You are on page 1of 25


Serving Utah Since. . .Now


1NC SHELL…………………………………………………………..2-6
Uniqueness-COFTA Won’t Pass Now…………………………….7
2NC Link Modifier-Picking Funding Fights=Pelosi Loss…………8
Link Extensions-APRA-E…………………………………………9
Brinks-Dem Allegiance Shaky…………………………………...10
Brinks-Now Key Time……………………………………………11
BIO-D-Hidden Threshold………………………………………….13
BIO-D Outweighs All other Impax………………………………..15


Uniqueness Outstrips Link………………………………………..18

No Internal Link-Unions…………………………………………19
N/U Other Nations Fill In………………………………………20
Turns-Job Creation Internals……………………………………..21-22
Turns-Democracy Internals……………………………………....23-24
Democracy Impact-Extinction……………..…………………..25
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


First, the US/Colombian free trade agreement has been signed but needs congressional
approval. So far Democrats have refused to do so, but Bush will continue to push it in
the upcoming year.
The Seattle Post Intelligencer May 13, 2008

You can tell when President Bush wants something really, really bad. He brings it up over
and over and over again. Every opportunity he's had, Bush has urged Congress to ratify
the Free Trade Agreement with Colombia.
The trade accord already has been negotiated, agreed upon, renegotiated and signed by
both countries. But in order to be implemented, it has to be approved by Congress, and
the Democratic leadership refuses to do it. So, why are both sides so stuck in their
Here are the two versions: Bush and the Republicans claim that the
agreement will benefit U.S. businesses by allowing their products into the Colombian
market free of tariffs, and that it's necessary to strengthen Colombia so it can fend off the
threat of surrounding leftist governments in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia.
Democrats are saying that before approving the Free Trade Agreement with Colombia,
the U.S. government needs to take care of its own in this weakening economy and that
the government of President Alvaro Uribe in Colombia needs to do more to stem and
clarify the assassinations of union leaders.
So, is this really about supporting Colombia and giving U.S. exporters a market in which to sell their products,
and about protecting labor laws and human rights in a foreign country, or more of a power struggle between
Republicans and Democrats?
Dr. Bruce Michael Bagley, professor of international studies at the University of Miami (Fla.), thinks it's the
latter. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to Bagley, wants Bush to accept the Trade Adjustment Act, which
would provide training for American workers who might lose their jobs as a result of international trade pacts.
And what the president is trying to do is "flex his muscle and embarrass Democrats," says Bagley.
I don't know about the "embarrassing the Democrats" part, but Bush certainly did try to flex his muscle. In early
April the president put the Colombian Free Trade Agreement on the fast track, giving Congress 90 days to
approve it without a possibility of making any changes. But the Democratic leadership did not take the bait.
Pelosi was successful in blocking the vote in the House of Representatives by simply changing the rules, and
there was nothing the White House could do about it but complain and continue to lobby for the passage of the
In Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, the Bush administration found its best and most direct cheerleader on
this issue. "If Colombians don't buy our tractors, they'll buy them from Japan," he said. "If they don't buy our
wheat, they'll buy it from Canada, and if they don't buy our high-tech equipment, they'll buy it from China."
The fact is that Colombia already has an advantage over the U.S., under the Andean Trade Preference Act. More
than 90 percent of Colombian products enter the United States duty-free, while our exports face tariffs up to 35
percent and even higher for some agricultural products. The new trade accord with Colombia would eliminate
tariffs on more than 80 percent of American exports of industrial and consumer goods immediately, and on 100
percent of American exports over time. As for Colombia, besides added relief from tariffs, the new accord
would mean big investments by U.S. companies and a stronger political alliance.
But in an election year, it's not likely that either side will give in. Democrats aren't just
worried about union leaders in Colombia being killed, they are responding to pressure
from big unions in the U.S. that are opposed to the deal. And who knows what kinds of
promises the White House made to Colombia that it cannot make good on. So, for now,
Colombia is going to have to stay stuck in the middle of yet another political power
struggle between the White House and the Democratic leadership.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


And, Pelosi’s political capital is crucial to preventing COFTA passage. A streamlined
appropriations process is crucial to this is allowing a single veto-override vote instead of
Chatanooga Free Times (staff, Czar Nancy's rule, May 7, 2008)

