You are on page 1of 11

ENDI 2008 Columbia FTA Bad Impacts

Colombia FTA Bad Impacts

Colombia FTA Bad Impacts 1

Colombia FTA Bad: Biodiversity (1/2) 2
Colombia FTA Bad: Biodiversity (2/2) 3
Colombia FTA Bad: Heg (1/2) 4
Colombia FTA Bad: Heg (2/2) 5
Ext: Colombian Instability 6
Colombia FTA Bad: Drug Trafficking 7
Colombia FTA Bad: Human Rights 8
Ext: Hurts HR Cred 9
Columbia FTA Bad: Econ 10
Ext: Hurts Econ 11

ENDI 2008 Columbia FTA Bad Impacts

Colombia FTA Bad: Biodiversity (1/2)
CFTA gives investors access to Colombia’s natural resources, threatening one of the most
diverse ecosystems in the world
Alliance for Responsible Trade, March 2007, “The “Contaminated” Environmental Chapter of the Free
Trade Agreement,”

Colombia has many regions full of biodiversity, especially in the Andean region, the Chocó jungle, and the Amazon
rain forest. The availability of water and the abundance of forests make Colombia one of the richest countries, in
terms of natural resources, in the world. This natural heritage is claimed by transnational corporations. They transform renewable and
non-renewable natural resources into profits, but still don't have access to the quantity of natural resources that their growing demand requires.
Private investors see in the free trade agreements, like those promoted by the U.S. since 1994, the possibility of investing in this
sector and gaining access to other resources in order to satisfy their demand. It is not a coincidence that primary materials and
natural resources, necessary for the industrial transformation, are many times imported to the U.S. with very low or non-existent taxation.[19]
The Andean region of Colombia, composed of the sub-Andean forests, the Andean mountains, and the high plains,
holds almost half the total biodiversity of the Neotropic ecozone, which includes South America, Central America, and the
Caribbean. It is one of the 12 regions in the world from which cultivated plants come from. Unfortunately, it is also
one of the most threatened regions, with highly degraded ecosystems that have resulted from urban expansion and the concentration of
the population.[20] Colombia possesses 68,143 square miles of Amazon rain forest[21], of the million and a half square miles of land; it is the
largest and richest tropical jungle in the world. The Amazon contains 2,500 species of trees, a third of all species of plants, a
third of the tropical wood in the world, and the largest diversity of fresh-water fish, birds and butterflies anywhere.
The Amazon River is the longest river on the planet, crossing close to 4,000 miles to the Atlantic Ocean, where it spills about 20% of the world's
river water into the ocean.[22] The aforementioned arguments are weighty and sufficient enough to ask the Congress of
the United States and the Congress of Colombia, to reject the ratification of the Free Trade Agreement. As has been demonstrated, it
is not only the environmental regulations that should be negotiated in the FTA, but the text in its entirety, which
negatively and gravely affects the environmental conditions not only in Colombia, but in the entire world.

ENDI 2008 Columbia FTA Bad Impacts

Colombia FTA Bad: Biodiversity (2/2)

Loss of biodiversity risks extinction

Major David N. Diner, Judge Advocate General's Corps, United States Army, Winter 1994, “The Army And The
Endangered Species Act: Who's Endangering Whom?” Military Law Review, 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161, lexis

