The KOREA FTA: A Bad Choice for Leftovers

Leftovers can often be a gamble. It’s even worse if they’ve been sitting out for three years, after being left behind by the last landlord.
President Bush and the Republic of Korea signed the KORUS Free Trade Agreement on June 30 2007. Because of concerns about an unlevel playing field on cars and catfish – on refrigerators and rice – on TV sets and shrimp, and a host of other issues, this FTA remains unresolved.
In fact, since Bush first pushed it, not one U.S. labor union, faith group, family farm organization or pro-environmental entity has yet to endorse or support the Korea FTA, or advocate for its passage.
Put simply, these old leftovers are not healthy.
Contact elected officials and ask them to oppose the KORUS Free Trade Agreement.

News on the Korea FTA

Obama Sets November Deadline for S. Korea Trade Deal
BusinessWeek – Julianna Goldman, Hans Nichols
US pledges to revise South Korea free trade agreement
Financial Times – Alan Beattie, Chris Giles

US business lobby supports Obama’s plans for KORUS FTA ratification
Yonhap News – Hwang Doo-hyong ‎

US Vows New Push in Korean Trade Pact
Wall Street Journal – Elizabeth Williamson

Obama will resume talks on South Korea trade
The Associated Press – Martin Crutsinger

US To Complete FTA With South Korea By November

CattleNetwork.com

White House to Push Free Trade Deal With South Korea
New York Times – Sewell Chan, Jackie Calmes

Some of the problematic leftovers from NAFTA include . . .

Foreign Investor Rights. The investment chapter still affords foreign investors greater rights than those enjoyed by U.S. investors. Not one word was changed in the Korea FTAs’ foreign investor chapters that promote off-shoring, and subject our domestic environmental, zoning, health and other public interest policies to challenge by foreign investors in foreign tribunals. The Korea FTA also allows challenges by foreign investors in foreign tribunals of timber, mining, construction and other concession contracts with the U.S. federal government.

Food Safety Provisions. The amended text does not address limits on imported food safety and inspection. These FTAs still contain language requiring the United States to accept imported food that does not meet our safety standards.
Procurement Provisions. The Korea FTA procurement rules subject many common federal and state procurement policies to challenge in trade tribunals and directly forbid other common procurement policies. These procurement rules continue the NAFTA/CAFTA ban on anti-off-shoring and Buy America policies and expose U.S. renewable energy, recycled content and other environmental safety requirements to challenge.
Agriculture Provisions. The text does not address the problems in the NAFTA-style agriculture trade rules that have simultaneously undermined U.S. producers’ ability to earn a fair price for their crops at home and in the global market place. Multinational grain trading and food processing companies have made enormous profits while farmers on both ends have been hurt. Continuing this model is projected to increase hunger; illicit drug cultivation; undocumented migration; and continue the race to the bottom for commodity prices, pitting farmer against farmer and country against country to see who can produce food the cheapest, regardless of standards on labor, the environment or food safety.
Access to Medicines. While the amended text of these FTAs removes the most egregious, CAFTA-based, provisions limiting the access to affordable medicines, the text still includes NAFTA provisions that undermine the right to affordable medicines for poorer countries contained in the WTO’s Doha Declaration.
We are all eager to support trade agreements that benefit a majority of U.S. workers, farmers, small businesses and consumers. We all want to pass future trade agreements that work to achieve the larger societal goals of economic justice, poverty alleviation, healthy communities, pollution reduction, human rights and a sound environment.
The Korea FTA does not meet these goals.
To see what a good trade agreement might look like, we encourage you to read the Trade Reform, Accountability, Development and Employment (TRADE) Act put forward last session by Sen. Sherrod Brown, Rep. Mike Michaud and over eighty of their Congressional and Senate colleagues.
The TRADE Act marks out policy space for a more balanced way to expand trade. It maps out a fair path forward, explaining what we are all for in a good agreement. It sets out the basic terms of what must and must not be included in future trade agreements.

More Background on the Korea FTA

Reports & Fact Sheets

Welcoming a New Day on Trade and Globalisation Policy: Comments on the Korea Free Trade Agreement
Citizens Trade Campaign, September 10, 2009

Radio Program: Labour vs. US-Korea Free Trade Agreement Women’s International News Gathering Service
(Windows Media Player Required)

The United States Needs a New Pro-Environment Trade Policy
Amazon Watch, American Lands Alliance, ForestEthics, Greenpeace USA, Rainforest Action Network, October 5, 2007

IBEW Legislative Fact Sheet on Trade August 2007

The US-Korea Free Trade Agreement, Annex 22-B: A Missed Opportunity on Workers’ Rights in North Korea

Human Rights Watch, August 2, 2007

Trade Deficit in Food Safety

Public Citizen, July 2007

Evaluation of the Korea-U.S. FTA

The Korean Alliance against the Korea-U.S. FTA, June 11, 2007

News & Opinion

Obama to Discuss with President Lee Timetable for Korea FTA’s Ratification: White House Yonhap, November 14, 2009

Members Call for Fairness in Korean and Japanese Auto Markets
Michigan News, November 10, 2009

Ministry Threatens to Blacklist Firms Paying Salaries to Full-Time Unionists Joong Ang Daily, November 9, 2009

Levin Says Korea Auto Barriers Need to Be Fixed; Kirk Says Proposals Being Developed
Daily Report for Executives, November 6, 2009

Kirk Says Korea FTA Issues Must Be Resolved, Business Gears Up Inside US Trade, November 6, 2009

Obama Poised to Discuss Korean Trade Agreement, but Lawmakers are Anxious CQ Today, November 6, 2009

USTR Kirk: US Isn’t Standing Still On Korea Trade Agreement
Dow Jones, November 5, 2009

South Korea-US FTA Will Be Top Agenda When Obama Visits Seoul Bernama, November 5, 2009

Obama yet to decide to push FTA ratification
Joong Ang Daily, November 4, 2009

USTR Kirk sets speech on long-delayed Korea pact
Reuters, October 30, 2009

EU-Korea trade deal put pressure on Obama to act
Reuters, October 15, 2009

U.S. Lawmakers Urge Swif Ratification of Korea-U.S. FTA
Chosun Ilbo, October 8, 2009

US Debates Continue on FTAs with Colombia, South Korea

ICTSD, September 16, 2009

USTR Receives Public Comments Concerning the Pending Colombia and Korea Free Trade Agreements
Office of the US Trade Representative, September 15, 2009

S. Korea reaffirms ‘no renegotiation’ on U.S. FTA

Yonhap News Agency, July 15, 2009

The Korea FTA is an ending point for the previous administration, not a starting point for the new one.

This entry was posted in Agriculture, Environment, Human Rights, Immigration, Indigenous Rights, Intellectual Property Rights, Labor, Security, Sovereignty, Womens' Rights, WTO. Bookmark the permalink.