Adding in Pelosi's unprecedented tactics in blocking the Colombian Free Trade

Agreement, she has in 16 months established herself as one of the most powerful
speakers ever. The stunning aspect of Czar Nancy's rule is the degree of Republican
acquiescence. Neither losing their House majority in 2006 after 12 years nor facing more
serious losses in 2008 has toughened the Republicans.
Republicans have just caught on that Pelosi plans for the second straight year to substitute
a continuing resolution for individual appropriations bills. Continuing resolutions in the
past consisted of a single sentence keeping spending at the previous year's level, but these
documents have become complicated descriptions of spending. At year's end, the
Democrats devise an omnibus bill wrapping up all domestic spending -- hamstringing the
lame-duck Republican president's resolve to veto generous Democratic appropriations
bills, one by one.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


And funding APRA-E would crush Pelosi’s ability to stay out of a controversial spending
process. Only her personal influence would be sufficient to guarantee it’s funding..
Inside Energy September 17, 2007

The House passed an energy and water spending bill with $31.6 billion (H.R. 2641) while
the Senate is to vote on a bill with $32.3 billion. The White House has decried these
funding levels as excessive, and has urged lawmakers to pass a bill with its budget total
of $30.5 billion (IE, 3 September, 1). Members of Congress have taken notice and are
unsure where any extra funding for fiscal 2008 could come from. "It's a tight budget,"
said another Hill staffer. "It's a heavy lift for 2008, but 2009 is plausible," the staffer said.
The most likely way to get ARPA-E funding in fiscal 2008 is to negotiate it into the
House-Senate conference report once the Senate has passed its energy and water
spending bill.
The staffer acknowledged that even a push by the energy and water appropriations
chairmen ? Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota and Visclosky ? or even the full
appropriations committee chairmen ? Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia and David
Obey of Wisconsin ? would not be enough to obtain funding for the program. "It's going
to have to lay dormant this year unless someone like [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi or
[Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid can find the money from some revenue stream or
something like that because the appropriators are fairly well tapped out," the staffer said.
Another fear is that denying funds for two consecutive years will allow ARPA-E to
whither on the vine only to become overtaken by other funding priorities in a new
administration. Other concerns still persist such as funding it partially. "If you look at the
scope of what is envisioned today, you'll do more damage funding ARPA-E at a low
amount of money," the staffer said.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


And, Passage of COFTA would rapidly expand Colombian biodiesel exports leading to
massive expansions in palm plantations and clear-cutting of rainforests
Parker in 2007 (David [Reporter, No One Is Illegal Community Radio] “Violence
Continues Against Afro-Colombian Communities”, August 21, 2007,

The palm oil industry currently developing in Bajo Atrato Chocano now with 27,000
hectares of palm plantation in the Cuenca of Curvaradó operated and owned by 12
corporations, figures prominently in government and State policy of economic
development under the administration of President Álvaro Uribe Vélez. Palm oil has
traditionally been a highly profitable export used in foods and hygiene products, but the
use of palm oil to make biodiesel and the expanding demand for biodiesel in the North as
a ‘green’ energy has led Uribe to guarantee an export market of palm oil for biodiesel. He
has pledged to increase palm plantation hectares from 175,000 in 2005 to 6 million, as
part of State policy recognized in the U.S.-Colombian Free Trade Agreement and the U.S.
backed Plan Colombia.

Palm plantations will destroy the rainforests of Colombia. The indigenous people will be
forcible displaced, the forests destroyed, the soil rendered sterile and the water poisoned
Parker in 2007 (David [Reporter, No One Is Illegal Community Radio] “Violence
Continues Against Afro-Colombian Communities”, August 21, 2007,

In 2000 and 2001, many community members, after suffering from fear, the loss of loved
ones, hunger, and living in refugee camp conditions, decided to return to their land and
create Peace Communities, only to find the development of agro-industrial mega-projects
well underway. Urapalma S.A., the first of 12 private companies to operate in the region,
with funding coming internationally from USAID (under the pretext of replacing illegal
crops with sustainable agriculture and providing jobs for poor peasants) and nationally
from FINAGRO and Fedepalma subsidies, had already sown 2000 hectares in the
Curvaradó River basin with African Palm monocultres, with another 6000 hectares being
cleared for the same purpose, all in the heart of the territories collectively owned by the
communities of Curvaradó.
By way of violence, armed forces had ‘emptied’ the land of its traditional and ancestral
inhabitants, although many fled the violence by retreating into the dense jungle, living
without a home and without lighting a fire, for fear of both guerrilla forces in the region
and the paramilitary and military forces. The violence had cleared the way for heavy
machinery to deforest the land, destroying the soil structure and poisoning waterways, to
plant greenhouse grown African Palm trees in symmetrical rows that would later be
harvested for mass production of palm oil for the world market.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


