Bhr Colombian Free Trade Politics

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 1 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COLOMBIAN FREE TRADE

**Bush Bad** colombian free trade.................................................................................................................................................................................1 bush bad 1nc .............................................................................................................................................................................................2 bush bad 1nc .............................................................................................................................................................................................3 COFTA won’t pass....................................................................................................................................................................................5 COFTA won’t pass....................................................................................................................................................................................7 COFTA won’t pass (damn hippies)........................................................................................................................................................8 concessions key to agenda ext.................................................................................................................................................................9 human rights ext ....................................................................................................................................................................................10 human rights ext ....................................................................................................................................................................................11 at: colombian govt reformed ................................................................................................................................................................12 COFTA -> terrorism ...............................................................................................................................................................................13 COFTA -> disease ...................................................................................................................................................................................14 COFTA -> harms us econ ......................................................................................................................................................................15 COFTA -> environmental degradation................................................................................................................................................16 bush good 1nc.........................................................................................................................................................................................17 bush good 1nc..........................................................................................................................................................................................18 bush good 1nc..........................................................................................................................................................................................19 will pass ...................................................................................................................................................................................................20 will pass....................................................................................................................................................................................................21 at: won’t pass (damn hippies)...............................................................................................................................................................21 bush push ................................................................................................................................................................................................22 bipart key to agenda ext.........................................................................................................................................................................23 democracy link ext..................................................................................................................................................................................24 democracy link ext..................................................................................................................................................................................25 democracy impact ext – econ................................................................................................................................................................26 democracy impact ext – environment..................................................................................................................................................27 cofta helps us econ impact (1/2)............................................................................................................................................................28 cofta helps us econ impact (2/2)............................................................................................................................................................29 exports key to econ ext...........................................................................................................................................................................30 econ impact ext – china us war.............................................................................................................................................................31 cofta -> econ growth ext.........................................................................................................................................................................32 cofta -> econ growth ext........................................................................................................................................................................33 at: cofta harms us economy ..................................................................................................................................................................34 AT: ft exports jobs/harms econ..............................................................................................................................................................35 at: human rights impact ........................................................................................................................................................................36 AT: Other FTAs come first ....................................................................................................................................................................37

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 2 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

BUSH BAD

1NC

A. Dems will block COFTA – organized Colombian labor violence and US job losses AP 7/21/08 (Russ Bynum, writer for the Associated Press, ” Commerce chief pushes trade deals at Georgia port”, Associated Press. 21 Jul. 2008. < http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/07/21/ap5237149.html>)

SAVANNAH, Ga. - U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez pressed Congress on Monday to approve three free-trade agreements backed by the president, saying legislators are costing exporters millions of dollars. "Every day that goes by is a missed opportunity," Gutierrez told reporters in a dockside news conference at the Port of Savannah, the nation's fourth largest. President Bush has been lobbying Congress to approve free-trade pacts with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. Congress hasn't complied, saying such deals could hurt U.S. workers - particularly during lean economic times. Gutierrez said that by blocking the trade deals, Congress is slowing expansion of American exports - which accounted for 40 percent of economic growth last year - and causing U.S. businesses to pay unnecessary tariffs. "We signed the Colombia agreement over 600 days ago," Gutierrez said. "In that time period, our exporters have paid $1.1 billion dollars in tariffs that they wouldn't have to pay if that agreement were approved."

In blocking the pact with Colombia, congressional Democrats have cited violence against organized labor in the northwestern South American country and differences with Bush over how to extend a program that helps U.S. workers displaced by foreign competition.

B. Link – 1. [plan popular] 2. Concessions to democrats key to agenda Deans 04 (Bob Deans, Austin American-Statesman (Texas) 11-8, 2004) "If there's going to be any reconciliation, it has to be at a symbolic level," said Shanto Iyengar, chairman of the communications department at Stanford University. "Given the way the vote split, particularly on cultural issues, I see no possibility of that occurring." History -- and common sense -- suggest, however, that Bush's political capital might go farther if he can replace animosity and gridlock with cooperation and compromise. "He has a golden opportunity now," said Cass Sunstein, professor of political science and law at the University of Chicago. "He's in a position of strength, but not omnipotence."

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 3 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

BUSH BAD

1NC

C. Impact 1. Ratifying COFTA justifies ignoring human rights tragedies – the US should reject Colombia’s perpetual and tolerated violence Haugaard 08 (Lisa Haugaard, “So Far to Go: Human Rights in Colombia”, Latin America Working Group Education Fund, April 2008. ) As the debate on the free trade agreement for Colombia heats up, the true human rights tragedy that is still taking place in that country should not be ignored. It is essential for the United States to insist upon improvements in human rights in Colombia, not to paint a rosy picture to secure a trade agreement. U.S. policy must take responsibility for the behavior of security forces trained with U.S. taxpayer dollars; take into account the continued suffering of the civilian population in the midst of an ongoing conflict; and support the rights of victims to truth, justice and reparations after a decade of atrocities. Here is a summary of recent human rights concerns. · Extrajudicial executions of civilians by the Colombian army are increasing. · While over 31,000 paramilitary members went through demobilization ceremonies, new groups, rearmed and undemobilized paramilitaries continue to use threats and violence against the civilian population to exert control over territory and the drug trade. · Victims, witnesses and human rights defenders are threatened and killed for denouncing paramilitary violence, limiting freedom of expression and assembly. · The Justice and Peace process, under which the worst paramilitary abusers were supposed to receive at least token sentences in exchange for revealing their crimes, is so far offering little in the way of justice. · As it becomes clear that few paramilitaries will pay even reduced sentences for crimes, the full scope of paramilitary atrocities is starting to be revealed. · The progress in investigating politicians’ ties to paramilitaries, driven by the Supreme Court rather than the executive, is a positive first step – but the armed forces’ role in aiding paramilitary violence has barely even been broached.

· More people were internally displaced by violence in 2007 than the year before, and the total number of people internally displaced in Colombia’s conflict now tops 4 million. · The number of kidnappings is declining, although it is still a very serious problem, and kidnap victims suffer greatly in captivity. · Guerrilla groups continued to kill, threaten and displace the civilian population. · Violence against trade unionists continues at extremely high levels; the vast majority of cases of assassination of trade unionists remain unsolved. 1. Extrajudicial executions of civilians by the army are increasing. · Colombia’s major human rights groups documented 955 extrajudicial killings allegedly committed by the Colombian armed forces between July 2002 and June 2007, compared with 577 over the previous five-year period, a 65 percent increase. The Colombian Commission of Jurists documents 13 cases in the first month of 2008. These cases, which are deliberate rather than cases of civilians caught in the crossfire, typically involve groups of soldiers detaining a civilian, who is seen by witnesses, and who later turns up dead, dressed in guerrilla clothing and claimed by the army as killed in combat. · The Washington Post cites Colombian government figures that confirm the nongovernmental groups’ estimate of the number of these incidents (the Attorney General’s office is investigating 525 killings, with another 500 cases yet to be opened; the Inspector General’s office has disciplinary cases that could involve as many as 1,000 victims). (Juan Forero, “Colombian Troops Kill Farmers, Pass Off Bodies as Rebels,’” Washington Post, March 30, 2008) · The Jesuit research center CINEP reported 128 extrajudicial executions allegedly committed by members of the armed forces in the first six months of 2007, compared with 92 in the same period the previous year. (cited in the State Department human rights report for 2007) · The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights’ office in Colombia asserted in 2004, 2005, and 2006 that the number of allegations of extrajudicial killings by members of the Colombian armed forces reported to its office increased compared to the previous year. The 2007 report did not estimate changes in number, but noted that “in most cases, these executions followed the same pattern observed in previous years: the victims were civilians who were presented as members of the guerrilla groups or other illegal armed groups, reported as killed in combat.” For example, “In Riohacha, La Guajira, members of the Cartagena Battalion were allegedly responsible for the death of a peasant farmer affected by mental disability. On 2 May 2007, in Hato Corozal, Casanare, there was the death of a community leader, in events attributed to members of the Counter-Guerrilla Battalion No. 65. On 13 May, in Pueblo Bello, Cesar, a murder was allegedly perpetrated by soldiers of Brigade 10. In Orito, Putumayo, members of Mobile Brigade 13 were

· European and U.S. human rights experts in October 2007 listened to witnesses, relatives and lawyers in 130 cases and observed, “In a large number of cases, victims are illegally detained in their home or workplace and taken to the place where they are executed…Those who are killed or disappeared are generally peasant farmers, indigenous people, labourers or very impoverished people. allegedly responsible for the death of three civilians on 9 September.” (UNHCHR 2007 report, Annex, points 1-3)

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 4 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

2. Dehumanization is as evil as nuclear war, environmental apocalypse and international genocide Berube 97 (Professor of speech communication, Nanotechnology Magazine June/July 1997, http://www.cla.sc.edu/ENGL/faculty/berube/prolong.htm) Assuming we are able to predict who or what are optimized humans, this entire resultant worldview smacks of eugenics and Nazi racial science. This would involve valuing people as means. Moreover, there would always be a superhuman more super than the current ones, humans would never be able to escape their treatment as means to an always further and distant end. This means-ends dispute is at the core of Montagu and Matson's treatise

the dehumanization of humanity. They warn: "its destructive toll is already greater than that of any war, plague, famine, or natural calamity on record -- and its potential danger to the quality of life and the fabric of civilized society is beyond calculation. For that reason this sickness of the soul might well be called the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse.... Behind the genocide of the holocaust lay a dehumanized thought; beneath the menticide of deviants and dissidents... in the cuckoo's next of America, lies a dehumanized image of man... (Montagu & Matson, 1983, p. xi-xii). While it may never be possible to quantify the impact dehumanizing ethics may have had on humanity, it is safe to conclude the foundations of humanness offer great opportunities which would be foregone. When we calculate the actual losses and the virtual benefits, we approach a nearly inestimable value greater than any tools which we can currently use to measure it. Dehumanization is nuclear war, environmental apocalypse, and international genocide. When people become things, they become dispensable. When people are dispensable, any and every atrocity can be justified. Once justified, they seem to be inevitable for every epoch has evil and dehumanization is evil's most powerful weapon. on

