Congress returns from vacation next week, and so will the smoke and heat over free trade. Anti-globalization activists and U.S. labor unions are organizing a massive effort to defeat a bill giving President Bush fast-track trade authority. And this time they have an unlikely ally -- U.S. Rep. Jim Davis, a Tampa Democrat who until now had been a reliable supporter of free trade. We find Davis' sudden conversion to the other side baffling and disappointing.

As Davis himself was arguing a few years ago, Congress should approve fast-track authority for the president and work along a broader front to improve labor and environmental practices by our nation's trading partners. The law would allow the president to submit a trade agreement to Congress for an up-or-down vote; no changes could be made and a vote must take place within 90 days. Fast-track authority, which expired in 1994, gives the president some negotiating strength and nimbleness to manage both trade and foreign policy. Presidents of both parties have sought it, because fast-track makes sense in a world that's increasingly interdependent and undergoing rapid technological change.

Critics argue fast-track denies Congress the opportunity to shape trade agreements in ways that protect the environment and labor. Not so. Congress can, and should, help set the nation's trade agenda. Side agreements can promote these goals without becoming obstacles that only delay multination deals that further America's broader interests.

Davis, long a supporter of fast-track, said he intends to vote against the House bill because it doesn't contain specific protection for labor or the environment. Davis supported fast-track for Democrat Bill Clinton without those same conditions; the switch, he said, represents his lack of confidence in the Republican president, whose "credibility on protecting workers' rights and the environment is very shaky on the Democratic side."

We assume Davis' about-face has nothing to do with his potential candidacy for the Democratic nomination for governor. Or that his political knees didn't start shaking because of the recent protests outside his Tampa office by labor unions.

The reasons Davis supported fast-track authority for Bill Clinton are still valid, and his claim that Bush can't be trusted to negotiate the best deal for American workers sounds like the latest spin from the Democratic caucus. Without fast-track authority, can House Democrats be trusted not to sabotage trade agreements opposed by organized labor? We think Davis knows the answer.

Davis and others point to the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement as evidence "there have been a lot of problems . . . in terms of the U.S. being treated fairly."

But a study released in July by the U.S. General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, shows no significant problems with NAFTA's enforcement of side agreements, or any convincing evidence that the United States has been treated unfairly. If anything, NAFTA fostered a regard for labor and environmental standards by expanding routine contacts between regulators in the United States, Mexico and Canada. The measure to watch is not how many complaints against trading partners are brought, but how many are resolved before becoming a full-blown problem.

Global economic union makes it easier for small businesses to reach markets across the world. Fast-track could speed that along. Jim Davis used to understand that.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page