avatar
Fast-track: The next attack on democracy


Jensen

Conservatives are usually the most strident defenders of the doctrine of

original intent, the idea that we should follow the will of the Founding Fathers

in interpreting the U.S. Constitution.

In a

strange twist on that idea, Republicans are warning us that the Constitution has

“tied the hands” of the president in trade negotiations.

The

problem, it seems, is that the Constitution states in Article I, Section 8 that:

“The Congress shall have Power … to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.” The

original intent seems pretty clear: Congress should regulate international

commerce.

The

“problem” is that Congress is sometimes more prone to public pressure (also

known as democracy) than the executive branch. That is, citizens who organize to

pursue their interests have more chances at influence in the House and Senate

than they do when the whole show is run out of the White House. As a result,

congressional participation in regulating commerce with foreign nations has at

times made it more difficult for corporations to ram through the kinds of trade

deals that help them line their pockets at the expense of those citizens.

The

solution to this occasional excess of democracy? For the Bush administration and

Republicans in the House, the answer is fast-track legislation.

Well,

it used to be called fast-track, until the Bush spinmeisters realized that the

term makes it sounds as if the rich and powerful might be trying to pull a fast

one on U.S. citizens, which of course they are. So, the concept has been renamed

“trade promotion authority,” and congressional Republicans are gearing up to

push the legislation through before they head off for vacation in August.

Fast-track authority made it easier for the first Bush administration to

negotiate, and the Clinton administration to pass, the disastrous North American

Free Trade Agreement. But fast-track authority expired in 1994, and the most

recent attempt to bring it back, in 1998, was defeated in the House by a 243-180

vote. But now fast-track is back, and the Republicans are talking about a

bipartisan coalition to push it through.

Under

fast-track, members of Congress would be abandoning their duty instead of taking

their rightful role in regulating international commerce. The proposed law

allows the president to bring trade agreements he negotiates before Congress for

an up-or-down vote, without amendments and with limited debate.

In

other words, fast-track severely limits the ability of the representatives

elected by the citizens of the United States to influence trade policy. Given

that trade policy is becoming as important, if not more important, than military

muscle in shaping the world, fast-track is not only an attack on democracy but

on democracy in the arena we most desperately need it.

If

reinstated, fast track will certainly make it easier for the Bush administration

to ram through a version of the Free Trade Area of the Americas — a hemispheric

NAFTA — that will increase the power of corporations and marginalize the

interests of labor organizers, human-rights activists and environmentalists.

From

the point of view of Bush administration officials, congressional Republicans

and other defenders of the right of corporations to run the world, that’s

precisely the reason HR 2149, the “Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2001”

introduced by Rep. Phil Crane, R-Ill., is needed. (Read the bill at

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:h.r.02149 :)

During the debate over this, expect to hear the usual distortions from Bush.

Already he has said that fast-track is necessary so that he can avoid a trade

agreement that has “codicils on it that frighten people from trading with us.”

Bush

knows full well, of course, that “people” aren’t frightened by agreements that

protect workers’ rights, human rights and the environment. Corporations are

frightened by such protections, which limit their ability to rake in massive

profits off the vulnerable economies and peoples of the developing world.

Robert Jensen is a professor in the School of Journalism at the University of

Texas at Austin. He can be reached at [email protected] Other

writings are available online at

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/

~rjensen/freelance/freelance.htm.

 

 

Leave a comment