Armaggedon for American Workers
Armaggedon for American Workers
Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:43 PM
JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER
www.ZaZona.com
Last year I characterized Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) as the "the
mother of all H-1B programs." Now mommy had a baby and it's going to be
one ugly little monster. The baby's name is CAFTA, and his close
cousin is NAFTA.
Congress gave George Bush Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to make
NAFTA-like trade agreements with other countries. CAFTA is the first of
these agreements to emerge and it will come with a nasty surprise
called the "W" visa. The "W" visa will be similar to NAFTA's TN visa.
"W" seems like an odd letter for a visa - perhaps it is short for
"World", or George W. I would prefer they call it an NWO visa for "New
World Order".
At this very moment Congress is in the process of voting for Bush's
free trade agreements with Chile and Singapore. The "W" visa would
allow 6,800 workers from Chile and Singapore to work In the U.S.
indefinitely. A couple thousand workers might not seem a big deal to
you, but please keep reading.
Unlimited numbers of workers from Chile and Singapore will be allowed
to work in the United States as long as they declare themselves "treaty
traders or investors" or "developers and directors". Developers will
include engineers or programmers and directors will be the bosses.
Here's why this trade agreement is Armageddon for American workers.
The Bush Administration said that they would use these two trade
agreements to serve as blueprints for future agreements with other
countries. Countries are standing in line for Bush to make more TPA
treaties; here are a few that are in the front of the line: Brazil,
Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Peru, Bolivia,
Ecuador, Australia, Israel, Jordan, Pakistan, and India.
Once enough of these treaties are made there will be no need for H-1B,
L-1 or any of the other nonimmigrant visas. The "W" visa will make all
others irrelevant because "natural persons" from all over the world
will have the right to work in the USA. The free flow of people across
our borders will be regulated by the WTO, not Congress. These
agreements are H-1B on steroids, and must be stopped before it's too
late.
One of the pernicious aspects of TPA is that Congress only has the
authority to approve or reject the free trade agreements (FTA); it may
not amend them because the President has fast track authority. Once
Congress gives its approval, it may not pass laws that restrict or
alter the provisions of the trade agreements.
Congress must make it absolutely clear to Bush that bad immigration
provisions are not acceptable in international trade agreements. Free
trade should not automatically entail the importation of large numbers
of foreign workers.
The House Judiciary Committee considered the agreements last week and
had some responsible criticisms. The committee cannot amend the FTAs or
single-handedly send them back to the White House for renegotiation,
but they did stage a mock mark-up session as a mild protest. In a
bi-partisan effort led by Reps. Steve King (R-Iowa) and John Conyers
(D-Mich.), and supported by committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner
(R-Wis.), the committee voted that the White House should change the
immigration provisions by eliminating the proposed "W" visa, setting
aside 6,800 of the existing H-1B visas (i.e., within the existing H-1B
numerical cap) for Chilean and Singaporean workers, and subtracting
those 6,800 visas from the annual number of green cards that may be
issued to Chileans and Singaporeans.
Armageddon Day (July 25th):
There isn't much time left for the American middle class. That's
because The House and Senate are expected to vote on these agreements
before the August recess which starts on July 25 in the House and
August 1 in the Senate.
This steamroller is speeding through Congress while the media obsesses
about fluff issues like the Kobe Bryant flap. The impact on the future
of the United States is without measure yet very few people even know
what is about to happen.
An overwhelming majority of Congress supports FTAs and that's why they
gave Bush Trade Promotion Authority. Last week brought the first bad
omen: the Senate Judiciary Committee rubberstamped the White House's
proposal and didn't protest the disastrous immigration policies
inherent in these agreements.
What Can you Do About This?
Probably not much but it wouldn't hurt to contact your Representatives
and Senators. Demand that they vote against the Chile and Singapore
free trade agreements when they come to the floor. This is a bomb that
is about to blow up in the face of every American worker. The fuse is
lit and the clock is ticking.
I propose somebody make a bumper sticker that says:
"If you like NAFTA, you're gonna Luv CAFTA"
Those Midwest towns that lost all their factories should really like
that one.
Here are the links to the agreements:
Chile
http://www.ustr.gov/new/fta/chile.htm
Singapore
http://www.ustr.gov/new/fta/singapore.htm
I haven't spent enough time researching this treasure trove of
documents but I did glance at the Singapore agreement Chapter 11
entitled, "Temporary Entry of Business Persons".
Here a few notable things to take note of (I'm sure there are many
more). My comments are in brackets, everything else is a cut and paste
from the agreement:
----- Section III -----
Intra-Company Transferees such as managers, executives and specialists
as defined in relation to intra-corporate transferees in a Partys
Schedule of Specific Commitments to the GATS."
