Federation of Retailers Calls for Senate to Pass U.S.-Peru Free Trade Agreement

On Tuesday, the National Retail Federation, the world's largest retail trade association, urged the Senate to pass legislation implementing a long-delayed free trade agreement with Peru.

Due to political issues involving a number of similar pacts including those with Panama, Colombia, and South Korea, while the Peru FTA was signed in April 2006, its implementation has been delayed.

"Rejecting this agreement would have important negative consequences for advancing U.S. foreign policy and security goals to cement ties with important allies in the region, and would make it more difficult for the U.S. economy to grow and create new and better jobs in the global economy. A no vote is simply an endorsement of economic retreat and isolationism and for condemning poor countries to remain on the world's economic margins," wrote NRF Senior Vice President for Government Relations Steve Pfister in a letter sent to all members of the Senate.

Pfister additionally commented that the agreement would increase opportunities for U.S. workers whose livelihoods are already dependent upon the $7.4 billion in current trade between the U.S. and its ally Peru, provide for reciprocal treatment of U.S. agricultural exports, and endorse democratic stability in the South American nation, allowing for job creation that would provide an economic alternative to the narcotics trade.

The Bush Administration has been heavily criticized by for featuring what some have said is the most trade-protectionist President in the last 80 years. His critics say that Bush has consistently made poor policy decisions with regards to entrenched protectionist standards in areas such as steel production and agriculture and has not adequately challenged the protectionist Majority in Congress, even though his Administration came to power with the platform that it would work to remove trade barriers and implement free trade.

Republicans were traditionally the Party that used tariffs to protect American trade interests, while the Democrats had traditionally backed free trade policies that kept down the prices of goods and therefore helped the poor and working middle class while keeping money out of the politicians' wallets.

After World War II, both major Parties became backers of general free trade policies; however, by the end of the 1970s, the Democrats had taken up the formal mantel of their political rivals and come to see protectionism as the way of defending American manufacturers, small business owners, farmers, and the middle class.

On Monday, the Senate began debating anew the Peru-U.S. free trade agreement. The House approved the agreement by a vote of 285-132 in November.

Original Newswire Source:
http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&newsId=20071204006022&ndmHsc=v2*A1196773200000*B1196821348000*DgroupByDate*G3*J1*N1000837&newsLang=en&beanID=202776713&viewID=news_view