Last, Rainforests are the lungs of the earth. Further deforestation risks the extinction of
all life.
Jereski in 2007 (Robert [Journalist] “New York City Is One of the Biggest Destroyers of
the Amazon Rainforest”, October 15, 2007,

Biologists and climate scientists describe tropical rainforests as the lungs of the earth, a
cooling band along the equator that converts carbon dioxide into oxygen, thereby
preserving the world's delicate climate balance. These miracles of millions of years of
evolution contain the most biodiverse ecosystems in the world.
More than 100,000 different species can be found on just one acre of Western Amazonian
rainforest. An estimated 50 percent of the world's 14 million species inhabit these forests
along with dozens of indigenous cultures, and all are at risk of succumbing to what
Harvard etymologist and conservation biologist E.O. Wilson has described as "the sixth
great extinction."
This time, instead of cosmic or geological events, human avarice and short-sighted
consumption are causing the despoliation of habitat that is leading to the destruction of
life on earth.
According to former World Bank economist Sir Nicholas Stern, author of the Stern
Report on the economics of climate change, halting deforestation is the world's "single
largest opportunity for cost-effective and immediate reductions of carbon emissions."
Commissioned by the British Chancellor of the Exchequer in 2005 to determine the
relative costs and benefits of shifting to a low-carbon economy, this report was a startling
warning against further deforestation, declaring that the carbon locked up in the biomass
of the world's forests is double that already in the atmosphere. Stern's research team
concluded that the need to preserve the world's remaining natural forests was "urgent"
and that "inaction now risks great damage to the prospects of future generations."
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

Uniqueness-COFTA Won’t Pass Now

COFTA won’t pass now. Democrats are united against it, but the GOP is trying to gain
Tampa Tribune May 6, 2008

She said Colombia has been a strong U.S. ally but faces hostility from anti-U.S.
neighbors, including Venezuela. Because other nations nearby, including Chile and Peru,
have free-trade pacts with the United States, the lack of one in Colombia is an economic
disadvantage as the nation works to combat drug cartels and a violent guerilla movement,
she said.
"The U.S. has in Colombia one of its best friends, long-term friends," she said.
The political backdrop appears to make it unlikely the pact will make headway before
November's election, however. Democrats in Congress are angry at Bush for sending it to
them and seeking a quick vote when they preferred to delay. Republicans in Congress,
meanwhile, have gone on a public relations offensive in favor of the pact, apparently
seeking to make the Democrats appear anti-business.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now
2NC Link Modifier-Picking Funding Fights=Pelosi Loss

Pelosi could still lose. If she picks contentious fights with the White House over
spending issues like the plan
UPI April 20, 2008 (Pelosi Tests Might With War Funding Bill)

Pelosi opposed President George Bush by refusing to vote on a warrantless surveillance

bill and blocking a fast-track vote on a U.S.-Colombian free-trade agreement, but her
resolve will be challenged in the next two weeks when lawmakers debate the war funding
bill, The Washington Post reported Sunday.
The Post said Pelosi took advantage of the changing political climate in Washington as
Bush winds down his last term in office, but the war funding measure could be quite
contentious as the sagging U.S. economy puts any foreign spending under additional
Many Democratic and Republican leaders said Bush won't get the $108 billion in war
funding without a fight, but some conservative Republicans warn Pelosi could lose this
battle, the Post said.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

Link Extensions-APRA-E
Pushing for ARPA-E funding would require an appropriations showdown with the
Rugnetta in 2007 (Michael [staff, American Progress] American Progress, August 21,

