|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Dec 5, 2007 3:15:27 GMT -6
from Bloomberg: Senate Approves Peru Trade AgreementBy Mark Drajem " The Senate approved a free-trade agreement with Peru that may be the only such accord the Democratic-controlled Congress supports before next year's elections.
The Senate voted 77-18 for the agreement, one of the broadest majorities for a trade deal since President George W. Bush took office. The House approved the accord Nov. 8 in the first vote on trade since Democrats took control of Congress. The measure will now go to Bush, who urged its approval, for his signature.
``With the strong votes by both chambers of Congress, we are sending a strong signal to the world that the United States is regaining its bipartisan footing on trade policy,'' said U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab.
The agreement will eliminate tariffs and set rules of investment, boosting trade between the U.S. and Peru by $1.5 billion a year, as the U.S. opens the door for more Peruvian exports of asparagus and apparel and more American meat and grain can be sent to Peru.
It ``will create more employment by opening up Peru for industrialists to install plants here to supply the U.S. market,'' President Alan Garcia of Peru said in Lima today....Yes, it will create more opportunities for American manufacturers to outsource American jobs--laying off their American workers, moving their factories to Peru, and replacing American workers with cheaper Peruvian workers.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Dec 5, 2007 3:49:48 GMT -6
The Peruvian FTA, H.R.3688, passed the Senate by a 77-18 vote. A special thanks to the following Democrats who voted FOR this bill: Lincoln (D-AR), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Yea Carper (D-DE), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Yea Inouye (D-HI), Yea Durbin (D-IL), Yea Bayh (D-IN), Yea Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Cardin (D-MD), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea Kennedy (D-MA), Yea Kerry (D-MA), Yea Levin (D-MI), Yea Baucus (D-MT), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea Bingaman (D-NM), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea Conrad (D-ND), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea Johnson (D-SD), Yea Webb (D-VA), Yea Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Yea www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00413Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---77 Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Barrasso (R-WY) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Bingaman (D-NM) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burr (R-NC) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Durbin (D-IL) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Feinstein (D-CA) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Inouye (D-HI) Isakson (R-GA) Johnson (D-SD) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (ID-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) Martinez (R-FL) McConnell (R-KY) Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murkowski (R-AK) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Pryor (D-AR) Roberts (R-KS) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Schumer (D-NY) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) Webb (D-VA) Wyden (D-OR) NAYs ---18 Akaka (D-HI) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Byrd (D-WV) Casey (D-PA) Dorgan (D-ND) Feingold (D-WI) Harkin (D-IA) Klobuchar (D-MN) Kyl (R-AZ) Leahy (D-VT) McCaskill (D-MO) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Sanders (I-VT) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Whitehouse (D-RI) Not Voting - 5 Biden (D-DE) Clinton (D-NY) Dodd (D-CT) McCain (R-AZ) Obama (D-IL)
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Dec 6, 2007 23:08:55 GMT -6
Wow!! Talk about being in bed with big business?? John Kerry and Ted Kennedy voted for this? Because of so-called "labor provisions" put in the agreement? Like those will be enforced anyway. Ha. It really does seem like there is only only political party in the U.S... THE FASCIST PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES Do these senators want the U.S to enter a Greater Depression? It can happen when we ship every last job to every impoverished country on Earth! This won't last though, once the Greater Depression hits in earnest soon, say just after the New Year in 2008, the stock market plunges, people's 401k's disappear over night, any last remaining pensions vanish, and millions become out of work. I can see downright angry, rioting protesters demanding government do the will of the people, and The Constitution, of else each and every one of them faces opposition come election time!!! No more of this crap of canidates running "unopposed." Only when congresspeople see their own job's at risk will they answer to the American people. This is why Ron Paul gets it to a certain degree! Even if he is by chance elected president, there will likely be a democrat house and senate to check and balance his power. Many posters on the one progressive forum Democratic Underground do not see this and blindly support Cooperate controlled canidates such as Hitlery and Obama. Heck even with Bush in the White house for 6 plus years, abortion has yet to be overturned!! It never will be because it is and was the only issue to keep sucking in suckers to vote republican every time against their own interests.
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Dec 8, 2007 9:04:46 GMT -6
Unbelievable. Such a blatant disregard for the will of and best interests of the american people.
Rangel admitted on Lou Dobbs this trade deal was bad for US workers, yet he rammed it thru and voted for it any way.
And what about weasels Hillary and Obama not voting. Pretty typical of a clinton to want to have it both ways. Now she can tell the labor base she didn't vote for it, and her corporate backers she didn't vote against it - how utterly calculating and cynical.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Dec 8, 2007 23:00:44 GMT -6
This is where I would even consider running for a seat in the house or senate, even as token opposition, to just keep the incumbents honest. My problem is, I am 22 years old, still in college, with a low paying retail job. I need to make connections, and know people first before I would even do that. Plus age requirements might mean I would have to be 25 I believe. Still there are plenty of political savvy people like me who should run for office( it pays nicely by the way..over $150,000 a year I believe).
Also, even if you would be a long shot to win, any incumbent you face can easily slip up or get involved in a controversy, and boom, just like that you surge ahead, and the race becomes competitive. I hate seeing incumbents running unapposed, even if most voters like them.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Dec 9, 2007 4:23:59 GMT -6
This is where I would even consider running for a seat in the house or senate, even as token opposition, to just keep the incumbents honest.... Also, even if you would be a long shot to win, any incumbent you face can easily slip up or get involved in a controversy, and boom, just like that you surge ahead, and the race becomes competitive. I hate seeing incumbents running unapposed, even if most voters like them. This is exactly the kind of stuff that makes me want to run as well. I would add that even a long-shot can draw votes away from candidates of the major parties, and force them to put the issues championed by a long shot at the top of their list of priorities. And a primary run in a Congressional race in one of the major parties, would make that party pay attention to the views of the long-shot candidate, which would be very helpful if the long shot is representing the majority view of rank-and-file members, as opposed to only those of rich campaign contributors.
|
|