1. Why Do We Care? -- No species has ever dominated its fellow species as man has. In most cases, people have assumed the
God-like power of life and death -- extinction or survival -- over the plants and animals of the world. For most of history, mankind pursued this
domination with a single-minded determination to master the world, tame the wilderness, and exploit nature for the maximum benefit of the
human race. 67 In past mass extinction episodes, as many as ninety percent of the existing species perished, and yet the
world moved forward, and new species replaced the old. So why should the world be concerned now? The prime reason is
the world's survival. Like all animal life, humans live off of other species. At some point, the number of species could decline
to the point at which the ecosystem fails, and then humans also would become extinct. No one knows how many
[*171] species the world needs to support human life, and to find out -- by allowing certain species to become extinct
-- would not be sound policy. In addition to food, species offer many direct and indirect benefits to mankind. 68 2. Ecological Value. --
Ecological value is the value that species have in maintaining the environment. Pest, 69 erosion, and flood control are prime benefits certain
species provide to man. Plants and animals also provide additional ecological services -- pollution control, 70 oxygen production, sewage
treatment, and biodegradation. 71 3. Scientific and Utilitarian Value. -- Scientific value is the use of species for research into the physical
processes of the world. 72 Without plants and animals, a large portion of basic scientific research would be impossible. Utilitarian value is the
direct utility humans draw from plants and animals. 73 Only a fraction of the [*172] earth's species have been examined, and mankind may
someday desperately need the species that it is exterminating today. To accept that the snail darter, harelip sucker, or Dismal Swamp southeastern
shrew 74 could save mankind may be difficult for some. Many, if not most, species are useless to man in a direct utilitarian sense. Nonetheless,
they may be critical in an indirect role, because their extirpations could affect a directly useful species negatively. In a closely interconnected
ecosystem, the loss of a species affects other species dependent on it. 75 Moreover, as the number of species decline, the effect of
each new extinction on the remaining species increases dramatically. 76 4. Biological Diversity. -- The main premise of species
preservation is that diversity is better than simplicity. 77 As the current mass extinction has progressed, the world's biological diversity generally
has decreased. This trend occurs within ecosystems by reducing the number of species, and within species by reducing the number of individuals.
Both trends carry serious future implications. 78 [*173] Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist
species, filling narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems inherently are more stable than less diverse systems. "The more complex the
ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. . . . [l]ike a net, in which each knot is connected to others by several strands, such a fabric
can resist collapse better than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if cut anywhere breaks down as a whole." 79 By causing
widespread extinctions, humans have artificially simplified many ecosystems. As biologic simplicity increases, so
does the risk of ecosystem failure. The spreading Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the United States
are relatively mild examples of what might be expected if this trend continues. Theoretically, each new animal or plant extinction, with
all its dimly perceived and intertwined affects, could cause total ecosystem collapse and human extinction. Each new
extinction increases the risk of disaster. Like a mechanic removing, one by one, the rivets from an aircraft's wings, 80 mankind may be edging
closer to the abyss.

ENDI 2008 Columbia FTA Bad Impacts

Colombia FTA Bad: Heg (1/2)
Colombia FTA polarizes the political situation in Colombia threatening civil war
José María Rodríguez González, Political analyst, devoted to U.S. foreign policy, March 27, 2007, “Colombia
FTA: Monkey Business for U.S,” Scoop,

By playing on the split between Colombia’s FARC and anti-FARC, Mr. Uribe
is advancing his narrow political goals and enriching
his friends even as he aggravates conditions for civil war -- a war initiated by the narco-paramilitaries. It is a war
that could find further fuel in the Pandora’s Box of the FTA. Until now U.S. policy has been driven to support the worst of all
possible choices: either the narco-paramilitary or the FARC. Can the U.S. untie itself from the false equation that camouflages the true intentions
of Mr. Uribe’s narco-para-politics? If there is one Free Trade Agreement in the world that the U.S. has to consider
carefully, is the one with Colombia. Is this the right Colombian government to make this agreement with? Shouldn’t the U.S. Congress
listen to Cardinal Rubiano Saenz of the Colombian Catholic Church who foresees a health catastrophe intensified by the FTA? What about the
development concern of Colombian economists like Mr. Guillermo Maya or Colombian Senator Jorge Robledo? These respected authorities
predict that the FTA with Colombia would worsen the critical livelihood of the 60% of Colombians living in chronic poverty. When U.S.
economic treaties failed in Brazil and Argentina, the U.S. lost two important allies; but if the FTA fails in Colombia, an explosive
country of vast potential danger, the U.S. can expect serious and lasting consequences against its interests in the
whole of Latin America.

