When protectionists know that they can’t win an economic argument, they try to change the subject.
That’s what they’re attempting to do right now with the Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Instead of debating economics, they want to talk about human rights. That would be fine, except that they aren’t even correct about the human-rights side of the story.
Unfortunately, their carelessness is smearing the reputation of President Alvaro Uribe, who is the finest president Colombia has had in years and one of our country’s best friends in Latin America.
Due to this phony controversy, Colombia may not benefit from bipartisan negotiations between the White House and Congress that could lead to the approval of trade agreements with Panama and Peru. That would be a shame, because it means that Americans won’t benefit, either: A trade deal with Colombia is clearly in our national interest.
Let me start by addressing the facts that the protectionists want to dodge: The agreement with Colombia makes economic sense for the United States. If Congress approves the pact, more than 80 percent of consumer and industrial products made in America will become duty-free immediately, and the rest would see their tariffs phased out over a ten-year period.
Farmers have a lot to gain, too. A long list of agricultural products would receive unfettered access to Colombian consumers: high-quality beef, wheat, cotton, soybeans and soybean meal, and fruits such as apples, cherries, peaches, and pears. Some barriers would remain in place, but a number of items would receive improved entry, such as pork, corn, poultry, rice, and dairy products.
From an economic standpoint, this is an open-and-shut case. Americans will benefit if they can trade additional goods and services with 46 million Colombians.
Under the rules of Trade Promotion Authority, the agreement should receive an up-or-down vote in Congress. In recent weeks, the Bush administration has negotiated with Rep. Charles Rangel and other congressional Democrats to force additional labor and environmental standards on potential trading partners. This could lead to the ratification of trade deals with Panama and Peru.
Colombia deserves to join them. But its trade agreement is now in dire straits for reasons that, on the surface, have nothing to do with economics, labor, or the environment. Instead, the protectionists are complaining about human rights.
Human rights indeed have been a problem in Colombia, a country plagued by civil war for decades. Since the election of President Uribe in 2002, however, the violence and crime have plummeted and the country has prospered. Colombia still has its troubles, but they’ve lessened significantly under Uribe. As stated recently in the Wall Street Journal, “Uribe has done more to protect human life and establish a rule of law in Colombia than any president in recent memory.”
What’s more, Colombia is an important regional ally: Uribe balances the harmful anti-American talk and action of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and is a willing and capable partner in our war on drugs.
Yet Uribe’s domestic political foes recently have tried to tie him to outlawed paramilitary organizations. At best, these charges are unproven. At worst, they’re scandalous lies. They certainly don’t seem to have disturbed ordinary Colombians: Uribe’s approval rating, in a recent poll, topped 80 percent.
Surely if his character were low, his popularity wouldn’t be so high.
Uribe and the Colombians deserve this trade agreement. So does the United States.
Dean Kleckner, an Iowa farmer, chairs Truth About Trade and Technology.
News 
When protectionists know that they can’t win an economic argument, they try to change the subject. 