[Guess what folks, this is the dreaded L Visa all over again! And just
in case you are hoping that it won't be as bad as the L visa, you will
be disappointed when you read this]
A Party shall not:
(a) as a condition for temporary entry under paragraph 1, require labor
certification tests or other procedures of similar effect; or
(b) impose or maintain any numerical restriction relating to temporary
entry under paragraph 1.
----- SECTION IV : PROFESSIONALS -----
[Just in case you are wondering if you will be affected, the answer is
YES. The reason I know the answer is because you can read, and so can
most of the graduates from Singapore's paper mills. :-) ]
[Here is their definition of who can come here to take your job:]
* business person(s) seeking to engage in a business activity as a
professional, or to perform training functions related to a particular
profession, including conducting seminars
* professional means a national of a Party who is engaged in a
specialty occupation requiring:
(a) theoretical and practical application of a body of specialized
knowledge; and
(b) attainment of a post-secondary degree in the specialty requiring
four or more years of study (or the equivalent of such a degree) as a
minimum for entry into the occupation. Such degrees include the
Bachelors Degree, Masters Degree, and
the Doctoral Degree conferred by institutions in the United States and
Singapore.
----- MINIMUM EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS AND ALTERNATIVE CREDENTIAL
[Let's say someobdy from Singapore doesn't have a techie degree but he
wants to come to the U.S. Here are a couple of professions that are
given exemptions:]
* Disaster Relief Claims Adjuster
* Management Consultant
----- CHAPTER 12 : ANTICOMPETITIVE BUSINESS CONDUCT, DESIGNATED
MONOPOLIES, AND GOVERNMENT ENTERPRISES -----
[I have been fooling you guys all along. This agreement isn't that bad
after all. There are all sorts of protections written into it such as:]
ARTICLE 12.2 : ANTICOMPETITIVE BUSINESS CONDUCT
1. Each Party shall adopt or maintain measures to proscribe
anticompetitive business conduct12-1 with the objective of promoting
economic efficiency and consumer welfare, and shall take appropriate
action with respect to such conduct.
----- ENFORCEMENT -----
[Just in case there is a dispute, chill out, the lawyers from the WTO
will hold a tribunal:]
Each Party shall ensure that a person subject to the imposition of a
sanction or remedy for violation of such measures is
provided with the opportunity to be heard and to present evidence, and
to seek review of such sanction or remedy in a domestic court or
independent tribunal.
----- Government of a Party -----
[I'm not even going to tackle this one. Check out Annex 12A if you want
dyslexia.]
----- CHAPTER 13 : GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT -----
[In case you missed my newsletter on the Doha Round, it basically
mandates that "natural persons" (i.e. the people that want your jobs)
can cross international borders without government interference.]
The Parties shall also actively cooperate to implement the WTO Doha
Ministerial mandate related to the negotiation of
a multilateral agreement on transparency in government procurement.
----- ARTICLE 15.8 : PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS -----
[So you want to Buy American. Nope. That's not allowed and you may be
tried in the World Tribunal if you get those patriotic ideas!]
Neither Party may impose or enforce any of the following requirements,
(a) to export a given level or percentage of goods or services;
(b) to achieve a given level or percentage of domestic content;
(c) to purchase, use, or accord a preference to goods produced in its
territory, or to purchase goods from persons in its territory;
(d) to relate in any way the volume or value of imports to the volume
or value of
exports or to the amount of foreign exchange inflows associated with
such
investment;
----- ARTICLE 15.15 : SUBMISSION OF A CLAIM TO ARBITRATION -----
[I used to think the John Birch Society was just a bunch of wackos with
one-world conspiracy theories. Oh well, I was wrong, and they were
right.]
ARTICLE 15.15 : SUBMISSION OF A CLAIM TO ARBITRATION15-12
1. In the event that a disputing party considers that an investment
dispute cannot be settled by consultation and negotiation:
[Guess who gets to settle the disputes]
ARTICLE 15.18 : SELECTION OF ARBITRATORS
1. Unless the disputing parties otherwise agree, the tribunal shall
comprise three arbitrators, one arbitrator appointed by each of the
disputing parties and the third, who shall be the presiding arbitrator,
appointed by agreement of the disputing parties.
2. The Secretary-General shall serve as appointing authority for an
arbitration under this Section.
3. If a tribunal has not been constituted within 75 days from the date
that a claim is submitted to arbitration under this Section, the
Secretary-General, on the request of a disputing party, shall appoint,
in his or her discretion, the arbitrator or arbitrators not yet
appointed.
