Ballot Access Map
Loading

Stein calls Obama "win-win" Colombia trade agreement a "lose-lose" for workers

colombia-jill-stein.gifJill Stein, the leading contender for the Green Party presidential nomination, today condemned President Obama's approval on Sunday of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

"President Obama called it a win-win. No, it's a lose-lose for workers," Stein said. "It's a deadly assault on the freedom of Colombian workers to organize, as well as on the freedom of American workers from unfair competition from workers who make poverty wages because they are violently repressed."

Stein noted that the AFL-CIO Solidarity Center reports that 4,000 Colombian trade unionists have been murdered in the last 20 years. In only a tiny number cases have the murderers been prosecuted.

"The killings of union organizers have not stopped," Stein said. "In 2011, 51 union organizers were murdered, according to the National School of Labor, a Colombian trade union. Four more have been killed so far this year."

Obama made his announcement at a news conference with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos as they concluded the Summit of Americas in the Colombian resort city of Cartagena.

The trade agreement now goes into effect May 15. It passed Congress and was signed by the President last October. However, its implementation was contingent on the administration's certification of Colombia's labor protection efforts.

U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said Sunday that Colombia was implementing a "labor action plan" to enforce homicide laws against the killers of union organizers and laws that allow workers to organize.

"Let's first see the murders stopped, the death squads prosecuted and convicted, the unions organized, and decent union contracts signed with the companies. Then we can talk about reducing trade barriers with Colombia," Stein said.

The trade pact makes more than 80 percent of industrial and manufactured products exported from the U.S. and from Colombia duty free. More than half of U.S. agriculture exports to Colombia will also become duty free.

"This trade pact is a jobs export pact," Stein said. "Manufacturing jobs are going to flow from the U.S. to Colombia, where violence and intimidation against trade unionists makes the labor cheap."

Stein also criticized the impact of expanded U.S. agricultural exports on Colombian farmers and workers.

'The U.S. agricultural exports are not so-called free trade but subsidized trade. Many of them receive federal agribusiness subsidies. They will flood Colombian markets, displace Colombian farmers, reduce Colombia's food self reliance, and push farmers and farmworkers into the manufacturing labor market to further lower wages there. The trade deal is job killer for American workers and a wage depressor for Colombian workers," Stein said.

"We get called protectionists for opposing these pro-corporate trade deals," Stein added. "Yes, I am for protecting people and planet. I support trade governed by rules designed to level-up labor and environmental standards to a high common level instead creating a race to the bottom. We need real free trade between free peoples in free markets. This trade deal favors the giant manufacturing oligopolies and subsidized agribusinesses at the expense of workers in both countries."

The U.S. labor movement opposed the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. The AP reported Sunday that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said Obama was putting "commercial interests above the interests of workers and their trade unions" by certifying the Colombian labor plan.

Dan Kovalik, a lawyer with the United Steelworkers, said Obama's announcement was "premature in light of the continued violence against unionists and human rights defenders in Colombia," according to the AP. 

The United Steelworkers of America was a plaintiff in two lawsuits against Coca-Cola on behalf of a sister Colombian trade union. The lawsuits charged that Coca-Cola bottlers, "contracted with or otherwise directed paramilitary security forces that utilized extreme violence and murdered, tortured, unlawfully detained or otherwise silenced trade union leaders."

Do you like this post?

Showing 6 reactions


Vaudree Lavallee commented 2012-11-04 04:45:27 -0500 · Flag
Sounds like what the NDP said about the Columbian-Canadian trade agreement both before and afterwords – except their focus was on the way Canadian mining companies both benefit from and help perpetuate a lot of these crimes against workers.
Carl Klapper commented 2012-04-21 11:17:13 -0400 · Flag
I would add that it is no less a right for individuals and families to bargain and no less an infringement on that right when attacked by unions or lenders “protecting” special advantages for their workers or purchasers. By the same token, failing to provide for the necessities of its citizens robs them of the independence required for truly free bargaining.
Bill Bradshaw commented 2012-04-20 13:31:54 -0400 · Flag
To allow the government or corporation to attack any ones right to bargan, wheather it is a union or a community group is to allow this to happen to everyone. It is a first amendment issue. Rights are god given and not from governments. Government is established to protect this, and are not the source of any rights.

The Green Party does not take money from Pacs, Corporation or unions, but do support the rights of the unions and all people to these god given rights.

The government shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion nor prohibiting the free excercize thereof, or of the freedom of speech or the press, and the right of the people to peaceably assemble and pettition for a redress of Grievance.
Carl Klapper commented 2012-04-19 15:51:57 -0400 · Flag
Though I find attacks on any person appalling, I would caution the Green Party against too much involvement with the unions. First of all, the union position does not make economic sense. Even with the best of conditions, there is no reason why the market price for labor would always be sufficient for survival. Second, allaying or correcting those conditions requires countervailing political power which suggests violence, especially in the case of violence being perpetrated upon the workers or the unionists themselves, and unions have shown a predilection for taking such suggestions. Third, economic reality will cause the issue of “a living wage” to cause more conflicts which the unions are loth to pass up.

The Greens, and the people generally, would be better served by advocating the provision of the necessities which other populists and I have suggested at various times. Then the wages will fall where they may and rise where they may. With the link between wages and survival broken, we may finally see an end to wage slavery. This policy, moreover, does not require federal cooperation. Though the states are prevented, there is nothing in the Constitution to keep a community from issuing their own distinctive currency for use within its borders.
Uzoma Peter Lane commented 2012-04-17 05:07:21 -0400 · Flag
This is why we can’t rely on Democrats to be progressives
jill stein published this page in News 2012-04-16 16:38:00 -0400