Last Thursday, President Bush signed legislation that authorizes $33.6 billion in funding
over the next three years to improve scientific research and education. The bipartisan
America COMPETES Act—Congress’s legislative response to the National Academy of
Sciences’ 2007 report “Rising above the Gathering Storm” —would provide for a variety
of programs, including competitive grants for increasing the number of highly qualified
teachers serving high-need schools, grants to expand access to AP and IB courses, and
two new grant programs to enhance math education in elementary and secondary school.
As detailed by the House Committee on Science and Technology, the major government
agencies that will benefit from this funding are the National Science Foundation, the
Department of Energy, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
We are glad to see that the Bush administration took the National Academy’s
recommendations under serious consideration and signed off on Congress’s bipartisan
effort to authorize funding for the much needed advancement of scientific research and
education in the United States.
But this act only authorizes funds, so more excitement is in store when Congress returns
from its August recess and begins the appropriations process. The president has expressed
some reservations about the act, claiming in a White House statement that “[t]he bill
creates over 30 new programs that are mostly duplicative or counterproductive.”
In fact the president’s FY2009 budget request will only seek funding for “those
authorizations that support the focused priorities of the American Competitiveness
Initiative.” Bush announced the ACI in his 2006 State of the Union Address with the goal
of increasing investment in research, education, and entrepreneurship. As part of ACI, the
Domestic Policy Council’s Office of Science and Technology Policy later produced a
report with detailed recommendations for policy.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

Brinks-Dem Allegiance Shaky

Democratic allegiances on COFTA are divided. If Pelosi can’t prevent a vote strong
lobbies could get it passed
Novak in 2008 (Robert [Editorialist, Chicago Sun Times] “Dems Risk Alienating
Colombia over Trade” Chicago Sun Times, April 3, 2008)

President Bush next week will send Congress a trade agreement forcing Democrats there
to make an unpleasant choice. Will they follow the bidding of organized labor and reject
a pact negotiated more than a year and a half ago with the country's strongest ally and
best customer in South America?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not want to make her members cast votes on the
Colombian Free Trade Agreement. It is unconditionally opposed by the AFL-CIO, which
is uninterested in negotiating changes. But to forget about a vote this year as Pelosi wants
would be akin to an outright rejection in its international implications. It would humiliate
Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, a free-trader and a bulwark against the spreading
influence in Latin America of Venezuela's leftist strongman President Hugo Chavez.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

Brinks-Now Key Time Pelosi Needs to Prevent A Quick Vote

Timing matters. Pelosi will push for a late vote allowing Democratic support to erode.
Pelosi key.
Bedard in 2008 (Paul [staff] Administration Confident of Pelosi Deal on Colombia Free
Trade Agreement, USNEWS.COM, April 18, 2008)

Secondly, Republicans are moving to put the blame for inaction on Pelosi in advance of
the upcoming election in which the Democrats are seeking to win the Hispanic vote.
Pelosi has suggested a vote in the lame duck session, but the administration is pressing
for an earlier vote and has counted almost enough Democrats backing CFTA to win
approval if a vote were pushed soon. Opponents say that Colombia hasn't done enough on
human rights and labor issues to join the free-trade world, but administration officials say
that it has.

All Pelosi needs to do is stall. If she can prevent a quick vote it’ll get lost in the shuffle
between administrations
Dale in 2008 (Helen [staff] “Sabotaging Colombia” The Washington Times, April 16,

How does the U.S. presidential election figure into the equation of free trade with
Colombia? It appears that congressional Democrats are fearful of offending: 1) their two
presidential candidates, both of whom are now actively campaigning on anti-free trade
platforms and 2) their constituencies among the U.S. trade unions. Once the election is
over, some have suggested, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
might overcome her problems with the Colombian accord and allow Congress to vote in
the lame-duck session following the election.
This would be an extraordinarily cynical, high-stakes gamble. The danger would be that
were it to fail, the consequences could well be that the next U.S. administration would not
have time to take up the Colombia trade deal in its first year in office (were the next
White House inclined to pursue free trade agreements at all), and Colombia would
probably go into its next presidential election in 2010 without an agreement with the
United States.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


The COFTA Debate offers a unique opportunity to reverse presidential fast track
authority, this is crucial to the US economy, global human rights and the creation of a
prosperous world trade system
Isaacs in 2008 (Amy [National Director Americans For Democratic Action] “Pact Must
Work For Both Nations”, The Augusta Chronicle (Georgia) June 23, 2007)