Colombia instability destroys US hegemony

R. Evan Ellis is an associate with Booz, Allen & Hamilton Inc. who focuses on Latin American security issues
using the analytic methodology of system dynamics, Jan/Feb 2004, “The Impact of Instability in Latin and South
America,” IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine,

The growing disorder in the nations of the Andean ridge highlights a dangerous new phenomenon with significant national
security implications for the United States: Criminal organizations and armed groups in the region have fallen into new
forms of collaboration that allow them to finance their own operations without reliance on outside aid and its
associated strings. The military and self-financing activities of these groups, in turn, creates dynamics that ultimately could break down the
economic and sociopolitical fabric of the countries in which they operate. As illustrated by the FARC, ELN, and AUC in Colombia, these
organizations leverage the weakness of the states in which they operate to survive and grow. Their activities are financed, in part, by taxing or
directly engaging in criminal activity such as narcotrafficking, embezzlement, and extortion [11]. These criminal enterprises, in turn,
leverage a unique combination of global commerce and information flows and the compromised character of the
institutions within their own country. In short, criminal organizations conduct operations involving global shipments of narcotics and
other goods, leveraging international banking, the international transportation infrastructure, and the ability to purchase “specialized human
expertise” for certain operations on global markets [12]. At the same time, the criminal activities depend on “safe havens” that they
have created within compromised states to conduct key stages of their operations—such as money laundering and
narcotics production. Within their compromised societies, criminal organizations have enormous manpower needs, both to perform the daily
physical labor required by their operations and to provide protection from the state (and from rivals) for their activities. Armed groups on both the
left and right serve the interests of criminal enterprises by physically protecting them in exchange for revenue. This loose partnership between
criminal organizations and armed political groups thus generates capabilities and promulgates incidents that contribute to the weakness of the
state—thus sustaining the space in which criminal activity can take place [13]. Both criminal organizations and armed groups thus are nourished
by—and systematically destroy— the socioeconomic fabric of the state in which they grow. As the host state weakens, the activities of
these organizations also infects and destabilizes neighboring states through flows of guerillas and refugees, and the
violence and human suffering associated with them. Although a great deal has been written about narcotrafficking, the
spread of insurgency, and socioeconomic problems in Latin America [14], the current confluence of events is new and
different with respect to the way in which multiple phenomenon reinforce each other to produce a potential
escalating spiral of violence and economic malaise in the region. The individual perpetrators—such as drug cartels,
terrorist cells, and insurgent groups—may not be coordinated, yet the combination of their individual goal-directed
actions produces systemic effects that could ultimately destabilize the region and undercut the basis for U.S. global

ENDI 2008 Columbia FTA Bad Impacts

Colombia FTA Bad: Heg (2/2)

Collapse of leadership causes global nuclear war

Khalilzad, 1995 (Zalmay, Senior Analyst at RAND, Washington Quarterly, Spring, Lexis)
Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a global
rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding principle and
vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United States exercises
leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more open and more
receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a world would have a
better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as nuclear proliferation, threats of
regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership would help preclude
the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and the world to avoid another
global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global nuclear exchange. U.S.
leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a multipolar
balance of power system.

ENDI 2008 Columbia FTA Bad Impacts

Ext: Colombian Instability
The FTA strengthens FARC.
José María Rodríguez González, Political analyst, devoted to U.S. foreign policy, March 27, 2007, “Colombia
FTA: Monkey Business for U.S,” Scoop,

Colombia is pursuing this FTA as its way to push itself to the free and global market. It’s a very worthy aspiration --
if only the country wasn’t overrun by packs of domestic economic hyenas, seasoned speculators and corrupt middle
men, not to mention the narco traffickers who have infiltrated the current government. This unsavory band is
slavering to use the FTA for their advantage, but the unexpected beneficiaries of FTA are likely to be the resilient
guerrillas, FARC (Colombia’s Revolutionary Arm Forces). The FARC have been in existence for over four decades,
and are badly in need of a new cause to revive their anti-imperialist ardor and inflame patriotic and nationalistic
feeling in Colombia.

Unchecked paramilitary violence threatens to unravel the country

Winifred Tate, adjunct assistant professor at the Watson Institute and an assistant professor at Colby College,
Winter/Spring 01, “Paramilitaries in Colombia,” Brown Journal of World Affairs,