There are also some other goodies that I'm taking a look at. Here is a
classic:
http://www.ustr.gov/new/fta/Singapore/final/11%20temp%20entry.PDF
These are letters sent between US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick
and George Yeo, Singapore's Minister of Trade and Industry. In the
first letter, George Yeo wants assurance from Zoellick that workers
from Singapore won't be exploited as cheap labor and that they will be
protected by labor laws. Zoellick agrees, but forgot to demand the same
thing from Singapore. Oh well, it was probably a simple oversight that
can be settled in a World Tribunal.
http://capwiz.com/fair/issues/alert/?alertid=2841161&type=CO
Help Prevent Chile and Singapore Free Trade Agreements from Displacing
U.S. Workers
Contact Your Senators Today!
The U.S. Senate is poised this week or next week to vote on two free
trade agreements that could result in further displacement of U.S.
high-tech workers. Under the procedures governing Senate ratification
of trade agreements, so called "fast track", the Senate must vote these
trade deals up or down without any opportunity for amendments.
The offending language in the agreements, if approved, would prevent
the United States Congress from setting labor certification rules or
limits on the numbers of intra-company transfer workers admitted from
these two countries. Making these provisions especially dangerous, the
Bush Administration is touting them as a model to be replicated in
future trade agreements with numerous other countries.
The existing H-1B and L-1 temporary high-tech worker visa programs have
already contributed to record setting unemployment among U.S. high tech
workers. FAIR considers the guestworker provisions of these two free
trade agreements to be so harmful that the Congress should reject them
altogether unless changed.
How You Can Help:
Contact your senators and let them know you oppose the Chile and
Singapore free trade agreements because of guestworker provisions in
the bills. Type your zip code into the "Take Action Now" box to send a
free faxed message. Follow up your faxes with a phone call. (Visit the
"Elected Officials" section of our website for contact information.)
Recommend that the Senate return these agreements to the U.S. Trade
Representative with instructions to eliminate the temporary worker
provisions.
If the Senate must vote on these agreements in their present form, urge
your senators to vote AGAINST their approval.
Talking Points:
The guestworker provisions of these trade deals will cause further
displacement of U.S. high-tech workers at a time of record unemployment
in this sector.
Future Congressional action to set numerical limits and worker
protection standard for existing guestworker programs will be crippled
by these treaties if they are approved by the Senate in their current
form.
The limit on "specialty occupation" guestworkers under these agreements
are breached because there is no limit on the number of times the visas
for guestworkers from these countries may be renewed.
The provisions for intra-company transfer visas preclude establishing
any ceiling on them and rule out the establishment of labor market
protections for American workers.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/44527/1/.html
This story was printed from channelnewsasia.com
Title : Singapore-US trade deal faces criticism over immigration
provisions
By :
Date : 15 July 2003 1518 hrs (SST)
Republican and Democrat members of the US Congress have criticised
Washington's trade deal with Singapore, claiming it will increase
immigration into the US.
Even though the free trade agreement has already been signed by US
President George W Bush and Singapore Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, it
is still scheduled to be considered this month by Congress and the
Senate, where US lawmakers may force through changes.
The deal includes provisions giving Singaporean and Chilean engineers,
lawyers and other professionals opportunities to work in the US.
Some US lawmakers believes this sets a dangerous precedent of mixing
policy issues into trade deals.
This is a highly charged political issue given that US unemployment has
touched two-decade highs.
The agreement allows for 5,000 Singaporeans to enter the US each year.
The House Judiciary Committee has already succeeded in getting the
administration to put further caps on the number of temporary workers
allowed in.
http://www.idg.com.sg/idgwww.nsf/unidlookup/5251505E54BD4E2148256D210021B08F?OpenDocument
U.S. lawmakers question impact of free trade pacts on IT
By Grant Gross
IDG News Service, Washington Bureau
09-05-2003
WASHINGTON - The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and three
representatives of the U.S. IT industry Thursday called on Congress to
pass free trade agreements with Singapore and Chile, but lawmakers
asked whether current trade agreements were hurting the U.S. tech
industry.
The deals also might handicap Congress' ability to change the
much-criticized Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), one lawmaker
warned.
Representatives of the trade office promoted the two proposed
agreements as good for the U.S. IT industry and the economy as a whole
during a hearing Thursday before the U.S. House Committee on Energy and
Commerce's Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.
Subcommittee chairman Cliff Stearns, a Republican from Florida, said
the two proposals will "serve as blueprints" for future U.S. trade
agreements, with the two agreements taking new approaches on e-commerce
and intellectual property.
Both the Business Software Alliance and the Software and Information
Industry Association urged Congress to approve the agreements quickly.
Robert Holleyman, president and chief executive officer of the BSA,
said the large software companies that make up the group's membership
"unequivocally support" both trade agreements because they would impose
tough penalties for software piracy in the two countries and would
allow software and services to be delivered online without tariffs.
"In these agreements, new baselines have been set that should lead to
significant market opportunities for the U.S. IT and software
industries in the years ahead," Holleyman said.