"Fast Track" trade-promotion authority is set to expire July 1. Congress should seize this
opportunity to put "Fast Track" on the shelf and reassert its constitutional role in trade
policy by creating a trade negotiating model that is open, broadly debated, and that
provides basic standards for trade deals that include not only enforceable labor and
environmental standards.
It also should contain provisions for vigorous food safety and inspection, the inclusion of
anti-offshoring and "Buy American" policies, and the exclusion of foreign investor
provisions that undermine U.S. laws. These are a few of the basic provisions that are
essential to a fair trade system that allows everyone to prosper not just multinational
CONGRESS SHOULD take a step back before approving questionable trade deals not
only with Colombia but also Peru, Panama and South Korea. Our vitality at home and
abroad depends on making sound decisions. "Fast Track"-ing our way to global ruin does
not follow that simple rule.
Simply put, the Colombian Free Trade Agreement should be rejected because of that
country's poor human rights record. More important, however, the real path to a
prosperous global trade system is for Congress to reassert its Constitutional role by
denying President Bush an extension of NAFTA-style trade promotion authority and
taking the time to produce a trade system that works for everyone everywhere.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now
BIO-D IMPACTS- Hidden Threshold

The loss of each species presents the risk that it is the crucial
ecosystem link. Each species loss could cause extinction
Diner in 94 (David [Judge Advocate’s General’s Corps. United States
Army] “The Army and the Endangered Species Act: Who’s Endangering
Whom?” Military Law Review. 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161. Winter, 1994.

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 singleminded determination to master the world, tame the wilderness, and exploit
nature for the maximum benefit of the human race. n67 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. n68 2.
Ecological Value. -- Ecological value is the value that species have in maintaining the
environment. Pest, n69 erosion, and flood control are prime benefits certain species
provide to man. Plants and animals also provide additional ecological services --
pollution control, n70 oxygen production, sewage treatment, and biodegradation. n71 3.
Scientific and Utilitarian Value. -- Scientific value is the use of species for research into
the physical processes of the world. n72 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. n73 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 n74 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. n75 Moreover, as the number of species decline, the effect of
each new extinction on the remaining species increases dramatically. n76 4. Biological
Diversity. -- The main
premise of species preservation is that diversity is better than simplicity. n77 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. 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." n79 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. Likea mechanic removing, one
by one, the rivets from an aircraft's wings, [hu]mankind may be
edging closer to the abyss.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

Biodiversity collapse threatens all life

Schlickeisen in 2000, (Roger, President of Defenders of Wildlife and the
Natural Resources Defense Council, May 24, Federal News Service)

A 1998 survey by the American Museum of Natural History confirmed

that a majority of scientific experts believe that we are in the midst of
a mass extinction of living things. These scientists agree that: the loss
of species will pose a major threat to human existence in this century;
during the next 30 years as many as one-fifth of all species alive today
could become extinct; this so-called "sixth extinction" is the fastest in
the Earth's 4.5 billion-year history, but unlike prior mass extinctions, is
primarily the result of human activity and not natural causes;
biodiversity loss is a greater threat than the depletion of the ozone
layer, global warming or pollution and contamination.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

Biodiversity outweighs their impacts

Chen, 2000 (Jim, Prof. of Law and Vance K. Opperman Research
Scholar) 9Minn. J. Global Trade 157
The value of endangered species and the biodiversity they embody is
"literally ... incalculable." What, if anything, should the law do to
preserve it? There are those that invoke the story of Noah's Ark as a
basis for biodiversity preservation. Others regard the entire Judeo-
Chhstian tradition, especially the biblical stories of Creation and the
Flood, as the root of the West's deplorable environmental record. To
avoid getting
bogged down in an environmental exegesis of Judeo-Christian "myth
and legend," we should let Charles Darwin and evolutionary biology
determine the imperatives of our moment in natural "history." The loss
biological diversity is quite arguably the gravest problem facing
humanity. If we cast the question as the contemporary phenomenon
that "our descendants [will1 most regret" the "loss of genetic and
species diversity by the destruction of natural habitats" is worse than
even "energy depletion, economic collapse, limited nuclear war, or
conquest by a totalitarian government." Natural evolution may in due
course renew the earth with a diversity of species approximating that
of a world unspoiled by Homo sapiens - in ten million years, perhaps a
hundred million
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

A/T COFTA Key To New Jobs

COFTA would crush US jobs in a variety of manufacturing areas, e.g. textiles

Women’s Wear Daily April 8, 2008 (staff, “Bush Sends Colombian Trade Pact To

UNITE HERE, the apparel industry's main union, vigorously opposes the Colombian
trade agreement and has vowed to work for its defeat.
"It is outrageous," said Bruce Raynor, general president of UNITE HERE. "In the middle
of a time when American workers can't afford to put gas in their cars to go to work, Bush
would send an agreement to Congress that will further reduce American jobs."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) and Rep Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) criticized the
President, saying: "His unprecedented decision to send a free trade agreement to
Congress without following established protocols of congressional consultation is
counterproductive, jeopardizing prospects for its passage."

