President Bush acceded to Democratic urging yesterday to include labor and environmental guidelines on future trade deals, the New York Times reported:
The unusual agreement, which came after weeks of negotiations, would guarantee workers the right to organize, ban child labor and prohibit forced labor in trading-partner countries. It would also require trading partners to enforce environmental laws already on their books and comply with several international environmental agreements.
Trade has long been one of the most divisive issues in the Democratic Party. But after over a decade where free-traders seemed dominant, the tide may be turning. In the 2006 midterms, many Democrats trumpeted their opposition to free-trade agreements, especially some who the mainstream press considered conservative, like Heath Shuler. Iowans are likely divided on the issue. More from the Times:
Democrats representing the older industrial regions, where jobs have been lost because of imports of cheap textiles, shoes, machinery and other products made in Asia and Latin America, have generally been opposed to free trade deals… [On the other hand], farmers have become proponents of trade deals now that a large share of farm products are being exported. But lawmakers from farm areas have been skeptical of the administration’s record in negotiating trade pacts, insisting that they will not support them unless Europe and India open their markets.
Regardless of whether new trade deals are passed, the issue is not likely to go away anytime soon. For more on the matter, check out the dueling viewpoints of two progressive economists here.