Free trade agreements are designed to allow countries to trade goods
and services with minimal tariffs and other barriers. Trade agreements,
including the Chile and Singapore agreements, often define acceptable
behavior for protecting intellectual property, defining human rights
and protecting workers and the environment.
Michelle O'Neill, deputy assistant security for information technology
industries at the U.S. Department of Commerce, called both agreements
"ground-breaking" in their approaches to preventing tariffs on
electronic commerce. Provisions in both agreements will "make the
Singapore and Chile markets more predictable for U.S. (IT) and content
exporters," she said.
But other lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans, questioned
provisions in both agreements.
Representative Hilda Solis, a Democrat from California, questioned
whether the agreements' copyright protection provisions, similar to the
U.S. DMCA, would handcuff Congress from making changes to that law. The
DMCA, passed in 1998, has drawn criticism from some programmers and
civil rights groups for provisions that outlaw any attempt to
circumvent technologies designed to protect copyrighted materials.
Opponents of the DMCA argue there are legitimate reasons for bypassing
copyright controls, including scientific research and reviews of
products, and three bills have been introduced in Congress this year to
define consumer rights under digital copyright law.
"This is a controversial law that is currently being litigated," Solis
said of the DMCA. "I'm concerned that the U.S. trade representative may
have advocated for provisions that would tie our hands ... by
preventing us from fixing the law." Solis wanted to know if changes to
the DMCA would jeopardize these treaties.
Ralph Ives, assistant U.S. trade representative for Asia-Pacific, said
his office believes the agreements would allow Congress flexibility in
making some changes to the DMCA. "We'd have to see which specific
provisions you had in mind," he told Solis.
Solis also raised concerns about the numbers of skilled worker
immigration papers -- H1B visas -- allowed in both agreements, saying
immigration policy should be set by Congress, not the trade office.
Representative C.L. Otter, a Republican from Idaho, also questioned
whether the agreements would protect U.S. IT jobs. Otter used the
example of South Korean RAM maker Hynix Semiconductor Inc., a
competitor of Idaho company Micron Technology Inc., saying Hynix's RAM
dumping had cost Micron 1,500 jobs even though the U.S. has a trade
agreement with South Korea. In early April, the U.S. Department of
Commerce preliminarily concluded that imports of some RAM chips from
Hynix were unfairly subsidized by the South Korean government.
Otter criticized the pace of the Hynix investigation. "Americans need
to know that the federal government is working for them, not against
them," he said. "We intend to ensure that the (President George W.
Bush) administration insists on full enforcement of our current trade
agreements before we expand into new agreements."
Otter asked trade representatives whether they believed current trade
agreements have been adequately enforced.
"Do you think we that we've enforced our trade agreements with South
Korea sufficiently enough to have balance between the United States and
South Korea on high tech?" he asked.
O'Neill, from the Department of Commerce, declined to answer the South
Korea question directly. "We've made a concerned effort to review
agreements (and) work closely with industry ... to address some of the
concerns that have been raised," she said.
Other witnesses at the hearing raised environmental and worker rights
concerns about the two proposed agreements, and three subcommittee
members criticized a provision in the Singapore proposal that would
allow electronics components produced in parts of Indonesia to be
treated as Singapore imports to the U.S.
Representative Sherrod Brown, an Ohio Democrat, said part of the
Singapore agreement would allow components produced in "sweat shops" in
Indonesia to enjoy free trade protections. He countered the argument
that this move would encourage economic reform in Indonesia and allow
the government there to focus on antiterrorism measures.
"It's hard to see how running low-wage sweat shops would secure peace
in the United States," Brown said.
Representative Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, also questioned
the Singapore government's financial stake in Singapore Technologies
Telemedia Pte. Ltd. and the company's attempt to buy a majority piece
of U.S. telecommunications company Global Crossing Holdings Ltd.
"My concern is that we may end up in a situation where U.S. companies,
which are not controlled by the government, end up having to compete
with companies that are owned by the government of Singapore," he said.
"That is not fair trade, because the foreign competitor is both the
owner and the regulator of the same company."
Ives said the Singapore government has agreed to eventually end its
ownership of Singapore Technologies Telemedia.
Despite the criticism, Ronald Monford, the president and chief
executive officer of software company Mind Over Machines Inc., asked
the lawmakers to approve the agreements.
"Both the Singapore and Chile free trade agreements provide tremendous
opportunity for small businesses like mine to expand our markets
internationally and create jobs in this country," said Monford, whose
Baltimore company employs about 30 people. "(The IT) provisions will
ensure that we have access to new markets by knocking down the
artificial barriers that have locked us out."
Support this Newsletter and ZaZona.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm
To Subscribe or Unsubscribe send an email to
Rob Sanchez is board member of NAEA - www.NAEA.US
Back to archives