Here's a closer look at the White House case for the Colombia Free Trade agreement. It's
aimed at lowering tariffs on U.S. goods headed to Colombia, opening the market to
American farmers and manufacturers. Senior Democrats condemn Colombia for not
stamping out violent factions in the country.

COFTA would export US jobs.

CNN in 2008 (CNN Newsroom, 11 am EST, Bush Makes Case for Controversial
Colombia Trade Deal; Clinton Chief Strategist Steps Down; Protests Continue Over
Olympic Torch”, April 7, 2008)

Some say it's similar to NAFTA. That's the controversial agreement between the U.S.,
Canada and Mexico. Opponents say it has cost American workers job. Both Hillary
Clinton and Barack Obama oppose the agreement and they want to see changes in
NAFTA. John McCain supports both the Colombia deal and NAFTA.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

A/T COFTA K/T Democracy

Claims that the Uribe regime is democratic ignore it’s repressive internal policies and the
climate of fear and intimidation in Colombia
Michaud in 2008 (Michael [Demo Congress Maine] REP. MICHAUD JOINS U.S.,
TRADE AGREEMENT, US Fed News May 14, 2008)

"I am reminded that as a union member, if I were living in Colombia, I'd be subject to the
same intimidation, the same threats, and the same scare tactics as they are," said
Michaud. "I am proud to stand with them today in their fight to protect workers in
Colombian trade unions detailed the current climate of fear for Colombian trade unionists
and pledged their continued opposition to the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.
Michaud and Brown, along with U.S. labor leaders pledged their continued opposition to
the FTA, despite continued lobbying by the Bush Administration and the Colombian
government. They called for a "time-out" on bad trade deals to consider their implications
for US and foreign workers.
"When I confronted President Uribe about the violence, he issued an unconvincing flat
denial, hoping that we would turn a blind eye toward the violence in order to pass a free
trade agreement. The Bush Administration shows complete disregard for the views of
American people by promoting a trade agenda that has been a boon for big business at the
expense of working families and their jobs. Furthermore, the Colombia FTA rewards a
country whose record of violence against union organizers is nothing short of disgraceful.
The Administration is pushing an agenda under the guise of national security in order to
promote its own special interests. I am pleased Speaker Pelosi has halted the
consideration of the Colombia FTA until the violence is addressed in Colombia," said
Congressman Michaud.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

AFF ANSWERS-Uniqueness Outstrips Link

COFTA is just a political football. Bush has no intention of passing it only embarrassing
The News Tribune in 2008 (staff editorial, (Tacoma Washington),”Free Trade Shouldn’t
be Sacrificed to Politics”, April 14, 2008)

President Bush pressed the Colombia agreement on Congress for his own political
purposes -- in part to embarrass the two Democratic candidates. Pelosi and the House
Democrats changed the rules and scuttled it for the year to save Obama and Clinton
from embarrassment.
But the agreement deserved approval on its merits, regardless of politics. It served
American interests. Other U.S. trade partners will see its fate as evidence that the
president cannot deliver on negotiated promises.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


No internal Unions are key to effective opposition to Cofta

Ackley in 2008 (Kate [staff] “Victories That Are Union Made?” Roll Call, April 21,

The intensity of Sweeney's rhetoric might have seemed out of place. After all, the entire
U.S. labor movement had, just days before, scored a major victory in its fight to quash the
Colombia FTA after House Democrats voted to indefinitely stall legislation on the pact.
But instead of a victory dance, Sweeney and his allies revealed an insecurity bred from
years of defeats and the delicacy of their initial success on the trade deal.
"Should the Colombian free-trade agreement come up for a vote this year, we will
mobilize our members and the resources of the federation to defeat it," fumed the Bronx-
born Sweeney.
While unions alone may not be able to take credit for putting the brakes on the FTA, they
have been without question a key lobbying force in stymieing the agreement.
And the Colombia accord isn't the only issue where unions are helping to thwart
proposals they don't like. The United Steelworkers and more than a dozen other labor
organizations have thrown their weight against a patent reform bill that is now on hold in
the Senate.
Business groups say the unions are benefiting from the politics of trade on the campaign
trail; on the patent bill, they are simply one of many interests lobbying the legislation.
Still, labor movement leaders and outside observers say that unions, with their
considerable political clout inside the Democratic Party, potentially are on the cusp of
major policy victories.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

