AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka today issued a statement opposing the Korea–U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS). See the entire statement below. Also, read statements issued today from the United Steelworkers (USW) and Communications Workers of America CWA. 

AFL-CIO President Trumka:

For more than a decade, the labor movement, environmental groups, development advocates and others have advocated for a new trade policy that is part of a more coordinated and coherent national economic strategy. The proposed U.S.-Korea trade deal does not live up to that model and does not contribute to a sustainable global future.  We believe we must move towards a more democratic, sustainable and fair global economy with broadly shared prosperity for working people around the world.  Reaching that goal will require deep-seated reforms in current trade policy, as well as in our own domestic labor laws and other policies.   

We welcome the tremendous efforts by the Obama administration and particularly Ambassador Ron Kirk and his team to address the urgent concerns of autoworkers and auto companies with respect to market access, safeguard provisions and some non-tariff barriers.  Ways and Means Chairman Sander Levin and Ranking Member Dave Camp also pressed hard for key improvements in the auto provisions, and we appreciate their strong efforts. These newly negotiated provisions will give some much needed breathing room to the auto industry, and we appreciate the hard bargaining that was necessary to win these important changes.

However, the labor movement’s concerns about the Korea trade deal go beyond the auto assembly sector to a more fundamental question about what a fairer and more balanced trade policy should look like. In particular, the labor movement has consistently and for many years argued that the investment and government procurement provisions in the Korea deal will encourage offshoring.  And despite the progress made in improving the labor chapter in 2007, it is clear that in both the United States and South Korea, workers continue to face repeated challenges to their exercise of fundamental human rights on the job – especially freedom of association and the right to organize and bargain collectively. This deal does nothing to improve or strengthen the provisions negotiated by former President George W. Bush in these crucial areas.  It is essential that both countries bring their labor laws and practice fully into compliance with international standards prior to implementation of the agreement.  And for American workers to benefit from trade deals, we must strengthen U.S. labor law to harmonize social activity.   Going forward, we hope to work closely with the Obama administration to address all of these concerns in any future deals, particularly the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.

The Korea deal also fails to address the potential problem of currency manipulation and contains lax provisions on  rule of origin (allowing up to 65% foreign content in autos eligible for the lower tariff treatment, in contrast to the EU-Korea agreement, which allows only 45% foreign content) and duty drawback (which disadvantages domestic parts production).  These provisions will undermine both S. Korean and American workers.  There is significant opposition by many S. Korean unions to the trade agreement, as the agreement fails to address key offshoring and outsourcing issues facing S. Korea.  In fact, the weak offshoring protections and rule of origin make the agreement a backdoor for increasing offshoring to China and other countries from South Korea, as well as from the United States.

We are also concerned that the trade agreement leaves open the possibility that goods produced in the North Korean free trade zone, the Kaesong Industrial Complex (KIC), could in the future gain access to the United States.  We shouldn’t leave open the possibility of including these goods for two reasons: 1) grave concerns over the atrocious labor rights record in the KIC and 2) the impact on jobs and wages of the exports of these goods — produced at perhaps the lowest wage levels in the world.

In addition to much needed reforms in trade policy, the United States must implement a well coordinated industrial strategy that includes tax policy, infrastructure, skills development and technology investments to support a vibrant, growing and modern manufacturing sector.

The experiences of union members and working people with too many flawed trade deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement and China’s accession to the World Trade Organization do not justify optimism that this deal will generate the promised new jobs.  We’ve seen U.S. multinational companies take advantage of the investment and other corporate protections in past trade deals to shift production offshore, while maintaining access to the U.S. consumer market and undermining the jobs, wages and bargaining power of American workers. And the results have been catastrophic, with chronic and unsustainable trade deficits that sap economic growth and domestic job creation.

So long as these agreements fall short of protecting the broad interests of American workers and their counterparts around the world in these uncertain economic times, we will oppose them.

Just hours after the historic House vote last night to pass the DREAM Act, the Senate voted today 59-40 to table consideration of the bill. This means the bill could come up again during the lame-duck session. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said having a vote now to bring the bill to the floor was “futile” because there were not enough votes to overcome a  Republican filibuster against the bill. 

If you’re on Twitter, take a minute to retweet this:  RT @americasvoice BREAKING: Senate tables #DREAMAct in order to take up House bill. Call ur senators! 866-996-5161 #ri4a

The Senate version of the bill is different from the one passed by the Hiuse and the Senate may take the legislation up when it receives the House version as early as Monday.

During the debate on the bill, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), the bill’s sponsor, said the nation cannot afford to lose the talents of the many talented immigrant children who will be helped by the DREAM Act.

We owe it to America who needs their service in the military and  needs their skill in building our economy [I ask the Senate] to pause to reflect whether we can afford to say to these talented young men and women there’s no place in America for you.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said the DREAM Act is not amnesty for undocumented immigrants as opponents charge:

Amnesty is when you get something for nothing. I believe wearing the uniform of the United States of America, risking your life for your country, maybe losing that life…is not amnesty. I believe that working hard and being educated so you can help fuel the nation’s prosperity …that is paying your dues on behalf of the country.

The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, which is supported by a large majority of Americans, would allow undocumented students who have lived in the United States for at least five years and have graduated from high school or received a graduate equivalency diploma (GED) to legalize their immigration status by pursuing a college education or serving in the U.S. military.