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 5 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA WON’T PASS The deal is stalled until democrats pass larger packages or republicans amend their strategies Congress Daily 7/21/08 “Congress Set To Clear Housing Bill, As Energy Debate Continues Apace” 21 Jul. 2008. < http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/cda_20080721_6074.php>) Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus' top trade priority is TAA, which he has said must be approved before any talks on moving stalled free trade agreements can occur. The Colombia Free Trade Agreement is the top trade priority of the White House and Republican leaders, however, and last week Senate Minority Whip Kyl said Republicans would not allow TAA to move without assurances that Colombia would move as well. "I don't know of anybody on our side who would trust that we would do Colombia given all of the opposition particularly in the House to it, if we let the leverage go," Kyl said. House Speaker Pelosi has made a vote on Colombia contingent on passage of a larger package of economic stimulus measures, including TAA but also another round of unemployment insurance benefits, aid to states, infrastructure spending and other potentially costly items. Given all that, many observers believe the Colombia pact will likely lie dormant until next year. "There's a limit, obviously, to what Republicans are willing to do to get Colombia passed, even though it is very, very important," Kyl said.

Democrats are blocking the Colombia trade agreement now Reuters 7/17 (Reuters, “Democrats unveil U.S. trade enforcement bill”, 7/17/08. < http://www.forbes.com/reuters/feeds/reuters/2008/07/17/2008-07-17T211647Z_01_N17458625_RTRIDST_0_USA-TRADECONGRESS.html>) WASHINGTON, July 17 (Reuters) - The United States would beef up trade protections against Chinese government subsidies and punish foreign

"The American public is skeptical about U.S. trade policy in part because the public does not believe that our trading partners are playing by the same rules as the United States," House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat, said in a statement. "Our trading partners need to open their markets to U.S. exporters. They need to stop providing trade-distorting subsidies and to stop dumping their products in our market." The legislation comes as the U.S. economy struggles in a presidential election year, as polls show rising public anxiety about trade and as the Democratic-run Congress resists votes on free trade pacts the Bush administration has negotiated with Colombia, Panama and South Korea suppliers who repeatedly violate U.S. health and safety laws under a Democratic plan unveiled on Thursday.

Dems oppose COFTA – labor group violence Reuters 7/16/08 (“House Republicans push for Colombia pact vote” Reuters. 16 Jul. 2008. < http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1648117020080716?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0>) WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republicans pressured U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday to set a vote on a free trade pact with Colombia, which they said would die if Congress does not approve it this year. "If the 110th Congress adjourns without a vote in both the House and the Senate, the agreement will be well and truly dead," senior Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee and the House Rules

The free trade deal with Colombia, one of the United States' staunchest allies in Latin America, has been in limbo since April, when Pelosi rebuffed an effort by President George W. Bush to force a vote on the pact. Bush submitted the agreement under White House trade promotion authority, a law passed in 2002 which required Congress to vote approve or reject trade Committee said in a letter to colleagues.

agreements within 90 days and without making any amendments. However, Pelosi pushed through a rule change allowing her to delay action indefinitely on the pact. She

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 6 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _ said Bush had ignored her warning that Congress was not ready to vote on agreement, which many Democrats strongly oppose on the grounds that they believe Colombia has not done enough to curb violence against labor groups

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 7 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA WON’T PASS COFTA won’t pass – democrats strongly oppose and only republican concessions on TAA will loosen their draconian control over legislation National Review 7/15/08 (“Meekly Sensible - A Democrat to listen to on free trade.”Truth about trade & Technology. 15 Jul 2008. ) Congressman Gregory Meeks is among the dwindling number of pro-trade Democrats. He voted for normalized trade relations with China and in favor of the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Meeks has been to Colombia several times and supports the Colombia FTA. Most of his Democratic colleagues oppose it, citing President Uribe’s supposed willingness to tolerate violence against union members even though the number of unionists killed has fallen by 88 percent since 2002. Of the chances that Congress will pass the Colombia FTA before the November elections, Meeks says, “There’s a possibility, but it really would be tough to get done.” The Democrats control both houses of Congress, and their party’s presidential nominee, Sen. Barack Obama, opposes the deal. Meeks says that Obama’s opposition to the FTA doesn’t necessarily mean that his election would doom the deal’s chances. “I would like to make the offer at some point, if he is president, to do as he’s doing right now with reference to Iraq,” Meeks says. “I’d love to take him to Colombia. I’d love to go with him to places I’ve found, in the jungle, where there are things they’ve done for African-Colombians that had never been done before. I’d love to show him where the violence has been reduced substantially.” Meeks says, “Is it all done? Of course not. But under the last five years of the Uribe administration, a substantial, not a minimal, but a substantial change has happened.” Murders, kidnappings, assassinations, and other acts of terrorism common in Colombia five years ago have all decreased by double-digit percentages since Uribe took office in 2002. While acknowledging that Obama’s opposition to the FTA makes passage difficult, Meeks

does not blame Democrats for stalling the deal. “I think that the burden is not so much on the Democrats, but the administration,” he says. He argues that the administration needs to make it easier for Democrats to vote for the Colombia FTA by agreeing to work with Congress on an expansion of trade-adjustment assistance (TA”A), which is aid to workers who lose their jobs due to import competition.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 8 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA WON’T PASS (DAMN HIPPIES) CFTA is partisan – democrat hippies hate human rights violations USA Today, 2/26/08, [“Bush backs free-trade pact with Colombia,” http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-0226-748468203_x.htm] The Bush administration signed a bilateral free trade agreement with Colombia in 2006. But the required approval from Congress has not been forthcoming. Capitol Hill's Democratic leaders have refused, citing human rights violations in Colombia and its standing as the deadliest country in the world for organized labor. Supporters have argued that the agreement would level the playing field by requiring Colombia to lower or eliminate tariffs on U.S. imports, when many products from Colombia already get such preferences in the U.S. market.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 9 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

CONCESSIONS KEY TO AGENDA EXT

Concessions key to agenda Business Week 04 (Business Week, 11-15-04, Lexis) Bush's clear-cut victory puts him in a strong position to push ahead with the next leg of his ambitious conservative agenda. But given the deep divisions rending the nation, it would be a stretch to interpret his triumph as an overwhelming endorsement of anything concrete -- much less ``stay the course'' entreaties on Iraq, a deficit-be-damned drive for more tax cuts, or a dimly perceived ``Ownership Society'' that proposes partial privatization of Social Security and aims to replace the employer-based health-insurance system. Hemmed in by hostile Democrats, a busted piggybank, and a lack of national consensus on his conservative reforms, Bush faces tough struggles on Capitol Hill. What the President mainly won on Election Day, experts say, is a chance to revise the script of 2000, when he ignored a contested victory to govern more from the conservative than the compassionate end of the spectrum. He also gained an opportunity to reach across party lines and bind the nation's wounds. ``The country remains clearly divided,'' says Richard M. Kovacevich, chairman and CEO of Wells Fargo & Co. His hope is that ``President Bush would decide to bring the country together and be President of all the people.''

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 10 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

HUMAN RIGHTS EXT

Colombia is making little progress improving its poor human rights record Human Rights Watch 08 ( Human Rights Watch, “US: Reject Colombia Free Trade Deal” 7 Apr 2008. http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2008/04/07/colomb18460.htm). Washington, DC, April 7, 2008) – The US Congress should vote against the US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) because of Colombia’s continuing failure to effectively address anti-union violence and impunity, Human Rights Watch said today. " Colombia has yet to show concrete results in breaking paramilitaries’ power and holding the killers of trade unionists accountable. If Congress ratifies the FTA now, it’s very unlikely the Uribe government will follow through on its promises to tackle these issues. " José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch Congressional Testimony on Violence against Trade Unionists and Human Rights in Colombia Testimony, June 28, 2007 Colombia has the highest rate of killings of trade unionists in the world. Seventeen trade unionists have been killed in Colombia in just the first three months of this year, Human Rights Watch said. President George W. Bush has announced that tomorrow he will submit the free trade agreement to Congress for a vote, over the objections of the congressional leadership. Last year the leadership of the House of Representatives said that consideration of the deal would depend on whether Colombia showed “concrete evidence of sustained results” in breaking the power of paramilitary groups and addressing the near-total impunity for widespread violence against trade unionists. Colombia has not met these

“Colombia has yet to show concrete results in breaking paramilitaries’ power and holding the killers of trade unionists accountable,” said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “If Congress ratifies the FTA now, it’s very unlikely conditions.

the Uribe government will follow through on its promises to tackle these issues.”