AFF ANS -NON-UNIQUE-Other Nations Will Fill In

All of your impacts are non-unique. IF the US doesn’t sign a free trade agreement with
Colombia China or Europe will.
Gurwitz in 2008 (Jonathan [Editorialist] “Trade Accord Would Perk Up Colombia’s
Trade” San Antonio Express-News, April 23, 2008)

Where the United States won't ink trade agreements, its economic competitors in Europe
and Asia will. Who would Speaker Pelosi prefer to sell its products in Colombia duty-
free: the United States or China?
The benefits of a free trade agreement with Colombia are so clear and the stakes so high
that last week 35 Democrats who served either as senior officials in Democratic
administrations or as members of Congress signed an open letter urging quick
congressional action. "We believe this agreement is in both our vital national security and
economic interests. We feel that the treaty should be considered as soon as possible and
that any obstacles be quickly and amicably resolved."
In Colombia, brave reformers like Francisco Santos are watching and wondering whether
Pelosi and company have the courage to respond.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

AFF ANS -Turns-Job Creation

Non-unique and turn free trade mechanisms are already in effect between the US and
Colombia. COFTA is key to US job generation and competitiveness. Cross apply our
Bearden impact
Baruah in 2008 (Sandy [Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development]
States News Service, May 13, 2008)

Currently, the Congress is considering the U.S. - Colombia Free Trade Agreement. Today,
there are more than 9,000 American companies, most of them small and medium-sized,
that export to Colombia. Approving the Colombia FTA will help these and scores of other
companies increase their sales and add higher-skill, higher-wage jobs here at home.
The recent unprecedented move by the Speaker of the House to change the long-standing
rules for consideration of Free Trade Agreements was a disappointment, because without
this agreement, fewer American businesses will be able to access this growing market. If
Colombians don't buy our tractors, they'll buy them from Japan. If they don't buy our
high-tech equipment, they'll buy it from China.
What's interesting about the debate over the Colombia FTA is that we already have free
trade between the United States and Colombia, but it's one-way free trade. Since the
1990s, Congress has voted routinely and overwhelmingly to open the U.S. market to
duty-free Colombian imports.
Keep these numbers in mind: 92, 16, 365. No, unfortunately, these are not tonight's
winning lottery numbers, but they are interesting.
92 is the percentage of imports from Colombia that currently enter the United States
completely duty free. 16 is the number of years it has been since Congress first approved
preferential treatment for Colombian imports as a way to reduce poverty, promote
democracy, and fight the drug trade. And 365 is the number of Members of Congress
from both sides of the aisle who voted for these one-way preferences the last time they
were up for renewal.
Many would have you believe that we've embarked into some uncharted territory here,
but what the Colombia FTA does is to level the playing field for U.S. companies.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

AFF ANS -Turns-Job Creation

COFTA key to US jobs.
Boehner in 2008 (Rep. John [House Minority Leader] News Conference, April 24, 2008)

Last week, I sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi on the Colombia free trade bill, asking, really,
her to spell out her demands for how this bill could be brought to the floor. In her
response, not only did she fail to detail those demands, but she continues to ignore the
benefits of free trade with Colombia.
And I think if she wants to be serious about helping our economy, moving the Colombia
free trade bill will allow our manufacturers and their employees to ship goods to
Colombia on a duty-free basis. And this is a win-win for the American people.
And it's beyond me as to why this bill has not been brought to the floor. And we're going
to continue to press her.
I think the pact will create more American jobs. And it's time for the speaker to either put
up or shut up on when we're going to have a vote. And I think America's workers,
farmers, and businesses have too much at stake to be playing political blackmail with the
White House and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

AFF ANS -TURNS-Democracy Internals

Colombia is a crucial beacon of democracy in Latin America. Failure to approve it will
embolden Venezuala risking regional war and democratic collapse
National Review May 27, 2008 (Kathryn Jean Lopez, Dems vs. Latin American

