[Peace-discuss] Fwd: [SRRTAC-L:12902] Fwd: Stop the CAFTA/FTAA Sneak Attack on *State* Purchasing Policy!

[Alfred Kagan]

>For action.
>>
>>Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 16:24:31 -0500
>>From: Carol <radred at ix.netcom.com>
>>Subject: Stop the CAFTA/FTAA Sneak Attack on *State* Purchasing Policy!
>>
>>Folks,
>>
>>New York is on the list.
>>
>>Take action yourself, then pass this along to everyone you know here
>>and in other affected [to differing extents] states (AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE,
>>FL, HI, ID, IL, IO, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MT, NE, OK,
>>OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, WI, WY).
>>
>>The Public Citizen website doesn't offer option to send an e-mail or fax
>>on this issue, but they provide information about what to do.
>>
>>Best,
>>Carol [Liu]
>>
>>>Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:10:50 -0800 (PST)
>>>From: MichaelP <papadop at peak.org>
>>>To: mai-not at flora.org
>>>Subject: [MAI-NOT] Stop the CAFTA/FTAA Sneak Attack on State 
>>>Purchasing Policy!
>>>Sender: owner-mai-not at flora.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>From: Timi Gerson <tgerson at citizen.org>
>>>        Purchasing Policy!
>>>
>>>This is the FAIR TRADE list, a moderated listserv of Public Citizen's
>>>Global Trade Watch for Fair Trade issues locally, nationally and
>>>worldwide.
>>>
>>>===========================================
>>>
>>>Heads Up: You Must Act Now to Stop an Appalling CAFTA, FTAA Sneak Attack
>>>on State Purchasing Policy!
>>>
>>>A leaked letter from the Bush Administration to state governors reveals a
>>>sneaky attempt now underway to get governors to 'voluntarily' commit their
>>>states to comply with draconian constraints on domestic procurement
>>>(purchasing) policy included in the recently completed CAFTA and proposed
>>>for FTAA. Unbelievably, the leaked documents show that the U.S. Trade
>>>Representative's Office is seeking blanket permission from governors to
>>>sign states on to the procurement provisions of ALL trade agreements under
>>>negotiation - including the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the
>>>Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the South African Customs
>>>Union and a raft of bilateral deals with Australia, Morocco, Columbia,
>>>Thailand and more nations.
>>>
>>>The recently-released CAFTA text lists 23 states as having agreed to 'sign
>>>on' to that pact's procurement rules. When a state is listed, all cities
>>>and counties within that state are covered as well, despite the fact that
>>>neither state legislators, mayors nor city councils have been apprised of
>>>their new obligations - much less agreed!
>>>  We'd bet anything that some of those state and local elected officials
>>>and state attorneys general would have a few things to say about this if
>>>they knew what their governors and the USTR and were up to.
>>>
>>>That's were you come in - making sure the state and local officials know
>>>that some 'trade' rules negotiated behind closed doors without their input
>>>much less their approval are about to permanently shut down their right
>>>and authority to halt off-shoring of state services, require living or
>>>prevailing wages in government contracts, or preferences for recycled
>>>paper content, locally-grown food, locally-produced vehicles and more.
>>>
>>>The good news is that until there is a vote on one of these agreements,
>>>the states can pull their names off the list with no liability. But once
>>>Congress votes to approve a pact, getting a state OFF the list requires
>>>compensating trading partners for their lost opportunity - an expensive
>>>and often unviable solution.  The first pacts up for votes and as soon as
>>>this spring are CAFTA (U.S., Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua
>>>and Costa Rica) and the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement.  Yes, we know
>>>that if we all work hard we can defeat CAFTA in Congress and that would
>>>save progressive procurement policies from being ravaged by CAFTA - but
>>>the USTR's letter to governors requesting their buy-in extends to ALL
>>>future agreements.  And believe us, USTR continues right now to court and
>>>to pressure governors of states that have not yet done so to sign away
>>>state and local officials' rights.
>>>
>>>There is plenty of treachery to go around. First, USTR has billed the
>>>request to governors as an innocuous extension of the WTO's Agreement on
>>>Government Procurement (AGP), claiming that signing up would simply create
>>>opportunities for U.S. producers and service providers to compete for
>>>foreign contracts. As if! To start with, only some states signed the WTO's
>>>AGP and since then the AGP's track record includes the demise of states'
>>>procurement policies aimed at avoiding business with the Burmese
>>>dictatorship and pressuring Nigeria for better labor rights. And, an
>>>analysis of the proposed pacts' rules reveal that at stake is the ability
