Trade Progress - Maybe

The Washington Post editorializes on some progress in getting free-trade agreements through the Democratic-controlled Congress. It appears that a deal has been reached with Peru and that the House will sign off on it. But the Post also points out that it should not have been necessary to drag it out and that there is much work left to do.

IT APPEARS that the Democratic Congress and the government of Peru have finally gotten to "yes" on the pending free-trade agreement that the Bush administration and Lima negotiated earlier this year. Last week, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel (N.Y.) and trade subcommittee Chairman Sander M. Levin (Mich.) circulated a "Dear Democratic Colleague" letter signaling members of their party that it was now safe to vote for the pact. Mr. Rangel and Mr. Levin assured Democrats that Peru has adjusted its labor laws to meet international standards. A vote on the bill is due in Mr. Rangel's committee tomorrow; the Senate Finance Committee approved it on Friday, 18 to 3. An October floor vote on final passage is within reach.

Much of the credit for the progress belongs to Mr. Rangel and Peruvian President Alan Garcia, each of whom showed considerable flexibility and political skill in recasting the agreement in a form that House Democrats could accept — without sacrificing its tariff-slashing essence. They spent a good part of the summer dancing this minuet. But let us also be clear that it should never have been necessary in the first place. On May 10, after the Bush administration agreed to incorporate labor and environmental conditions in free-trade agreements, Democratic leaders pledged swift approval for the Peru deal and a similar one with Panama, only to renege a month later under pressure from organized labor. That sent the Peru deal into the purgatory from which it has now, seemingly, been rescued.

That purgatory is pretty crowded right now, too. Agreements with Columbia, Panama and South Korea languish there because of anti-trade pressure. Despite the pressure group's position, it is in America's best interest to make sure we are supporting democratic governments, particularly in South America. We must not turn our backs on friends, leaving them vulnerable to pressure form the budding dictatorship of (T)Hugo Chavez. Protectionism hurts the US and her allies.