Paramilitary groups are responsible for more than eighty percent of political violence. In addition to the devastating impact
of paramilitary violence on individuals and families, these attacks have forced hundreds of thousands of people from their
homes. According to Bogotá-based think tank Consultaria para los Derechos Humanosy Desplacimientos (CODHES) paramilitary violence has
forced more than 300,000 people to flee their homes in the past two years, many from rural areas to urban shantytowns where they swell the
ranks of the urban unemployed. Paramilitary violence has spilled over Colombia’s borders, threatening the stability of
neighboring countries. Paramilitary massacres have forced thousands of Colombian refugees into Panama and
Venezuela. Paramilitary leader Carlos Castaño has issued public communiques threatening attacks against the Panama- nian National Guard
and Venezuelan security forces. Paramilitary forces have been responsible for violence in Ecuador and Venezuela. Paramilitary violence
threatens efforts for peace, as the Colombian government and FARC begin the first serious efforts to negotiate in
almost a decade. Community leaders organizing efforts to support peace rightly fear attack, as paramilitaries target anyone speaking out
against violence. Guerrillas rightly fear demobilizing, as such moves in the past have made them vulnerable to paramilitary attack. During the
1980s, paramilitary violence annihilated the Patriotic Union, a legal political party born of failed negotiations with the FARC. Such violence is
not a thing of the past; demobilized guerrillas and civilian peace activists continue to be the target of assassination
by paramilitary forces. Without minimum guarantees for civil society groups organizing for peace, and for guer-
rillas who lay down their arms, a negotiated settlement will be virtually impossible

ENDI 2008 Columbia FTA Bad Impacts

Colombia FTA Bad: Drug Trafficking
Colombia FTA increases the incentive for drug trafficking
U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky et al, Nov 7, 2005, “Schakowsky, Colleagues, Send Letter To
Ambassador Portman Over Afta Concerns,”

In preparation for agriculture negotiations, the Colombian Ministry of Agriculture released a report entitled
Colombian Agriculture and the FTA with the United States in July 2004. The report predicts that if Colombia
eliminated its price band system and undertook substantial tariff reductions in sensitive products, as the U.S.
continues to request, farmers could experience an overall 57 percent reduction in income and a 35 percent reduction
in employment among workers in nine major agricultural sectors. Indeed, the report sounded a striking warning:
"[If] . . . Colombia [does not take] adequate measures in defense and support of agricultural producers, rural
problems could worsen and many of its inhabitants would have no more than three options: migration to the cities or
to other countries (especially the United States), working in drug cultivation zones, or affiliating with illegal armed
groups. Thus the agreement, if not adequately negotiated, could worsen these three problems that Colombia is trying
to remedy and that would be in the interest of the United States to overcome." Former World Bank Chief Economist
Joseph Stiglitz agrees, explaining in an October 2004 interview, "the United States is spending billions trying to
eradicate the cocaine trade and here we are giving them an incentive to grow more coca. If their income from corn
and rice and other legitimate crops goes down, they will switch to something else, and the most lucrative alternative
is coca."

Drug trafficking funds terror efforts against the US

BSCIA, An American- Romanian Antidrug Partnership, no date, “Drugs and Terror,”

Drug traffickers and terrorist organizations both attack the underpinnings of legitimate government institutions to
achieve their objectives, or enjoy the protection of governments that condone terror or drug trafficking. Drug
traffickers and terror groups are both drawn to regions where central government authority is weak. If a terror group
already controls a region and has excluded or neutralized legitimate government institutions, drug production only
requires a business deal. The growing link between terrorists and the drug trade contributes to an increased threat to
America. Drug and terrorist organizations are taking advantage of the global economy to expand the scope, scale
and reach of their activities and, as a result, their ability to harm American citizens and to damage U.S. interests is
dramatically expanding. As state sponsors for their activities become scarce, terrorists are increasingly dependent on
drug financing. The combined force of their alliance poses an enhanced threat to regional stability, American
national security and the future of our country's youth.

US retaliation after a terrorist attack would cause global nuclear war

Easterbrook 2001 (Greg Easterbrook, senior editor of the New Republic, Nov 11 2001 CNN show: Greenfield
At Large, LN)

Easterbrook: Well, what held through the Cold War, when the United States and Russia had thousands of nuclear weapons pointed at
each other, what held each side back was the fact that fundamentally they were rational. They knew that if they struck,
they would be struck in turn. Terrorists may not be held by this, especially suicidal terrorists, of the kind that al Qaeda is
attempting to cultivate. But I think, if I could leave you with one message, it would be this: that the search for terrorist atomic weapons
would be of great benefit to the Muslim peoples of the world in addition to members, to people of the United States and Western Europe,
because if an atomic warhead goes off in Washington, say, in the current environment or anything like it, in the 24 hours that
followed, a hundred million Muslims would die as U.S. nuclear bombs rained down on every conceivable military
target in a dozen Muslim countries.