Human Rights Watch does not oppose free trade agreements per se,

More than 400 trade unionists have been killed since President Alvaro Uribe took office in 2002, according to the National Labor School (Escuela Nacional Sindical), a highly respected labor rights group in Colombia. Every year, hundreds of trade unionists also report receiving death threats. Proponents of the trade deal seek to minimize the violence by asserting that trade unionists are less likely but said any free trade deal should be premised on respect for fundamental human rights, including the rights of workers.

to be killed in Colombia than the average citizen. But that “average citizen” includes people in conflict zones or others living under conditions of unusually high risks. A statistically appropriate comparison would look at trade unionists as compared to non-unionized workers in the same region and industry. There have been more than 2,500 trade unionist killings in Colombia since 1985, but only 68 of these cases have ever resulted in a

Bush says the Colombian government has addressed Congressional concern over impunity by stepping up funding for prosecutions and supporting the creation last year of a specialized group of prosecutors and judges assigned to reopen some cases. Human Rights Watch noted that positive step, but warned it could be quickly undone if the deal were ratified before prosecutors made real headway in obtaining well-grounded convictions. “The most promising step the Colombian government has taken is to establish this specialized group of prosecutors,” said Vivanco. “But they need sustained pressure to get the job done.” Paramilitary groups, which are on the US list of foreign terrorist organizations, have openly admitted to deliberately targeting unionists. Bush says the Colombian government has addressed the violence by demobilizing tens of thousands of paramilitary fighters. However, the Organization of American States (OAS) mission verifying the demobilizations has identified 22 illegal armed groups, in which paramilitaries are actively recruiting new troops and participating in drug trafficking, extortion, selective killings, and the forced displacement of thousands of civilians. Eight foreign embassies in Bogota, the OAS mission, and countless human rights defenders, trade unionists, and civilians have also reported receiving threats from these groups in recent months. Meanwhile, Colombian democracy is facing a serious threat in the form of paramilitaries exercising influence at some of the highest levels of government. More than 50 congressmen from Uribe’s governing coalition, his former intelligence chief, and other officials, have come under investigation for collaborating with paramilitaries. conviction.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 11 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

HUMAN RIGHTS EXT The CFTA encourages US and Colombian human rights abuses Witness for Peace, 2008, [“Colombia: Where U.S. Policy Kills”, http://www.witnessforpeace.org/pdf/Col_FTA_factsheet.pdf] WORKERS: Colombia is able to compete well in the global race to the bottom of wages and labor rights since Colombia is the number one killer of trade unionists. Since 1991, over 2,200 Colombian union members have been murdered. The FTA would give incentives to multinational corporations to take advantage of the extremely violent situation for Colombian workers in order to continue to prioritize their own profits over worker rights. U.S. companies such as Coca-Cola, Chiquita, and Drummond Coal have already been accused of and/or sued for hiring paramilitaries who kill, threaten, torture, and kidnap Colombian union members. The FTA would push Colombia to lower already low wages, to weaken already poor labor standards, and to remove or reduce laws that once guaranteed workers the right to receive overtime pay, the right to collective bargaining, and the right to worker’s compensation.

The CFTA encourages Colombian human rights violations Witness for Peace, 2008, [“Colombia: Where U.S. Policy Kills”, http://www.witnessforpeace.org/pdf/Col_FTA_factsheet.pdf] While all free trade agreements are harmful, the US-Colombia FTA is especially critical to oppose due to Colombia’s atrocious human rights record. Colombia’s government and military have been implicated in many human rights violations due to direct contact with paramilitary death squads that appear on the U.S.’s list of designated terrorists. As of March 2008, over 85 Colombian political leaders have been detained for their involvement with paramilitaries, including current and past members of Congress, council members, governors, mayors, state legislators, and the former director of DAS—Colombia’s FBI.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 12 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

AT: COLOMBIAN GOVT REFORMED

Even if the government has taken steps to address human rights abuses, new cases reinforce prevalent human rights abuses Haugaard 08 (Lisa Haugaard, “So Far to Go: Human Rights in Colombia”, Latin America Working Group Education Fund, April 2008. ) The Colombian government has taken some potentially significant steps to address this serious problem. The Defense Ministry issued directives to the armed forces to prioritize captures over killings, adhere to regulations over rules of engagement and transfer cases of possible extrajudicial executions from military to civilian courts. In 2007, human rights cases involving security forces finally began to be transferred to civilian courts. The government also established a highlevel commission to examine the problem. · However, new cases continue to occur and very few convictions have been achieved in past cases. Progress must be measured through results: an end to new killings; existing cases being regularly and promptly transferred from military jurisdiction, where they go nowhere, to civilian courts; and convictions, where warranted, achieved. · More than one-third of recent killings of civilians, in cases in which the perpetrators’ group is identified, were committed directly by Colombia’s security forces, with slightly less than one-third each attributed to paramilitary and guerrilla groups. Of 1,348 people killed or disappeared (outside of combat) from July 2006 to June 2007, the Colombian Commission of Jurists asserts that in the cases in which the presumed perpetrators’ group is identified, 39.1 percent of these crimes were committed directly by state agents; 31.7 percent by paramilitaries, and 29.2 percent by guerrillas. (In nearly half of the 1, 348 cases, the perpetrators’ group is still unknown). 2. While over 31,000 persons participated in the paramilitary demobilization program, a considerable number appear not to have been paramilitaries at all. Meanwhile, new groups, undemobilized and rearmed paramilitaries continue to use threats and violence to exercise power, threaten human rights defenders and union activists, and take control of the drug trade. · The OAS mission officially monitoring the demobilization process documents the existence of 22 rearmed groups. (MAPP/OAS 10th report)

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 13 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA -> TERRORISM The CFTA increases terrorism by destroying the Colombian agricultural business Witness for Peace, 2008, [“Colombia: Where U.S. Policy Kills”, http://www.witnessforpeace.org/pdf/Col_FTA_factsheet.pdf] FARMERS AND FOOD SECURITY: Colombian farmers are not able to compete with U.S. agricultural goods due to, among other factors, U.S. government subsidies. The U.S. government subsidizes farmers to the tune of $24 billion a year, meaning that they can produce at below the cost of production, thus making it impossible for Colombian agricultural to compete on a level playing field. Colombian farmers also often lack technology, infrastructure, and/or physical access to markets. Without protections against U.S. agricultural goods, many Colombians will lose their livelihood. Without alternatives for feeding their families, many Colombian farmers have no choice but to grow illicit crops, such as coca (the raw material for cocaine), join an illegal armed group, or leave their farm and become another of Colombia’s already nearly four million internally displaced individuals.

Terrorism threatens extinction Sid-Ahmed 2004, Political Analyst, 2K4 (Mohamed, “Extinction!” Al-Ahram Weekly On-Line, August 26 – September 1, http://weekly.ahram.org.eg /2004/705/op5.htm) A nuclear attack by terrorists will be much more critical than Hiroshima and Nagazaki, even if -- and this is far from certain -- the weapons used are less harmful than those used then, Japan, at the time_, with no knowledge of nuclear technology, had no choice but to capitulate. Today, the technology is a secret for nobody. So far, except for the two bombs dropped on Japan, nuclear weapons have been used only to threaten. Now we are at a stage where they can be detonated. This completely changes the rules of the game. We have reached a point where anticipatory measures can determine the course of events. _Allegations of a terrorist connection can be used to justify anticipatory measures, including the invasion of a sovereign state like Iraq_. As it turned out, these allegations, as well as the allegation that Saddam was harbouring WMD, proved to be unfounded. _What would be the consequences of a nuclear attack by terrorists? Even if it fails, it would further exacerbate the negative features of the new and frightening world in which we are now living. Societies would close in on themselves, police measures would be stepped up at the expense of human rights, tensions between civilisations and religions would rise and ethnic conflicts would proliferate. It would also speed up the arms race and develop the awareness that a different type of world order is imperative if humankind is to survive. But the still more critical scenario is if the attack succeeds. This could lead to a third world war, from which no one will emerge victorious. _Unlike a conventional war which ends when one side triumphs over another, this war will be without winners and losers. When nuclear pollution infects the whole planet, we will all be losers.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 14 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA -> DISEASE The FTA encourages US medicinal patents, making it impossible for Colombians to have access to affordable medicine and leading to disease spread Witness for Peace, 2008, [“Colombia: Where U.S. Policy Kills”, http://www.witnessforpeace.org/pdf/Col_FTA_factsheet.pdf] ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE: The FTA puts the interests of large U.S. companies over the health of Colombians. The FTA includes strengthening intellectual property rights (governing patent law) which will allow U.S. companies to extend patents on medicines, thus taking away millions of people’s access to generic medicine. According to the Pan-American Health Organization, the FTA will result in an increase of approximately $900 million in annual medicinal costs for Colombians. Intellectual property rights provisions would place patents on traditional medicinal knowledge and natural resources (water, plants, wind etc.) without prior agreement or community consent. This means that the traditional medicinal practices will then be rendered illegal for the communities from which it comes and that natural resources of Colombia, one of the most bio-diverse countries in the world, could become property of and controlled by U.S. companies.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 15 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA -> HARMS US ECON The FTA will increase immigration and decrease US jobs Witness for Peace, 2008, [“Colombia: Where U.S. Policy Kills”, http://www.witnessforpeace.org/pdf/Col_FTA_factsheet.pdf] What does the FTA mean for the US? What do FTA’s have to do with Immigration? The vast majority of profits made from FTAs benefit multinational corporations, not the majority of the people in the U.S. or Colombia. As we’ve seen with NAFTA in Mexico, the FTA model has not had many benefits for the people who need them the most: • NAFTA has destroyed the Mexican countryside, resulting in the loss of 2 million jobs. • Mexicans, having to choose between migration and starvation, have migrated to the US. The number of Mexicans living in the US has nearly doubled since NAFTA was passed to about 11.2 million, approximately 10% of the Mexican population. 2/3 of Mexicans living in the US have come since the passage of NAFTA. • Since NAFTA was ratified the average cost of food in Mexico has gone up 257% while average purchasing power has decreased by 50%. • One third of the 800,000 manufacturing jobs in Mexico that were created after the passage of NAFTA have disappeared while the Mexican minimum wage has dropped by 20%. In addition, since the passage of NAFTA over an estimated one million US manufacturing jobs have been lost as corporations search for the country with cheapest wages and the poorest labor rights.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 16 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA -> ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION A. CFTA destroys the environment Witness for Peace, 2008, [“Colombia: Where U.S. Policy Kills”, http://www.witnessforpeace.org/pdf/Col_FTA_factsheet.pdf] THE ENVIRONMENT: The FTA proposes reforms that give national and transnational corporations greatly increased access to exploit natural resources such as biodiversity, fisheries, water, and minerals. They would also have the right to challenge environmental protection laws in Colombia as “barriers to trade.”

B. Environmental destruction risks human extinction: Tobin 1990 (Richard, associate professor of political science at SUNY-Buffalo, The Expendable Future: U.S. Politics and the Protection of Biological Diversity, p. 13-14). Every time a human contributes to a species’ extinction, a range of choices and opportunities is either eliminated or diminished. The demise of the last pupfish might have appeared inconsequential, but the eradication of other species could mean that an undiscovered cure for some cancers has been carelessly discarded. The extinction of a small bird, an innocent amphibian, or an unappealing plant might disrupt an ecosystem, increased the incidence and areal distribution of a disease, preclude the discovery of new industrial products, prevent the natural recycling of some wastes, or destroy a source of easily grown and readily available food. By way of analogy, the anthropo-genic extinction of a plant or animal can be compared to the senseless destruction of a priceless Renaissance painting or to the burning of an irreplaceable book that has never been opened. In an era when many people believe that limits to development are being tested or even breached, can humans afford to risk an expendable future, to squander the infinite potential that species offer, and to waste nature’s ability and willingness to provide inexpensive solutions to many of humankind’s problems? Many scientists do not believe so, and they are fearful of the consequences of anthropogenic extinctions. These scientists quickly admit their ignorance of the biological consequences of most individual extinctions, but widespread agreement exists that massive anthropogenic extinctions can bring catastrophic results. In fact, when compared to all other environmental problems, human-caused extinctions are likely to be of far greater concern. Extinction is the permanent destruction of unique life forms and the only irreversible ecological change that humans can cause. No matter what the effort or sincerity of intentions, extinct species can never be replaced. “From the standpoint of permanent despoliation of the planet,” Norman Meyers observes, no other form of environmental degradation “is anywhere so significant as the fallout of species.” Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson is less modest in assessing the relative consequences of human-caused extinctions. To Wilson,

the worst thing that will happen to earth is not economic collapse, the depletion of energy supplies, or even nuclear war. As frightful as these events might be, Wilson reasons that they can “be repaired within a few generations. The one process ongoing…that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by destruction of natural habitats.”

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 17 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

BUSH GOOD

1NC

A. CFTA is bipartisan—democrats support because it recognizes labor and environmental principles. LA Times, 5/11/07, [Molly Hennessy-Fiske, “The Nation; Pelosi announces bipartisan trade policy; The deal negotiated with the administration incorporates labor and environmental standards, she says.”] "Last November, Americans voted on a new direction, and that includes a new direction on trade," [Nancy Pelosi] said, urging open markets but also warning: "We can have a bipartisan consensus on trade, but only with a recognition of labor and environmental principles." "We're applauding the bipartisan effort to get the trade agenda moving," said Christopher Wenk, senior director for international policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington. "It is our hope that this deal can pave the way for a solid majority of members to vote in favor of renewing trade promotion authority and passage of bilateral agreements with Peru, Colombia, Panama and Korea." Rep. Betty Sutton of Ohio, one of 71 freshman Democrats to sign a letter earlier this year urging [Charles B. Rangel] not to compromise "fair trade" principles, was "frustrated" that she and other new legislators were not consulted about the compromise, her staff said.

B. Link: 1. [plan unpopular] 2. Internal link – democratic support key to agenda Christian Science Monitor 08 (Christian Science Monitor, 7 July 2008. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0707/p09s02coop.html) Regarding trade, Democrats have become unabashedly protectionist to the point where they are willing to thumb their noses at American friends and allies like South Korea, Colombia, Canada, and Mexico. In May, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi shelved a painstakingly negotiated trade pact with Colombia that would have primarily benefited American exports. If the US is wary of trading with tiny Colombia – a democratizing neighbor confronting terrorism and drug trafficking – what does that say about America's capacity for global economic leadership? Ms. Pelosi also recently killed "fast-track" procedures intended to ease congressional votes on trade agreements, meaning new pacts with South Korea and Panama are also likely to remain in limbo. And just last month, Democrats in the House and Senate proposed a bill (containing many of Senator Obama's campaign promises) that would require the president to submit plans to renegotiate all current trade agreements – including the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico – before Congress would consider any new agreements.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 18 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

BUSH GOOD

1NC

C. Impact 1. Chavez is plotting to expand his socialist regime into Columbia, but strong Colombian US relations hamper his efforts Griswold and Hidalgo 08 (Daniel Griswold, director, Center for Trade Policy Studies at Cato Institute and Juan Carlos Hidalgo, project coordinator, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, Cato Institute, “A U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Strengthening Democracy and Progress in Latin America”, Center for Trade Policy Studies. 7 Feb 2008. < http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/FTBs/FTB-032.pdf>)

The importance of Colombia has grown in recent years given the ideological battle taking place in the Andean region. With the ascendancy to power of populist left-leaning presidents in South America, President Uribe stands as the closest U.S. ally in Latin America. Even more, Colombia is now surrounded by two anti-American presidents who have friendly ties or are sympathetic to the Marxist guerillas: Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Ecuador’s Rafael Correa. The situation is particularly troubling in the case of Chavez. The Venezuelan president has repeatedly tried to export his “Bolivarian” (socialist) revolution to other Latin American countries, taking advantage of a windfall in oil revenue of approximately $300 billion since he came to power.14 President Chávez has openly supported the political campaigns of left-leaning candidates in the region such as Evo Morales (Bolivia), Shafik Handal (El Salvador), Daniel

in the last four years Chavez has spent $4 billion in armaments.15 Chavez’s ties with the guerrillas are well known. Venezuela has become a safe haven for the FARC and other terrorist groups. The 2006 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report says that “Colombian guerrilla organizations . . . move through parts of Venezuela without significant interference by the Venezuelan security forces.”16 Recently, Chavez stated that the guerrillas were “real armies” whose political project was respected by the Venezuelan government. Having the closest ally of the United States in the region right next door has always been a thorn in Chavez’s side. The relationship between him and President Uribe recently turned bitter over a failed mediation effort from the Venezuelan president with the Colombian guerrillas to release dozens of hostages that those groups have retained for more than five years. Both leaders exchanged recriminations, with Chavez calling Uribe “a sad pawn of the [U.S.] empire”17 Venezuela is the second largest market for Colombian exports, and many fear that the diplomatic crisis between the countries could lead to a Venezuelan blockade—something Chavez has already threatened on several occasions—that could have serious consequences to Colombia’s economy. Enter the U.S.-Colombia FTA Ortega (Nicaragua), Ollanta Humala (Peru), and Rafael Correa (Ecuador). Moreover,

2. Saying no hurts Colombia’s economy, fuels left-wing populism, and stops democratic growth Griswold and Hidalgo 08 (Daniel Griswold, director, Center for Trade Policy Studies, Cato Institute and Juan Carlos Hidalgo, project coordinator, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, Cato Institute, “A U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Strengthening Democracy and Progress in Latin America”, Center for Trade Policy Studies. 7 Feb 2008. < http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/FTBs/FTB-032.pdf>)

The Consequences of Saying “No” A comprehensive trade agreement would also benefit Colombia by opening its market to more import competition, encouraging more foreign investment, and strengthening its ties to the world’s largest economy. If Congress were to reject such an agreement, it would inflict real pain on the Colombian economy and workers. A recent study by the University of Antioquia shows that not approving the FTA would decrease investment by 4.5 percent in Colombia. Furthermore, it would increase unemployment by 1.8 percentage points, representing a net loss of 460,000 jobs. GDP would go down 4.5 percent, and the poverty level would rise by 1.4 points.25 It is not in the U.S. interest to inflict this kind of economic punishment on an ally in the Andean region. Left-wing populism is fueled by poverty and lack of opportunities, as can be easily seen in neighboring Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia. Strong democratic institutions rely heavily on economic development. The United States should promote it. This is very clear to Colombians.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 19 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

BUSH GOOD

1NC

3. Developing democracy is key to prevent six instances of violence and protects against imminent disasters Diamond, 1995 (http://wwics.si.edu/subsites/ccpdc/pubs/di/1.htm; Promoting Democracy in the 1990s: Actors and Instruments, Issues and Imperatives) On any list of the most important potential threats to world order and national security in the coming decade, these six should figure prominently: a hostile, expansionist Russia; a hostile, expansionist China; the spread of fundamentalist Islamic, anti-Western regimes; the spread of political terrorism from all sources; sharply increased immigration pressures; and ethnic conflict that escalates into large-scale violence, civil war, refugee flows, state collapse, and general anarchy. Some of these potential threats interact in significant ways with one another, but they all share a common underlying connection. In each instance, the development of democracy is an important prophylactic, and in some cases the only long- term protection, against disaster.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 20 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

WILL PASS US Congress will continue its support of Colombia’s democracy through the ratification of the FTA. The Boston Globe, 7/10/08, [Marc Grossman, vice chairman of The Cohen Group. He was undersecretary of state for political affairs 2001-2005, “Opening up trade with Colombia”, liz] When President Clinton, with strong congressional backing, committed the United States to bolstering Colombia's defense of its democracy, much of that nation was controlled by the FARC along with the paramilitary United SelfDefense Forces of Colombia, or AUC, and the National Liberation Army, or ELN, the two other narco-terrorist groups that long plagued the country. President Bush and Congress have continued strong US support for Colombia.

Bush is pushing the Colombia FTA VOA News, 7/22/08, [Paula Wolfson, “Bush Makes Renewed Push for Colombia Free Trade Agreement”, http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-07-22-voa63.cfm, liz] At a White House event showcasing ties between the Colombian and American people, President Bush made one of his strongest appeals to date for passage of the free trade deal with Colombia. "To demonstrate America's good faith, to stand by our strong friend, to send a clear signal that we appreciate our ally, the United States Congress must approve this free trade agreement," he said. Mr. Bush said it will open up a major duty-free market to American goods, noting that exports remain one of the bright spots in the uncertain U.S. economy.

House will approve the CFTA – the recent extraditions prove The Boston Globe, 7/10/08, [Marc Grossman, vice chairman of The Cohen Group. He was undersecretary of state for political affairs 2001-2005, “Opening up trade with Colombia”, liz] When the US House leadership chose not to bring the Colombia Free Trade Agreement to a vote in April, some opponents said that Uribe did not take seriously the atrocities committed by the paramilitary groups. Last May 13, Uribe extradited 14 paramilitary leaders to the United States to face drug trafficking and other charges. They had failed to meet their commitments under the terms of the Justice and Peace Law, including compensating their victims. The extradition of these individuals alone ought to persuade the House to now approve the agreement.

The hostage rescue and death of Manuel Marulanda mean that the agreement will be bipartisan in Congress. The Boston Globe, 7/10/08, [Marc Grossman, vice chairman of The Cohen Group. He was undersecretary of state for political affairs 2001-2005, “Opening up trade with Colombia”, liz] Colombians have more work to do to make their society truly secure, democratic, and just. They have earned respect for what they have accomplished so far and deserve continuing US support. The hostage rescue and the death of a narco-terrorist leader provide the chance for a bipartisan show of engagement with Latin America. Congress should seize it immediately.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 21 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

WILL PASS AT: WON’T PASS (DAMN HIPPIES)

Colombia’s human rights record is improving, and won’t be an issue in Congress VOA News, 7/22/08, [Paula Wolfson, “Bush Makes Renewed Push for Colombia Free Trade Agreement”, http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-07-22-voa63.cfm, liz] Mr. Bush made specific mention of the recent rescue by the Colombian military of hostages that had been held for years by members of the leftist rebel group known as the FARC, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, which the United States considers to be a terrorist organization. He noted that on Sunday, more than a million Colombians marched in the nation's streets to denounce the FARC and demand the release of remaining captives. "They chanted a simple but powerful message: Libertad! That means freedom," Mr. Bush said. Democratic Party leaders in the House have put off formal consideration of the free trade agreement because of concerns about the Colombian government's human rights record. But the White House contends conditions have significantly improved, that the Colombian justice system has been reformed and attacks on labor unionists have significantly declined.

Colombia is moving towards a peaceful democracy The Boston Globe, 7/10/08, [Marc Grossman, vice chairman of The Cohen Group. He was undersecretary of state for political affairs 2001-2005, “Opening up trade with Colombia”, liz] Taking advantage of US assistance, Colombian presidents Andres Pastrana and Alvaro Uribe turned their country around and got most ELN and AUC fighters off the battlefield. This process has not been perfect. More needs to be done to make sure that paramilitary and other leaders of illegal armed groups face the consequences of their actions. But since Colombia adopted the Justice and Peace Law in 2005, more than 31,000 members from 35 paramilitary groups, principally from the AUC, have demobilized. More than 10,500 members of the FARC and the ELN have turned themselves in to Colombian authorities since 2002. Since Uribe took office that same year, security in Colombia has improved significantly. The government of Colombia has expanded police presence throughout the country and is now able to provide protection against violence to more than 10,600 individuals, including more than 1,900 trade union members. The Colombian government has also continued to battle narco-trafficking.

Colombia FTA will pass – it’s the key time for the US to show its support for the country’s transition to democracy The Boston Globe, 7/10/08, [Marc Grossman, vice chairman of The Cohen Group. He was undersecretary of state for political affairs 2001-2005, “Opening up trade with Colombia”, liz] COLOMBIA'S brilliant liberation of 15 hostages, including three Americans held for years by the narco-terrorist group FARC, is fantastic news, not just for the hostages, their families, and the Colombian government, but for all who support Colombia's fight to protect and perfect its democracy. The freeing of these hostages, along with the death last March of Manuel Marulanda, the long-time leader of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, provides a defining strategic opportunity for the US Congress to approve the pending US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement. The daring hostage rescue and the demise of the FARC leader, who for 40 years used violence, kidnapping, and intimidation to try to overthrow Colombia's democracy, will open new possibilities in Colombia, perhaps including the final collapse of the FARC itself. This makes it the perfect time for

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 22 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _ Congress to show that America supports the struggle for Colombia's democracy and recognizes that this fight is not solely a military question but requires creating jobs, enhancing human rights, and protecting labor leaders.

BUSH PUSH Bush is pushing the Colombia free trade agreement because it key to national security USA Today, 2/26/08, [“Bush backs free-trade pact with Colombia,” http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-0226-748468203_x.htm] President Bush joined forces with top former Clinton White House officials on Tuesday to argue that a free-trade pact with Colombia is a must-pass item for Congress. The Bush administration signed a bilateral free trade agreement with Colombia in 2006. But the required approval from Congress has not been forthcoming. Capitol Hill's Democratic leaders have refused, citing human rights violations in Colombia and its standing as the deadliest country in the world for organized labor. Supporters have argued that the agreement would level the playing field by requiring Colombia to lower or eliminate tariffs on U.S. imports, when many products from Colombia already get such preferences in the U.S. market. Bush sought to add new urgency by proclaiming the issue also a matter of national security -- a point he made twice in just two minutes of remarks. He argued that the deal would help promote a "stable neighborhood" and send a signal of support to a democratic ally, while defeating it would "embolden the false populism." "A lot of time people think about trade, it's just an economic issue. In this case, it is a national security issue, and one that the members of both parties must take seriously," the president said after meeting at the White House with a bipartisan group of former lawmakers and top government officials from several administrations. "If the trade bill with Colombia is defeated, it will harm the national security interests of the country."

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 23 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

BIPART KEY TO AGENDA EXT

Peru proves bipartisanship is key to trade agenda Baker 08 (James Baker, Secretary of State under George H.W. Bush, “What’s at State in Colombia” The Wall Street Journal. 23 April 2008. < http://www.latradecoalition.org/NR/rdonlyres/e5wpfapvm4evnx67ru3gzzcqgwhp6but5ht55e2266yf2grsmy66mmzcf7vneqtsadv4fbeyqymo2dcogmh7hk lg67e/InCaseYouMissedIt.pdf>)

The White House and Congress have reached an impasse. As a result, an economically and geopolitically important agreement is hanging in the balance. If our leaders in Congress don't change their approach, a critical building block for stability in an important region of South America may fall victim to domestic partisan squabbling. I know an agreement can be struck because, for more than three decades, trade has been a rare issue that lends itself to consensus. As recently as December, Congress displayed the type of bipartisan leadership that Americans desire when it ratified a free trade agreement with Peru that is very similar to the one proposed for Colombia. And yet, this spring, the world is watching to determine if the United States will remain committed to embracing a free-market global economy, or display a growing isolationist attitude that can befuddle and vex our allies around the world.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 24 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

DEMOCRACY LINK EXT

Chavez is already destabilizing the Colombian region – approving COFTA is key to checking his growth Baker 08 (James Baker, Secretary of State under George H.W. Bush, “What’s at State in Colombia” The Wall Street Journal. 23 April 2008. < http://www.latradecoalition.org/NR/rdonlyres/e5wpfapvm4evnx67ru3gzzcqgwhp6but5ht55e2266yf2grsmy66mmzcf7vneqtsadv4fbeyqymo2dcogmh7hk lg67e/InCaseYouMissedIt.pdf>)

Members of the U.S. Congress should also consider the national security arguments that favor this freetrade agreement. Colombia has long been a valued ally in a region that is increasingly becoming adverse toward our interests. Bolivia and Ecuador are to one degree or another antagonistic toward the U.S., and Venezuela is outright hostile. Compare that to Colombia, an openly supportive, long-time ally that has long partnered with the U.S. on economic and security matters. Colombia was there when we needed an ally in that region. The backbone of the U.S.-Colombia security relationship, Plan Colombia, was started by President Bill Clinton and continued by President George W. Bush. Since Plan Colombia was conceived in 1998, the Colombian government has worked closely with the United States to prosecute the war on drugs. It has done so while constantly battling the so-called "Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia" (FARC). This group is no quaint band of pseudo-revolutionaries. Simply put, it is a terrorist organization – so classified by both the European Union and the U.S. government – and one that receives a significant amount of its financing from the drug cartels. If the contents of a recently-seized computer once owned by Raul Reyes, a FARC leader that Colombia recently killed, are verified as accurate, the world

Does America want to allow Hugo Chávez to remake the Andean region in his image? While this matter is currently being investigated, it is clear that Chávez and his allies are already destabilizing the region. Both Ecuador and Venezuela, two of Colombia's biggest trading partners, have brought trade between them and Colombia to a virtual standstill. Colombia is at a crossroads; it is literally besieged on all sides. As Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in September, "If the U.S. turns its back on its friends in Colombia, this will set back our cause far more than any Latin American dictator could hope to achieve" would have incriminating evidence that Venezuela and Ecuador have been clandestinely supporting the FARC.

Turning our back on Colombia will give Chavez every opportunity to achieve his nationalistic goals Harper 07 (Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, Counsel on Foreign Relations. 25 Sep. 2007. < http://www.cfr.org/publication/14315/conversation_with_stephen_harper_rush_transcript_federal_news_service.html>). In my view, Colombia needs its democratic friends to lean forward and give them a chance at partnership and trade with North America. I am very concerned that some in the United States seem unwilling to do that. What message does that send to those who want to share in freedom and prosperity? (Speaks in French.) There is a lot of worry in this country about the ideology of populism, nationalism and protectionism in the Americas and the governments that promote it, but frankly, my friends, there is nowhere in the hemisphere that those forces can do more real damage than those forces in the United States itself. And if the U.S. turns its back on its friends in Colombia, this will set back our cause far more than any Latin American dictator could hope to achieve. I say this because I believe it is incumbent upon all of us to defend our shared interests and values at home as well as abroad, and more open trade in the hemisphere is consistent with our values and in all of our interests.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 25 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

DEMOCRACY LINK EXT

Approving COFTA checks antagonistic populist growth in Latin America Kyl 08 (John Kyl, State Senator, “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Colombia Free Trade” The National Ledger. 28 Apr 2008. < http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2008151/posts>) The Colombia accord also has important national security implications. As former Secretary of State James Baker wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, “Colombia has long been a valued ally in a region that is increasingly becoming adverse toward our interests. Bolivia and Ecuador are to one degree or another antagonistic toward the U.S., and Venezuela is outright hostile…. Colombia is at a crossroads; it is literally besieged on all sides. As Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in September, ‘If the U.S. turns its back on its friends in Colombia, this will set back our cause far more than any Latin American dictator could hope to achieve.’” Expanding free trade would provide American companies with new opportunities to grow; therefore, it is critical Congress approve pending trade agreements with nations like Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. But unfortunately, Speaker Pelosi has allowed politics to trump free trade at the expense of our economic and national security.

CFTA is key to national security – it signals support for democracy and opposition to socialism USA Today, 2/26/08, [“Bush backs free-trade pact with Colombia,” http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-0226-748468203_x.htm] Bush sought to add new urgency by proclaiming the issue also a matter of national security -- a point he made twice in just two minutes of remarks. He argued that the deal would help promote a "stable neighborhood" and send a signal of support to a democratic ally, while defeating it would "embolden the false populism." "A lot of time people think about trade, it's just an economic issue. In this case, it is a national security issue, and one that the members of both parties must take seriously," the president said after meeting at the White House with a bipartisan group of former lawmakers and top government officials from several administrations. "If the trade bill with Colombia is defeated, it will harm the national security interests of the country."

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 26 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

DEMOCRACY IMPACT EXT

– ECON

Major empirical studies prove: democracies best promote economic growth: Moore, Director of Center for National Security Law @ University of Virginia Law School, 1997 (37 Va. J. Int'l L. 811, Lexis) There has been a long debate in the economic literature about the relationship, if any, between government structures and economic growth and well-

Recently, however, a series of impressive empirical studies, as well as the powerful example of the seven-decade failed experiment in the former Soviet Union, provide powerful evidence about the linkage between democracy and levels of economic freedom on the one side, and rates of economic growth and economic well-being on the other. There have now been at least three major empirical studies linking economic well-being and economic growth rates with levels of economic freedom on a world-wide basis. These include the study by Bryan Johnson and Thomas Sheehy for the Heritage Foundation, 26 being.

the study by the Fraser Institute of Canada, with participation from a broad multinational group, 27 and, most recently, the study by Freedom House, the organization originally founded by Eleanor Roosevelt to counter Nazi propaganda which has long published the most detailed rankings of political

While these studies differ in significant ways, all demonstrate a striking correlation between levels of economic freedom and economic well-being and growth, with high levels of well-being and growth associated with high levels of economic freedom. According to the Freedom House survey, for example, the countries with the highest levels of economic freedom around the world. 28

freedom, with only 17% of the world population, produce 81% of the world economic product. In contrast, the countries with the lowest levels of economic freedom, with [*829] 36% of the population, produce only 5% of that combined product. The top two categories, "free" and "partly free," with a combined population of 24%, produce 86% of the world economic product in comparison with the bottom two categories, "not free" and "mostly not free," that with 66% of the population produce only 13% of the world product. 29

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 27 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

DEMOCRACY IMPACT EXT

– ENVIRONMENT

A) Democracies best protect the environment: Moore 97 (Director of Center for National Security Law @ University of Virginia Law School, 1997 (37 Va. J. Int'l L. 811, Lexis) Although there is as yet only episodic evidence concerning the linkage between government structures and environmental protection, the evidence that we have seems to point in the same direction. Thus, the abysmal environmental performance of the former Soviet Union, now revealed for all the world, with its Chernobyl and Aral Sea disasters, among others, is a powerful case study. 39 A comparison of the environmental records of the former East and West Germanies shows the same striking correlation. 40 And one

group of scholars at the Norwegian Peace Institute, aware of the striking correlation between government structures and war, has conducted at least one empirical study to test the same correlation with the environment. They have concluded that there is a correlation and that "environmental quality is affected by political organization ...." 41 Since it has long been known from welfare economics that environmental problems are a classic example of market failure produced by negative externalities, it is startling to many to find such a correlation between non-democratic non-market regimes and severe environmental degradation. While the answer likely involves interaction between a number of factors, including the often overlooked positive effect of profit and property rights on the environment, the core of the phenomena is probably the same "government failure" mechanism that itself generates massive negative externalities and that may well be the core mechanism underlying all of these negative effects in common.

B) Environmental destruction risks human extinction: Tobin 1990 (Richard, associate professor of political science at SUNY-Buffalo, The Expendable Future: U.S. Politics and the Protection of Biological Diversity, p. 13-14). Every time a human contributes to a species’ extinction, a range of choices and opportunities is either eliminated or diminished. The demise of the last pupfish might have appeared inconsequential, but the eradication of other species could mean that an undiscovered cure for some cancers has been carelessly discarded. The extinction of a small bird, an innocent amphibian, or an unappealing plant might disrupt an ecosystem, increased the incidence and areal distribution of a disease, preclude the discovery of new industrial products, prevent the natural recycling of some wastes, or destroy a source of easily grown and readily available food. By way of analogy, the anthropo-genic extinction of a plant or animal can be compared to the senseless destruction of a priceless Renaissance painting or to the burning of an irreplaceable book that has never been opened. In an era when many people believe that limits to development are being tested or even breached, can humans afford to risk an expendable future, to squander the infinite potential that species offer, and to waste nature’s ability and willingness to provide inexpensive solutions to many of humankind’s problems? Many scientists do not believe so, and they are fearful of the consequences of anthropogenic extinctions. These scientists quickly admit their ignorance of the biological consequences of most individual extinctions, but widespread agreement exists that massive anthropogenic extinctions can bring catastrophic results. In fact, when compared to all other environmental problems, human-caused extinctions are likely to be of far greater concern. Extinction is the permanent destruction of unique life forms and the only irreversible ecological change that humans can cause. No matter what the effort or sincerity of intentions, extinct species can never be replaced. “From the standpoint of permanent despoliation of the planet,” Norman Meyers observes, no other form of environmental degradation “is anywhere so significant as the fallout of species.” Harvard biologist Edward O. Wilson is less modest in assessing the relative consequences of human-caused extinctions. To Wilson,

the worst thing that will happen to earth is not economic collapse, the depletion of energy supplies, or even nuclear war. As frightful as these events might be, Wilson reasons that they can “be repaired within a few generations. The one process ongoing…that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by destruction of natural habitats.”

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 28 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA HELPS US ECON IMPACT

(1/2)

A. COFTA is key to sustaining growing American exports Kyl 08 (John Kyl, writer for the National Ledger, “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Colombia Free Trade” The National Ledger. 28 Apr 2008. < http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2008151/posts>) History has taught us that other than raising taxes, nothing can be more damaging to the United States than assuming a protectionist posture during a time of economic downturn. But that’s exactly the situation after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi decided to bar a vote on the Colombia Free Trade Agreement. It is important the United States gains equitable access to the markets of fast-growing developing nations like Colombia. Colombian-produced goods already enter the United States duty free, but American-manufactured goods exported to that country face stiff tariffs, ranging from eight percent to as high as 15 percent. The agreement, in other words, would level the playing field for the benefit of the United States. Expanding free trade would provide American companies with new opportunities to grow. If enacted, the Colombia Free Trade Agreement would lift tariffs immediately on over 80 percent of U.S.-produced consumer and industrial goods, and all goods would be duty free in 10 years. Exports are currently the fastest growing part of our economy, increasing $2.4 billion in January – an increase of 16.6 percent from last year. If that pace continues, net exports should add more than one percentage point to overall economic growth.

B. Exports are key to preventing economic decline Markheim 08 (Daniella Markheim, the Jay Van Andel Senior Analyst in Trade Policy at The Heritage Foundation's Center for International Trade and Economics, “The Best U.S. Export-Promotion Strategy: Free Trade” The Heritage Foundation. 7 May 2008. ) In 2007, the enacted budget authority for the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee was $1.37 billion.[13] These taxpayer dollars go toward the financing of numerous endeavors aimed at boosting U.S. exports, including education, data collection and dissemination, international trade missions, business services, and market research. While some of these activities certainly add value, much of what is being accomplished can be and is being done better by trade associations, business coalitions, and private business. In fact, the importance of the private sector in enabling the national export-promotion strategy is stated time and again throughout The 2007 National Export Strategy. The "Strategic Partnership Initiative" is designed to enhance cooperation between the private sector, exporters, and government at all levels. Recognizing that "the Federal government simply lacks the resources, marketing channels, and points of contact with businesses to reach most companies," the Partnership will ideally lead to a phaseout of government involvement in many of these activities.[14]

C. US economy engine is the world economy’s engine Brookes 2006 (Peter, Senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, July 4,

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed070406a.cfm)

The United States is the world's economic engine. We not only have the largest economy, we spend 40 percent of the world's budget on R&D, driving mind-boggling innovation in areas like information technology, defense and medicine. We're the world's ATM, too, providing 17 percent of the International Monetary Fund's resources for nations in fiscal crisis, and funding 13 percent of World Bank programs that dole out billions in development assistance to needy countries.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 29 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA HELPS US ECON IMPACT

(2/2)

D. Economic collapse leads to nuclear war Bearden 00 (Thomas Bearden, LTC, U.S. Army (Retired) CEO, CTEC Inc., the Director of the Association of Distinguished American Scientists (ADAS) and a Fellow Emeritus of the Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS), “The Unnecessary Energy Crisis: How to Solve It Quickly” 12 June 2000. http://www.cmaq.net/en/node.php?id=17547>) History bears out that desperate nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic collapse, the stress on nations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to the point where the arsenals of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25 nations, are almost certain to be released. As an example, suppose a starving North Korea launches nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including U.S. forces there, in a spasmodic suicidal response. Or suppose a desperate China -- whose long-range nuclear missiles (some) can reach the United States -- attacks Taiwan. In addition to immediate responses, the mutual treaties involved in such scenarios will quickly draw other nations into the conflict, escalating it significantly. Strategic nuclear studies have shown for decades that, under such extreme stress conditions, once a few nukes are launched, adversaries and potential adversaries are then compelled to launch on perception of preparations by one's adversary. The real legacy of the MAD concept is this side of the MAD coin that is almost never discussed. Without effective defense, the only chance a nation has to survive at all is to launch immediate full-bore pre-emptive strikes and try to take out its perceived foes as rapidly and massively as possible. As the studies showed, rapid escalation to full WMD exchange occurs. Today, a great percent of the WMD arsenals that will be unleashed, are already on

The resulting great Armageddon will destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the biosphere, at least for many decades. site within the United States itself.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 30 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

EXPORTS KEY TO ECON EXT

Exports are key to prevent economic collapse US Department of Commerce 08 (“U.S. Manufacturing Exports Swing from Deficit to Surplus with Free Trade Agreement Countries” 23 July 2008. < http://www.commerce.gov/NewsRoom/PressReleases_FactSheets/PROD01_006838>). WASHINGTON—U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez announced new U.S. Commerce Department data showing that the United States is running a trade surplus in manufactured exports with our 14 free trade agreement (FTA) partners. In the first five months of 2008, the trade balance in manufactured goods rose to a $2.7 billion surplus with our FTA partners from a $12.3 billion deficit during the same period last year. The U.S. manufactured goods trade balance improved 122 percent with our FTA partners, but only six percent with non-FTA partners in the first five months of 2008.“These

figures show that our FTAs are succeeding and that Americans benefit from open markets,” Gutierrez said. Our trade balance with FTA partners has swung from a deficit to a surplus proving that open markets are a key ingredient to the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing and the health of the U.S. economy. Last year, manufacturing accounted for 62 percent of America’s record $1.6 trillion exports in goods and services.” This improvement in the trade balance is due to the increasing competitiveness of U.S. manufactured goods. Since 2002, FTAs have helped U.S. manufactured exports grow steadily and at a faster rate than imports — 63 percent compared to only 42 percent, respectively, year-to-date through May 2008 (compared to same period of 2002). “Americans need more trade, not less,” Gutierrez said. “It’s clear FTAs make us more competitive and contribute to the health of the U.S. economy. Now it’s time for Congress to approve the pending FTAs with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. U.S. manufactured exports and local economies depend on free markets for jobs and prosperity.”

Exports are key to preventing US economic collapse Christian Science Monitor 07 (“Surge in exports buoys U.S. economy” Christian Science Monitor. 17 Oct 2007. < http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1017/p01s05-usec.html> American exports are now coursing their way around the world at a record level. In a major shift from the past five years, the US trade deficit, after stabilizing last year, is now shrinking. US companies, faced with slower economic growth in their home market, are now targeting foreign buyers. It doesn't hurt to have the dollar sinking in value – down almost 9 percent so far this year – and a relatively strong global economy. In fact,

the US economy would be flirting with recession if it weren't for the 1 percentage point of growth fueled by the export surge. "Exports have suddenly become a key source of growth at a time when the economy is looking for any growth it can get," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 31 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

ECON IMPACT EXT

– CHINA US WAR

1. US slowdown causes global depressions and war with China Mead 2004 (Foreign Policy, March- April) Similarly, in the last 60 years, as foreigners have acquired a greater value in the United States-government and private bonds, direct and ortfolio rivate investments-more and more of them have ac uired an interest in maintainin the stren of the U.S.-led system. A collapse of the U.S. economy and the ruin of the dollar would do more than dent the prosperity of the United States. Without their best customer. countries including China and Japan would fall into depressions. The financial strength of eve~ count~ would be severely shaken should the United States collapse. Under those circumstances, debt becomes a strength, not a weakness, and other countries fear to break with the United States because they need its market and own its securities. Of course, pressed too far, a large national debt can turn from a source of strength to a crippling liability, and the United States

must continue to justify other countries' faith by maintaining its long-term record of meeting its financial obligations. But, like Samson in the tem.,pleof the Philistines a coll~sin~ U.S econom.,ywould inflict enormous, unacceptable dam~f?eon the rest of the world. That is sticky power with a vengeance.THE SUM OF all POWERS?The United States' global economic might is therefore not simply, to use Nye's formulations, hard power that compels others or soft power that attracts the rest of the world. Certainly, the 1}S. economic system provides the United States with the prosperity needed to underwrite its security strategy. but it also encourag.es other countries to accept 1}S. leadership. U.S. economic might is sticky power. How will sticky power help the United States address today's challenges? One pressing need is to ensure that Iraq's econome reconstruction integrates the nation more firmly in the global economy. Countries with open economies develop powerful trade-oriented businesses; the leaders of these businesses can promote economic policies that respect property rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Such leaders also lobby governments to avoid the isolation that characterized Iraq and Libya under economic sanctions. And looking beyond Iraq, the allure of access to Western capital and global markets is one of the few forces protecting the rule of law from even further erosion in Russia.China's rise to global prominence will offer a key test case for sticky power. As China develops economically, it should gain wealth that could support a military rivaling that of the United States; China is also gaining political influence in the world. Some analysts in both China and the United States believe that the laws of history mean that Chinese power will someday clash with the reigning U.S. power. Sticky power offers a way out. China benefits from participating in the U.S. economic system and integrating itself into the global economy. Between 1970 and 2003, China's gross domestic product grew from an estimated $106

China is becoming increasingly dependent on both imports and exports to keep its economy (and its military machine) going. Hostilities between the United States and China would cripple China's industry, and cut off supplies of oil and other key commodities Sticky power works both ways, though. If China cannot afford war with the United States, the United States will have an increasingly hard time breaking off commercial relations with China. In an era of weapons of mass destruction, this mutual dependence is probably good for both sides. Sticky power did not prevent World War I, but economic interdependence rons de~er now' as a result the "inevitable" U.S.-Chinese conflict is less like\y to occur. Sticky power then is important to U S. hegemony for two reasons: It helps prevent war and if war comes it helps the United states. billion to more than $1.3 trillion. By 2003, an estimated $450 billion of foreign money had flowed into the Chinese economy. Moreover,

2. War with China causes global nuclear war The Nation 5-14-2001 China is another matter. No sane fig)lfe in the Pentagon wants a war with Chin~, and all serious US militarists know that China's minuscule nuclear capacity is not offensive but a deterrent against the overwhelming US power arrayed against it (twenty archaic Chinese warheads versus more than 7,000 US warheads).~, whose status constitutes the still incomplete last act of the Chinese civil war, remains the most dangerous place on earth. Much as the 1914 assassination of the Austrian crown prince in Sarajevo led to a war that no wanted, a misstep in Taiwan by any side could bring the United States and China into a conflict that neither wants. Such a war would bankrupt the United States, deeply divide 1~an and probably end in a Chinese victory,given that China is the world's most populous country and would be defending itself against a foreign aggressor. More seriously. it could easily escalate into a nuclear holocaust. However, given the nationalistic challenge to China's sovereignty of any Taiwanese attempt to declare its independence formally, forward-deployed US forces on China's borders have virtually no deterrent effect.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 32 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA

-> ECON GROWTH EXT

COFTA will further expand US economic growth Office of United States Trade Representative 07 (Office of the United States Trade Representative, “The Case for the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement” August 2007. )

1. Open a significant new export market. America’s two-way trade with Colombia reached $16 billion in 2006, making Colombia our fifth largest trading partner in Latin America and our largest export market for U.S. agriculture products in South America. In 2006, total U.S. goods exports to Colombia reached $6.7 billion. The U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement will further open this dynamic and growing economy to American goods and services. It will provide particular benefits to U.S. farmers and ranchers by immediately eliminating Colombia’s duties on high quality beef, cotton, wheat, soybeans, key fruits vegetables and many processed foods upon entry into force of the agreement. 2. Level the playing field for American business, farmers, ranchers and workers. America’s market is already open to imports from Colombia. In 2006, for example, 92 percent of U.S. imports from Colombia entered the United States dutyfree under our most-favored nation tariff rates and various preference programs, such as the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) and the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). The U.S.-Colombia trade agreement will give American businesses, farmers, ranchers and workers similar access to this important market. Upon entry into force of the agreement, over 80 percent of U.S. exports of consumer and industrial goods to Colombia will enter duty-free immediately. The Agreement also will provide substantial new opportunities for U.S. farmers’ and ranchers’ agricultural exports, and resolve sanitary and phytosanitary barriers to agricultural trade with Colombia. In addition, the agreement will remove barriers to U.S. services, provide a secure and predictable legal framework for investors, and strengthen protection for intellectual property, workers and the environment.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 33 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

COFTA

-> ECON GROWTH

EXT

Free trade agreements significantly add to US economic growth – several studies agree -

Intitute for International Economics says FT increase US econ $500 billion University of Michigan says reducing trade barriers for agro would add $164 billion World Bank estimates reducing agro subsidies by 10% would help developing countries gain $350 billion