The House passed the bill last night 216-198. It was the first time in the 10-year legislative history of the DREAM Act that the House has passed the bill.

During the House debate, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said:

Think of these young people and how they identify with America — they have no other identity in many cases. They want to use their degrees and their skills to help build something better for the next generation. That’s what our founders had in mind. We owe it to our founders and we owe it to these young people and we owe it to the future to cast our votes for a bill that makes America more American.

“Let’s give the DREAM kids an opportunity. They are American in every way but a piece of paper,” said Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.).

We have come here to support the rule of law, yes, but to change the law when it is unfair.

President Obama praised the House vote in a statement:.

This vote is not only the right thing to do for a group of talented young people who seek to serve a country they know as their own by continuing their education or serving in the military, but it is the right thing for the United States of America.

Ohio political observers expect Gov. Elect John Kasich (R) and his Republican allies in the state legislature to take aim the Buckeye States’ 1984 law that protects collective bargaining rights for public employees.

Kasich attacked public employees during the campaign and Cleveland Plain Dealer columnist Brent Larkin writes:

Kasich and the Republican-run legislature might just propose changes to Ohio’s collective-bargaining laws that precipitate an epic fight with Democrats and their allies in organized labor.

But Andy Richards, Ohio AFL-CIO Field Communications staffer, says workers in Middletown last night won one of the first skirmishes in the battle to protect workers’ rights. He files this report.

More than 100 union members and their allies packed the Middletown City Council chambers to show strong opposition and speak out against a resolution calling on the state legislature to weaken the current collective bargaining law. The council voted 6 to 1 to table the resolution. After the meeting, Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local 336 President John Harvey said the council

took a strong stand tonight in support of our community and the middle class. As a proud fire fighter, I work hard everyday to provide the best services to residents in Middletown and Butler County.  This resolution would have put our services at risk by taking away a process that has provided stability and cooperation between workers and local, county and state government agencies.

Ohio AFL-CIO President Joe Rugola said “Ohioans and workers know this resolution would have been a step in the wrong direction for communities across the state.”

The collective bargaining law has helped to create a relationship between workers and public administrators that has fostered greater consistency and stability in delivery of services.

UPDATE, 7:30 p.m. (EST)—The public safety officers collective bargaining bill (S. 3991) failed to win cloture (60 votes are needed) by a 55-43 vote, with threeDemocrats joining Republicans in blocking a vote on the bill. The three are Sen. Michael Bennett (D-Colo.), Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) and Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.).  

Republicans also led the fight to defeat the $250 Social Security cost of living adjustment supplemental payment legislation (S. 3985). The motion to end the filibuster failed by a 53-45 vote. The four Democrats and Independent who voted to block the cost of living adjustment are Sen. Russ Feingold (Wisc.) Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) Sen. Joe Lieberman, (I-Conn.), Hagan and Warner.

Four vital bills for working families are set for action in the U.S. Senate later today and this evening, but all four will need 60 votes to shut off  Republican filibusters.  Most Senate Republicans oppose the bills and Republican leaders have vowed to halt all Senate action until the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy are brought to a vote.

The bills scheduled for cloture votes today are:

• The 9/11 first responders health care bill (H.R. 847);
• Collective bargaining rights for public safety officers (S. 3991);
• A one-time $250 cost of living adjustment for Social Security recipients (S. 3985); and
• The DREAM Act (S. 3992). Click here for more on the DREAM Act.

The House passed the 9/11 health care bill 268 to 160 in September, with 13 Republican votes. But Senate action stalled amid reports that Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was the major stumbling block.

The bill would provide long-term medical care and monitoring for the first responders, recovery workers and others exposed to the Ground Zero toxic mix of chemicals, jet fuel, asbestos, lead, glass fragments and other debris.

More than 13,000 World Trade Center responders are sick and receiving treatment. Nearly 53,000 responders are enrolled in medical monitoring. Some 71,000 are enrolled in the World Trade Center health registry, indicating that they were exposed to the toxins.

The collective bargaining bill—the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act—protects the freedom of firefighters and other public safety officers to join unions.

More than 20 states do not fully protect those bargaining rights, and two states—Virginia and North Carolina—prohibit public safety employees from collectively bargaining.

The legislation guarantees first responders:

• The right to join a union.
• The right to have their union recognized by their employer.
• The right to bargain collectively over hours, wages and terms and conditions of employment.
• A fact-finding, mediation or arbitration process for resolving an impasse in negotiations.
• Enforcement of these rights, and of written contracts, through state courts.

Today’s cloture votes, says Fire Fighters (IAFF) President Harold Schaitberger, will ensure all senators have a chance to:

to demonstrate publicly whether or not they stand with professional firefighters. It’s that simple.

The $250 Social Security supplemental payment in S. 3985 is designed to help offset the lack of a cost of living adjustment for Social Security recipients for the second year in a row. In March, Republicans blocked an amendment for a $250 supplemental payment for Social Security recipients.

Edward Coyle, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, says the payment would be a boost to Social Security recipients,

many of whom have seen their retirement savings and home values badly shaken by this economic crisis….The purchasing needs of seniors are unique, and often include medications needed to stay alive.

House Republicans this afternoon led the charge to defeat (254-153) that chamber’s bill calling for the supplemental payment.  The bill was considered under a procedure called suspension of the rules which requires a two-thirds majority necessary to pass.