Pelosi trumps Bush on trade

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) upped the ante against President Bush Wednesday by holding the Colombia trade deal hostage to gain leverage on a second economic stimulus package.

Pelosi is taking the unprecedented step of changing House rules to block the Colombia free trade agreement. By doing so, she will spare Democratic lawmakers a difficult vote while setting up a bitter fight with Bush.

{mosads}Delaying action on the trade pact, a high priority for the administration, may secure leverage for Democrats as they seek extra federal spending opposed by many Republicans.

After meeting with Bush and other congressional leaders Wednesday afternoon, Pelosi said, “We have come together on many bipartisan agreements on how to inject demand and vitality into our economy, and we would hope some of those initiatives would be acceptable to the president, funded and signed into law. Then, and only then, can we consider the merit of a Colombia free trade agreement.”

The surprising move came a day after Bush set his own precedent by trying to force Congress to vote on the trade pact despite a warning from Pelosi that it would not pass.

An aide to Pelosi said Bush broke “years of precedent” by submitting a trade deal for congressional approval without first getting the consent of House and Senate leaders.

Administration officials and Republican congressional leaders blasted Pelosi’s maneuver, which they said violated the spirit of the fast-track trade law and undermined U.S. trade policy.

Democrats, including those who recently supported controversial trade agreements, rallied around Pelosi and criticized the president for his unwillingness to negotiate with Congress.

Pelosi announced her decision a few hours before Democratic and Republican leaders were scheduled to visit Bush at the White House to discuss a range of issues.

She said she had warned Bush not to send the trade deal to Congress and that it would probably not have enough votes to pass. She tied the standoff on trade to the worsening economy, calling attention to consumers’ decreased buying power and the rising cost of goods. 

Pelosi had been under heavy pressure from organized labor and Democratic lawmakers to scuttle the Colombia deal. Several freshmen, including Reps. Phil Hare (D-Ill.) and Ron Klein (D-Fla.), told Pelosi they opposed the trade agreement during a breakfast meeting Wednesday morning. Hare said he reminded the Speaker that the Democratic presidential contenders, Sens. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), shared his view.

{mospagebreak}Labor groups also squeezed the Democratic leadership.

“I’d say it’s a pretty important issue to our folks and that was conveyed pretty forcefully to leadership and other lawmakers,” said Thea Lee, policy director at the AFL-CIO. “There’s no question this is an important issue for our members and there’s no question that in an election year issues like this become more passionate and heated.

“We would hate to see the Democratic Party fractured on a vote like this, because it sends a terrible message to our members.”

{mosads}The AFL-CIO says it opposes the deal because dozens of trade unionists have been assassinated for advocating for workers’ rights in Colombia. Organized labor often opposes trade agreements because they threaten union jobs. Labor officials also say they doubt Colombia has the legal infrastructure to uphold labor standards.

Labor groups will play a big role in getting Democratic voters to the polls in November.

Yet Democrats would have faced unwelcome political consequences for voting to defeat the trade deal.
Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), who has voted for other controversial trade deals, said Democrats would have faced “pretty bad” political fallout among supporters in the business community had they killed the agreement.

Caterpillar Inc., a manufacturer of construction equipment that has an office in his district, exports more products to Colombia and Peru than to Germany, France and Japan, Cooper noted.

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over trade deals, supported Pelosi.  

He said the extra time would allow Democrats to negotiate for their own legislative priorities, such as trade adjustment assistance to help workers laid off because of foreign competition.

Several Democrats predicted that the Colombia deal would not reach the floor for a vote until after the election. Pelosi refuses to say when she might schedule it.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said he expected the chamber would adjourn at the end of September and dismissed the likelihood of a lame-duck session, saying that he doubted Congress would get much done after the election.

The administration tried to increase political pressure on House Democrats such as Cooper who represent districts that would benefit from an agreement with Colombia.

“This is Speaker Pelosi’s attempt at a pocket veto, so tomorrow’s vote is effectively a vote to kill this agreement and with it the jobs that would have been created for American workers,” said White House spokesman Tony Fratto, in reference to a vote, scheduled for Thursday, to change House rules.

Other administration officials condemned Pelosi’s action at a hastily called news conference.

Labor Secretary Elaine Chao said, “The Speaker’s threatened actions will serve only to harm American workers by costing them good-paying jobs. This is not the time for the Democratic leadership to put up roadblocks to the competitiveness of the American economy.”

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice added, “I cannot think of a more important element of our policy in Latin America than to pass this free trade agreement, and in fact, all of the things that we’ve done — the doubling of foreign assistance in Latin America, the working with the countries across the political spectrum — will be seriously harmed if this free trade agreement does not pass.”

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) joined the chorus: “Any vote to delay the consideration of the Colombia free trade agreement would violate the spirit of the law and undermine our ability to create more American jobs. Let me be clearer: It would be cheating.”

Republican aides did not dispute that Pelosi’s plan to waive the timetable would be within her rights, because the fast-track law states that each chamber’s rules take precedence. 

Hoyer said the House parliamentarian had approved the Democrats’ plan. Fast-track usually gives the House 60 days to act on trade legislation.

The Senate is meant to act within 30 days of the House, but it is unclear whether that requirement would remain if the House delayed for several months.

Klaus Marre, J. Taylor Rushing, Mike Soraghan and Ian Swanson contributed to this report.