Thread: A Clear Choice on CAFTA

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01675.html


A Clear Choice on CAFTA


Saturday, July 9, 2005; Page A14

The July 6 front-page article "CAFTA Reflects Democrats' Shift From Trade Bills" suggested that opposition to the Central American Free Trade Agreement is "a long, slow erosion of Democratic support for trade legislation." But CAFTA is a bad deal for all parties, and it has drawn opposition from many supporters of free trade.

While the article highlighted problems with labor and environmental protections, it did not discuss an egregious provision of CAFTA: the intellectual property protection for brand-name pharmaceuticals. The pharmaceutical industry wrote this provision to extend its monopolies to Central American nations, where people barely have enough money to buy generic drugs. With this provision, CAFTA would give the most profitable industry on the planet an additional five years to exploit the sick to maximize profits. This provision will raise the price of drugs for CAFTA-country residents and could limit these countries' abilities to provide more affordable generic drugs during public health emergencies.


The article suggested that opposition to CAFTA is a hard choice for many Democrats. Not so; the choice is clear. Democrats support labor rights, environmental standards and affordable medications for all citizens. CAFTA does nothing to promote these values, making a no vote on CAFTA the obvious choice.

PETE STARK

U.S. Representative (D-Calif.)

Washington

Whens the vote on CAFTA? July 11th right?

That what they said in the papers. I have spoken with some aids of our representatives here in NC and was told it is not on the agenda, they may be pushing it back to get more votes. They will probably vote on it at 3 am and sneakily try to pass it. It is underhanded and should not be allowed to be voted on that way. I will keep checking the houses web site for updates.

JP : Thanks for the articles that you select and read.
Question : about American Copyright Laws.





JP :

Thanks JP for the good work that you do reading a lot of press and media opinions or reports. Thanks for sharing.

I have a question about American Law :

Can we in our Forums extract some paragraphs from Online Newspapers and insert them inside our posts without becoming liable or subject to lawsuits in courts ???

Can we incur in punishable misdemeanors or felonies ???

I am assuming that we quote the source : newspaper, author, title, date, etc ... and that we post a link to the web page.




I believe that you are posted in North Carolina :


Is your state the most important in Textiles Production ??, in Garment Production ??. Or is it Alabama the home and kingdom of "Sock Industries" ?? ....... More textile and garment industry jobs in the South than the North ???

I hope that you keep us informed and posted on what is going on in North Carolina. Specially how Carolinas Representatives vote in the House for CAFTA.

I am working a News Forum on Apparel and Textiles, and everything about the U. S., China, Asians, Europe, etc .... is of extreme interest if it has to do with Textiles.

I am posted in Colombia, South America, a Garment producer, and I thank the kindness of ALIPAC members with me.

Monday, 11 of July, will be a memorable date, whatever the outcome. I will be here to read your posts and information about what happened in the House of Representatives and how members voted for or against CAFTA.

The roll call of the votes will be of extreme interest. It would be of great help for members of ALIPAC.

Thanks for help and kindness

Vicente Duque

But..but I thought CAFTA was supposed to "spread democracy..."