Cuba isn't the only Latin nation that needs our help. McCain reminded Americans of our
responsibilities to our other South American friends and blasted his Democratic
colleagues for refusing to pass the Colombian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) now before
Congress: "Colombia is a beacon of hope in a region where the Castro brothers,
and others are actively seeking to thwart economic progress and democracy."Stalling on
the approval of the CFTA "will not create one American job or start one American
business, but it will divide us from our Colombian partners at a time when they are
battling the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) terrorists and their allied
drug cartels."
When Alvaro Uribe became Colombia's president in 2002, he faced what seemed an
impossible task: Waging a war on narco-terrorism, on a continent whose loudest voice is
narco-terror supporter Hugo Chávez, Venezuela's president. But since taking office, Uribe
has made progress, most recently in mid-May, when top FARC commander Nelly Avila
Moreno, known by the nom de guerre Karina, turned herself in. In Uribe's five-year
tenure, Colombia has seen a drop in murders, kidnappings, and assassinations.
But these facts don't impress the U.S. Democratic Party, whose leadership is stalling the
free-trade agreement. The free-trade agreement would cost Americans next to nothing. As
things stand, most Colombian goods already enter the United States duty-free. The
agreement would open Colombia's markets to our exporters, and strengthen our economic
and security ties to a friend that's fighting bad guys on a continent full of dangerous ones
with an especially dangerous one in Venezuela
McCain's position is sharply different from that of the Democratic opponent he'll most likely face in November.
Barack Obama, while making plans to meet with the president of Iran, has already alienated Colombia's. In
April, he declared: "I'll also oppose the Colombia Free Trade Agreement if President Bush insists on sending it
to Congress because the violence against unions in Colombia would make a mockery of the very labor
protections that we have insisted be included in these kinds of agreements."
Uribe immediately responded, with considerably more diplomacy than the Democratic front-runner: I deplore
the fact that Sen. Obama, aspiring to be president of the United States, should be unaware of
Colombia's efforts. I think it is for political calculations that he is making a statement that
does not correspond to Colombia's reality.The Democrats' slam of Uribe only fuels an
already hostile political environment. Latin America is a region that lacks a good-
neighbor policy. Ecuador and Nicaragua broke off diplomatic relations with Colombia
last year after a Colombian raid killed Raul Reyes, the No. 2 FARC commander.
Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico condemned Colombia's actions. Chávez ordered
troops to the Colombian/Venezuelan border.
Chávez will delight in and be emboldened by the failure of the CFTA, which will be seen
as Uribe's failure to get a vote of confidence from the world's No. 1 superpower. Chávez
has already used it as a rhetorical weapon on state-run television. He has insanely
accused Uribe of running a "genocidal government." For Congress to hand Chávez this
victory would be a shameful and dangerous act. When Cubans finally taste freedom
again, will they be alone or have a friend in the area?
Serving Utah Since. . .Now

AFF ANS -TURNS-Democracy Internals

No COFTA would only further destabilize Colombia and threaten any democracy they
The Colombus Dispatch (staff editorial, Stalling free-trade pact with Colombia is harmful
to U.S. economy, interests, April 15, 2008)

The presidential-primary campaign in Ohio indicated how far Democrats will go to blame
free-trade deals for the nation's economic problems. Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack
Obama both falsely tied job-loss problems in Ohio and the nation to the North American
Free Trade Agreement.
In opposing the Colombia accord, U.S. labor leaders mention Colombia's political
instability and the killings of labor organizers. In fact, President Alvaro Uribe's
government has cracked down, with U.S. assistance, on rebel forces and drug traffickers.
Last year's 39 slayings of labor activists were far fewer than the record 276 such killings
in 1996. Colombia's level of lawlessness has been reduced.
Serving Utah Since. . .Now


Democracy is key to prevent extinction

Diamond 95. (Larry (Snr. research fellow @ Hoover Institute) Promoting Democracy in
the 1990's, p 6-7)
This hardly exhausts the list of threats to our security and well-being in the coming years
and decades. In the former Yugoslavia nationalist aggression tears at the stability of
Europe and could easily spread. The flow of illegal drugs intensifies through increasingly
powerful international crime syndicates that have made common cause with authoritarian
regimes and have utterly corrupted the institutions of tenuous, democratic ones. Nuclear,
chemical. and biological weapons continue to proliferate. The very source of life on
Earth, the global ecosystem, appears increasingly endangered. Most of these new and
unconventional threats to security are associated with or aggravated by the weakness or
absence of democracy, with its provisions for legality, accountability, popular
sovereignty, and openness.