can light a large fire. Be that spark.


JR:  During your book tour, has anyone asked you any surprising questions? 

MY: Well, people do want to know how you get a low rate at a motel! And we do have
lots of tips. And someone asked me what advise I would give to those who have little
education. Another asked me if it was a good idea economically to own a house. The
tour is still young, so I am sure I'll get a lot of unusual questions. A man
in Pittsburgh asked me a technical question about the consumer price index. And a
man in Phoenix asked if we had tried to get on the Michael Savage show. I wanted to
say that my desire to make my book popular wasn't so overwhelming that I
would go on a show run by a fascist.


JR: I'm working on a book about America's progressive populists, and I have a
feeling you might be one of them. What does the word progressive mean to you? 

MY:  Well, it can be a work with many meanings. After all, Teddy Roosevelt is often
said to be one as is someone like the editor of the Nation or Progressive magazine.
I think it means or should mean someone who struggles for much greater equality in
all spheres of life.


JR: A lot of talk is building among the grassroots of the Democratic Party around
free trade issues, universal healthcare, rebuilding Katrina, and other economic
populist issues. Do you believe that an economic populist could be elected President
in today's political climate? If so, do you see any candidates running that could
play that role? 

MY: I think a populist could be elected, someone like the old Jesse Jackson. You
have to tackle the race issue head on. No currently viable candidate comes to min
dthough.


JR: What do you see as the most critical issue for workers and activists in this
country to grapple with? What can they do to turn it around? 

MY: Rebuilding the power of workers, and being willing to address race and
immigration radically and in an egalitarian manner. Building organizations that
embrace not just workplace struggle but community and ecological issues is critical.