MSU Debate 07-08
File Title

Colombia FTA Bad: Human Rights

Colombia FTA devastates US human rights credibility

Chairman Mike Michaud (D-ME) and Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL) are both members of the House Trade Working
Group, April 8, 2008, “Colombia Free Trade Agreement: A Bad Deal for Everyone Involved,”

If we had been born in Colombia, we would probably be dead. That's right. As members of our respective labor
unions, the fight for higher wages, better working conditions, and a secure pension could have cost us our lives.
Thirty nine trade unionists were murdered in Colombia in 2007, and they are being killed at a rate of over one per
week this year. Of the more than 2,500 murders in that nation since 1986, only 68 cases -- around 3 percent -- have
resulted in convictions. However, many of these criminals were convicted in absentia -- meaning they may still be at
large and continuing to terrorize workers. Yet inexplicably, President Bush and some Members of Congress want to
reward Colombia with a free trade agreement. Not on our watch. The right to organize and bargain collectively is
essential to human freedom. We believe passage of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) would greatly
diminish our nation's reputation as a leader in the fight to end human rights abuses worldwide. Despite President
Alvaro Uribe's claim that the Colombian government has cleaned up its act, signs of trouble continue to persist.

Human rights credibility solves inevitable extinction

Rhonda Copelan, Professor of Law – NYU, New York City Law Review, 1999, p. 71-2
The indivisible human rights framework survived the Cold War despite U.S.
machinations to truncate it in the international arena. The framework is there to shatter the myth of the
superiority. Indeed, in the face of systemic inequality and crushing poverty, violence by
official and private actors, globalization of the market economy, and military and
environmental depredation, the human rights framework is gaining new force and
new dimensions. It is being broadened today by the movements of people in different parts of the
world, particularly in the Southern Hemisphere and significantly of women, who understand the
protection of human rights as a matter of individual and collective human survival
and betterment. Also emerging is a notion of third-generation rights, encompassing collective rights
that cannot be solved on a state-by-state basis and that call for new mechanisms of accountability,
particularly affecting Northern countries. The emerging rights include human-centered sustainable
development, environmental protection, peace, and security. Given the poverty and inequality in
the United States as well as our role in the world, it is imperative that we bring the human
rights framework to bear on both domestic and foreign policy.

MSU Debate 07-08
File Title

Ext: Hurts HR Cred

CFTA makes the US look complicit with human rights violations—devastates our
Office of Betty Sutton, June 8, 2007, “Sutton Calls for Colombia and the Bush Administration to Stop
Ignoring Human and Worker Rights,”

Yesterday, Rep. Betty Sutton was joined by other Members of Congress and leading labor and human rights
organizations to announce their united opposition to business-as-usual with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. "I
am very proud to stand with my colleagues and other leaders on human and worker rights to express our collective
concerns about U.S. policy towards a nation that seems to ignore both. The violence towards workers and those
trying to make a better life for their families and communities in Colombia is appalling and horrific and deserves a
much stronger rebuke from the Bush Administration and this Congress," Sutton said. "72 union members
assassinated last year. Over 400 trade unionists killed since 2000, when President Uribe came to office. Where is the
outrage and concern from President Bush, who on Human Rights Day last year said: 'We cherish the freedom of
every person in every nation and strive to promote respect for human rights.'" "Instead of turning words into action,
we get from this Administration a push to enact a U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement. What does this tell the
families of those murdered in Colombia? What does this tell the world community about American priorities?"
"Until the violence ends ... until those responsible for these deaths are brought to justice ... we cannot and should not
even be considering a trade deal with Colombia. Our trade and foreign policies must prioritize human and worker
rights, and unfortunately, our current policies with Colombia do not. It is time for change." Even though Colombia
has been home to egregious worker and human rights violations, the Bush Administration has nonetheless pursued a
free trade deal with the nation. Of the more than 400 trade unionists that have been killed since President Uribe
came to office in 2000, seventy-two were murdered in 2006 alone. Through April 2007, Colombia had sought
prosecution in only 10 of these cases. Sutton has been a leading voice in Congress fighting for a new trade model
that will truly provide fair trade and create a level playing field, while protecting environmental standards and the
rights of workers.

