Bush wins free trade pact with Tampa, Florida

The House followed the Senate in signing CAFTA into law. It's a done deal once monkey boy signs the legislation.

The NY Times, on the Central America Free Trade Agreement:

The immediate economic impact is likely to be small, at least for the United States, because the combined economies of the six countries are equivalent to about 1 percent of the United States economy or an economy about the size of Tampa, Fla., and its surrounding suburbs.

The curious might ask, so how is this supposed to help the U.S. economy? The cynical might ask, how does this help U.S. businesses and hurt U.S. workers? While the compassionate might ask, how does this hurt Central Americans?

But I wonder, did anyone in the House or Senate have a serious debate on this issue? I'm not talking about a rhetorical debate about how people feel about the idea of free trade. I am talking about an academic debate - one that tests the theories about free trade against actual observable facts. We've lived with NAFTA for over ten years now. There's certainly plenty of material to research.

CAFTA, like NAFTA, will be bad for workers and family farmers in the U.S. and in Central America. It's a secret pact for the enrichment of big business and corporate agriculture. We need FAIR TRADE, not free trade!

To those looking for answers, a good first place to start is StopCafta.org.