>>>to set policy - not just the right to compete for contracts.  But even
>>>state and local officials to whom a governor might have shown this letter
>>>(we have not found any such officials yet) would have no idea that at risk
>>>are:
>>>
>>>  --"Green" procurement policies requiring recycled content, fuel efficient
>>>vehicles, or renewable energy;
>>>  --Preferences used to demand corporate responsibility in the face of
>>>human rights abuses - such as those used to help bring an end to apartheid
>>>in South Africa and now in place regarding Burma;
>>>  --'No off-shoring' and other local development policies aimed at keeping
>>>state dollars paying in-state wages and giving preference to
>>>locally-produced goods and services.
>>>
>>>To make matters even worse, the process that USTR is using to seek
>>>"consent" from the states is illegal. Setting government procurement
>>>policy and deciding whether to cede to policy constraints imposed by a
>>>trade agreement is within the realm of state legislatures and city
>>>councils. Governors' whims - decisions often taken without a basic
>>>understanding of what is at stake - cannot be allowed to override the
>>>constitutional authority of state and local elected officials. Yet if a
>>>state is listed when an agreement is approved by Congress, that state
>>>becomes bound with no way to withdraw without compensating other countries
>>>even if the initial sign-on process was not legal!
>>>
>>>It's not too late to act!  Until Congress votes in favor of a specific
>>>pact, the list of 20-plus states whose governors appear to have already
>>>said yes to the sneaky USTR letter are not legally bound and can get taken
>>>off the list as easily as they got on.  Plus, we need to make sure that no
>>>additional states 'sign on.' In addition, state and city legislators must
>>>make it known that they demand prior informed consent on all provisions of
>>>international trade agreements that implicate state and local policy in
>>>order to stop future power grabs of state and local authority.
>>>
>>>Take action!
>>>
>>>Visit http://www.citizen.org/trade/cafta/articles.cfm?ID=11085 to see
>>>whether or not your state is signed on to CAFTA's procurement
>>>provisions. Then:
>>>
>>>--Call your governor's office to inquire about your state's response to
>>>the fall 2003 USTR's request for sign off on the new generation of
>>>procurement agreements.  Ask for documentation.  If your governor
>>>consented to be included, urge that she or he withdraw the state from the
>>>list -- telling them that you know just how easy that still is to do. If
>>>your state has not responded, ask the governor's office to turn over the
>>>request to the legislature for their consideration.
>>>
>>>--Call your state attorney general's office, any and all state
>>>legislators, city councilors and mayors you know to warn them warn them
>>>about the letter and ask them to contact the governor's office
>>>immediately. Some states also have statewide procurement officers - most
>>>of whom have no idea what their governors are up to but who will be
>>>well-informed about the implications.
>>>
>>>--Communicate to the governor, state attorney general, legislators etc.
>>>and your friends and colleagues about your concerns regarding the policy
>>>constraints these 'trade' agreements' procurement rules impose and
>>>specifically about what the CAFTA text reveals is at stake.
>>>
>>>--Urge all of the state and local officials with whom you communicate to
>>>demand a more democratic, inclusive mechanism for obtaining the prior
>>>informed consent of the state and local officials constitutionally-charged
>>>with policy-making authority before state and local authority is
>>>implicated - by the governor or the federal government - in trade
>>>agreements.
>>>
>>>Keep us informed about your results!  Contact Sara Johnson at
>>>sjohnson at citizen.org or (202) 454-5193 with any questions and to let us
>>>know how things are going.
>>>
>>>
>>>Sara Johnson
>>>Subfederal Outreach Coordinator
>>>Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch
>>>215 Pennsylvania Ave. SE
>>>Washington, DC  20003
>>>(202) 454-5193
>>>
>>>============================================
>>>  For more information on current Fair Trade issues please visit
>>>www.tradewatch.org. To be added to the Fair Trade list send an email to
>>>listserv at listserver.citizen.org with the text "subscribe fairtrade" in the
>>>body of the message.  If you have received this message in error, we
>>>apologize.  To be removed from the list send an email to
>>>listserv at listserver.citizen.org with the text "unsubscribe fairtrade" in
>>>the body of the message.
>>>--
>>
>>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert; 
>>x-avg-checked=avg-ok-41F180C
>>Content-Disposition: inline
>>
>>
>>---
>>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>>Version: 6.0.590 / Virus Database: 373 - Release Date: 2/16/04


-- 


Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA

tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu