Informed Growth Act

In 2007, the Maine Fair Trade Campaign passed landmark legislation, the Informed Growth Act, in the Maine Legislature.

Peru Free Trade Agreement

In the fall of 2007, Congress passed the Peru Free Trade Agreement, yet another NAFTA-expansion.  Democratic leadership in Congress made a deal to include some environmental and labor standards which gained enough support to pass the agreement.  MFTC did not support the Peru FTA because these added standards were weak and unenforceable, and did not address the flawed model that was still being replicated in the agreement.  Not one labor, environmental, human rights, faith, or family farm group supported the Peru FTA, nationally or here in Maine.

Read MFTCs statement on the Peru and Panama FTAs here

Maine's Congressmen Mike Michaud and Tom Allen opposed the Peru FTA.  Maine Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe voted in favor.

Nationally, a majority of the democrats opposed the deal.  In fact, 7 out of 9 freshmen democrats opposed it., showing that the tide is turning on support for the NAFTA model. 

Read Rep. Michaud's floor speech in Congress on the Peru Free Trade Agreement:

Mr. MICHAUD. Mr. Speaker, in the coming days Congress will consider the Peru Free Trade Agreement. I rise tonight to ask why are we in such a rush to approve a flawed and misguided trade policy.

The Peru Free Trade Agreement doesn't enjoy the support of any of the constituencies which it's supposed to benefit. No labor unions vocally are out supporting this agreement. Why would they? The labor standards are unenforceable. It doesn't protect ``buy America.'' It promotes offshoring of our industries.

The Peru Free Trade Agreement is just like the NAFTA-CAFTA framework. NAFTA has cost Maine over 23 percent of our manufacturing base. The new labor environmental language will do nothing to improve the situation. The Bush administration claims that the agreement will improve labor standards in Peru and, in the next breath, Tom Donahue, president of the United States Chamber of Commerce states that he is ``encouraged by assurances that the labor provisions cannot be read to require compliance with the ILO conventions.''

So why are we rushing to approve such a toothless measure? Why is Congress moving so fast to approve a trade policy which has not been subject to a full hearing since the deal was announced? The last hearing on the Peru Free Trade Agreement in the Ways and Means Committee was held in 2006. There are no environmental groups that are rallying support for the unenforceable environmental protections. That includes the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth.

So why are we not taking the time to consider the impact the Peru FTA will have on our environment, our intellectual property or privatization of Social Security? Even the labor leaders of major Peruvian labor organizations oppose this agreement. They urge Congress to vote ``no,'' claiming that it will weaken labor standards, encourage illegal immigration to the United States, and increase the rates of drug trafficking and violence.

So who supports this agreement? Big Business. It's the large multinational companies who seek to profit off the backs of working men and women in our country.

Remember back on May 10 when we heard about the new trade model? Well, if it's so new and great, then why aren't we hearing from all sides on the trade debate asking us to support it? There is a reason: there is not much new about it. It's the same old model with a little fancy title.

I ask my colleagues to take a step back and consider this agreement carefully, demand the enforcement of the labor standards that conform with the ILO Conventions and environmental protection that might actually protect the environment. I ask my colleagues to consider the impact of this agreement and to question why we are moving so quickly to box ourselves into a corner. And I'm asking Members to listen to their constituents.

All across this country, the American citizens are opposed to these bad, flawed trade deals. This is more of the same. We must have a new trade model. We have to start thinking globally of how we're going to deal with the globalization in this world today. So I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Peru trade deal.