MSU Debate 07-08
File Title

Columbia FTA Bad: Econ

Columbia FTA hurts the US economy—out sources jobs and devastates manufacturing
Chairman Mike Michaud (D-ME) and Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL) are both members of the House Trade Working
Group, April 8, 2008, “Colombia Free Trade Agreement: A Bad Deal for Everyone Involved,”

Historic violence against trade unionists is just one of many problems with the Colombia FTA. Like the Peru FTA,
an agreement we strongly opposed, the Colombia proposal is based on the flawed NAFTA-CAFTA model which led
to the outsourcing of millions of high-paying American jobs and virtually eliminated the U.S. manufacturing
industry. This comes at a time when we are in recession. The economy lost 80,000 jobs in March, the third
consecutive month of rising unemployment. And the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program -- a safety net for
displaced workers -- remains essentially dysfunctional. Passage of the Colombia FTA would add insult to injury for
American workers.

And the US economy is key to the world economy

Mead 04 (Walter Russell, Kissinger senior fellow in U.S. foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations,
"America's Sticky Power," Foreign Policy, March/April, p. ebscohost)

Similarly, in the last 60 years, as foreigners have acquired a greater value in the United States-government and
private bonds, direct and portfolio private investments-more and more of them have acquired an interest in
maintaining the strength of the U.S.-led system. A collapse of the U.S. economy and the ruin of the dollar would do
more than dent the prosperity of the United States. Without their best customer, countries including China and Japan
would fall into depressions. The financial strength of every country would be severely shaken should the United
States collapse. Under those circumstances, debt becomes a strength, not a weakness, and other countries fear to
break with the United States because they need its market and own its securities. Of course, pressed too far, a large
national debt can turn from a source of strength to a crippling liability, and the United States must continue to justify
other countries' faith by maintaining its long-term record of meeting its financial obligations. But, like Samson in the
temple of the Philistines, a collapsing U.S. economy would inflict enormous, unacceptable damage on the rest
of the world. That is sticky power with a vengeance.

The impact of this downturn is nuclear war

Mead, 92 (Walter Russell, fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, New perspectives quarterly, summer pp. 28)

But what if it can't? What if the global economy stagnates - or even shrinks? In that case, we will face
a new period of international conflict: South against North, rich against poor. Russia, China, India -
these countries with their billions of people and their nuclear weapons will pose a much greater
danger to world order than Germany and Japan did in the '30s.

MSU Debate 07-08
File Title

Ext: Hurts Econ

Columbian FTA kills the American Economy.

Ramey 08 (Corinne Ramey, “When Joining a Union becomes a Death Sentence,
April 21st 2008,
The agreement isn't just bad for Colombian workers, it's bad for the current
and aspiring American middle class as well. Increased international trade can
contribute to economic growth, but the way trade rules are formulated in
agreements like this means that the benefits of trade are distributed
unevenly, ultimately undermining the middle class and aspiring middle class in
both the U.S. and the nations it trades with...In effect, this pact would
increase opportunities to outsource U.S. jobs to a nation where wages are
kept low because working people literally fear for their lives if they stand
up for their internationally-recognized rights on the job. Trade deals may at
the top of corporate America’s agenda, but at a time when America’s soaring trade
deficit contributes to the nation’s economic weakness, another trade deal
is far from the agenda of the American middle class.

Columbian FTA leads to widespread job loss.

Ramey 08 (Corinne Ramey, “When Joining a Union becomes a Death Sentence,
April 21st 2008,
Judging from the U.S. experience with NAFTA, American workers will likely
lose more jobs to production that goes overseas than they will gain from
increased exports from Colombia. The agreement is based on the same
old, deeply flawed, “free” trade model that has resulted in the loss of over
one million American jobs and the decimation of the U.S. manufacturing
sector and family farms. According to the Economic Policy Institute, those one
million jobs displaced by NAFTA paid nearly 20% more than the jobs that
remained, on average, in the rest of the economy. Trade agreements like
Colombia, which encourage the off-shoring of U.S. jobs, is one of the major
reasons that a majority of the public sees the American Dream slipping
away for themselves and their children.