Markheim 08 (Daniella Markheim, the Jay Van Andel Senior Analyst in Trade Policy at The Heritage Foundation's Center for International Trade and Economics, “The Best U.S. Export-Promotion Strategy: Free Trade” The Heritage Foundation. 7 May 2008. ) The value of such export-promotion activities to the U.S. economy continues to be debated, especially for certain agencies, including the Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and for various programs carried out by other member organizations. While it remains difficult to assess how much explicit federal export-promotion programs actually bolster U.S. jobs, economic growth, or overall prosperity,

policymakers remain intent on advancing a formal U.S. export-promotion strategy. Fortunately, The 2007 National Export Strategy gives a nod to the contribution of free trade agreements (FTAs). One need look no further than the chapter on the impact of trade liberalization and an Appendix at the end of the document to see the most effective policy answer to advancing exports: freer trade. Benefits of Trade Liberalization Ideally, free trade would be achieved without any negotiations at all. So pervasive are the benefits of trade liberalization for the country doing the liberalization that countries would be smart to lower their protectionist barriers on their own, irrespective of what other countries do. It is true that the more widespread such liberalization becomes, the greater the benefits for all, and multilateral trade negotiations, which seem to provide valuable political cover to help politicians do what is best for their country, should be encouraged. However, as the current round of global trade talks ably demonstrates, the pace of such negotiations is slow, and consensus can be hard to achieve. Yet the expected benefits of a meaningful conclusion to the current Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations make the effort to reach agreement worthwhile. Numerous studies

studies consistently show that real economic gains are associated with further trade liberalization: * The Institute for International Economics has calculated that moving from today's trade environment to one characterized by perfectly free trade and investment would generate an additional $500 billion in annual income for the U.S., or about $5,000 per household each year.[3] * A University of Michigan study concludes that reducing agriculture, manufacturing, and services trade barriers by just one-third would add $164 billion, or about $1,477 per American household, annually to U.S. economic activity. Completely eliminating trade barriers would boost U.S. annual income by $497 billion.[4] * The World Bank estimates that the continued reduction of tariffs on manufactured goods, the elimination of subsidies and non-tariff barriers, and a modest 10 percent to 15 percent reduction in global agricultural tariffs would allow developing countries to gain nearly $350 billion in additional income by 2015. Developed countries would stand to gain roughly $170 billion.[5] Free Trade Agreements FTAs negotiated by smaller groups of countries are the next best thing to promote global trade liberalization.[6] FTAs can provide institutional competition to help keep multilateral talks on track and provide the U.S. an option of have estimated the potential gains under various trade-liberalization scenarios. While their results and methodologies differ, these

pursuing agreements with countries willing to engage in serious liberalization of foreign trade. In the process, FTAs formed with smaller groups of

Free trade agreements can also help developing countries to lock in and effectively implement economic and political reforms, spur regional integration, and enhance prospects for investment and economic growth. While some of the United States' trade partners may be small now, over time they will mature into larger, more sophisticated markets more closely integrated with the U.S. economy. As these economies develop, they will demand more and more U.S. products. As the data demonstrate, America has experienced growth in trade with all of the countries with which it has formalized free trade agreements. countries can serve as starting blocks to facilitate a transition to broader agreements.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 34 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

AT: COFTA HARMS US ECONOMY US-Columbia FTA will effect the US minimally at best United States International Trade Commission, 12/06, “US-Columbia Trade Promotion Agreement: Potential Economywide and Selected Sectoral Effects”, http://www.usitc.gov/publications/pub3896.pdf The U.S.-Colombia TPA may have a small, positive effect on the U.S. economy. The benefits will likely be moderated by the small size of Colombia’s economy relative to that of the United States, Colombia’s small share of U.S. trade (about 0.5 percent of total U.S. goods trade in 2005), and the duty-free access most Colombian products already receive. Key findings from the Commission’s analysis are: • U.S. exports to Colombia are estimated to be $1.1 billion higher with the fully implemented TPA, an increase of 13.7 percent. • U.S. imports from Colombia are estimated to be $487 million higher with the fully implemented TPA, an increase of 5.5 percent. • U.S. GDP will increase by about $2.5 billion (by less than 0.05 percent). • There is likely to be minimal to no effect on output or employment for most sectors in the U.S. economy. The U.S. processed rice, cereal grains (e.g., corn), and wheat sectors are estimated to experience the largest increases in output and employment as a result of the TPA. Only the U.S. sugar sector is estimated to decline by more than 0.1 percent in output or employment. The Commission’s findings from its quantitative assessment of the effect of tariff elimination on trade in goods are similar to those from other studies using similar quantitative techniques.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 35 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

AT: FT EXPORTS JOBS/HARMS ECON Innovation and reduced barriers to trade help productivity and job creation Markheim 08 (Daniella Markheim, the Jay Van Andel Senior Analyst in Trade Policy at The Heritage Foundation's Center for International Trade and Economics, “The Best U.S. Export-Promotion Strategy: Free Trade” The Heritage Foundation. 7 May 2008. ) Benefits of International Trade Increased trade is just part of the gains stemming from free trade agreements. Economy-wide, the net number of jobs displaced each year by international trade is estimated to be no more than a relatively small 3 percent of the workforce.[11] Far more important in changing the composition of America's workforce have been improvements in technology and shifts in consumer preferences. The combined impact of innovation and reduced barriers to trade has served to help the economy, not harm it. Today, more than 57 million Americans are employed by firms that engage in international trade--roughly 40 percent of all non-farm jobs.[12] Any negative impact that freer trade may have on job numbers is mitigated by the benefits that trade brings to the economy as a whole. While production may fall in less competitive industries, exporters and domestic producers that use lower-cost imported inputs gain a competitive boost that promotes investment, productivity, and growth in these industries. Lower prices for imported goods also help households to stretch their incomes, enabling them to buy more of everything, including goods and services that are produced domestically. With freer trade, resources flow from less competitive uses to more competitive and efficient uses, creating opportunity and bolstering long-run economic growth and job creation. U.S. FTAs generally strengthen the transparent and efficient flow of goods, services, and investments between member countries. Trade agreements open markets, protect investors, and increase economic opportunity and prosperity. In short, free trade agreements serve to promote U.S. interests, not to weaken them or to place an unfair burden on Americans.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 36 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

AT: HUMAN RIGHTS IMPACT

Uribe has enacted impressive policies that have drastically decreased the human rights abuses in Colombia Griswold and Hidalgo 08 (Daniel Griswold, director, Center for Trade Policy Studies at Cato Institute and Juan Carlos Hidalgo, project coordinator, Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, Cato Institute, “A U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Strengthening Democracy and Progress in Latin America”, Center for Trade Policy Studies. 7 Feb 2008. < http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/FTBs/FTB-032.pdf>)

A Complicated Country, a Remarkable President President Álvaro Uribe is a rarity in Latin American politics. After five years in office, his approval ratings are still very high, currently above 80 percent. He was reelected in 2006 with a whopping 62 percent of the vote. The reasons behind Uribe’s popularity are clear for anyone who has followed Colombian current events in the last decade. The president’s policies have delivered more safety, security, and economic opportunity for the citizens of Colombia. Since he first assumed office in 2002, President Uribe has made impressive progress in stemming violence in his country, not only violence against trade unionists. His government has boosted police presence in every major city and region of the country. More than 30,000 paramilitary fighters have returned to civilian life.9 Through more aggressive policing and military action against insurgents, the level of violence has dropped dramatically. Since 2002, homicides have declined by 40 percent, kidnappings by 82 percent, and terrorist attacks by 77 percent (see Table 1).10 Before Uribe’s tenure, Colombia was considered on the verge of becoming a "failed state." The Marxist guerillas who had waged a war against the Colombian government for almost 40 years controlled an area the size of Switzerland. Thousands of kidnappings and assassinations made Colombia one of the most violent countries in the world. As former U.S. assistant secretary of state for western hemisphere affairs, Otto Reich, noted, "Barely 5 years ago, the big debate inside the U.S. Government centered on how long the government of Colombia could survive."11

Uribe’s policies have changed Colombia. He adopted a tough policy against the Marxist guerrillas by strengthening the army’s presence in rural zones and pushing the FARC out of central Colombia. He also pushed for a controversial plan to persuade the paramilitary groups to disarm in exchange for reduced sentences and incentives to reincorporate former paramilitaries into the workforce. This process has not been exempt from criticism. Many argue that demobilization of paramilitaries represented an amnesty to confessed criminals. Others point out that many demobilized paramilitaries have gone into regular criminal activities. However, the numbers clearly show that crime has plummeted under Uribe’s watch. Today, Medellin has a lower per capita homicide rate than Baltimore. Colombia is still a very violent country, but critics fail to see the greater picture when looking at crime data without taking into account the trends of the last five years. Not only have crime figures improved during Uribe’s presidency, economic and social indicators also show remarkable progress. The economy, which grew at an average of 5 percent in the last four years, is estimated to have grown by almost 7 percent in 2007. Direct foreign investment ballooned from $2.1 billion in 2002 to $6.3 billion in 2006 (a 200 percent increase). Poverty has fallen by 11.9 percentage points to 45 percent during the same period.12 The unemployment rate has fallen from 15 percent to 11 percent.13 A combination of pro-growth policies and improved security has delivered better living conditions for millions of Colombians.

Liz/Mimi

SDI 08-09 Malicious Lemons Politics - COFTA 37 / 37 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _

AT: OTHER FTAS COME FIRST The Columbia FTA is Bush’s first priority VOA News, 7/22/08, [Paula Wolfson, “Bush Makes Renewed Push for Colombia Free Trade Agreement”, http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-07-22-voa63.cfm, liz] The president has also called on Congress to schedule votes on pending free trade pacts with Panama and South Korea. But he has spoken out more frequently on the deal with Colombia, indicating winning approval for this agreement is a high priority for the final months of his administration.

Liz/Mimi