Legislative — 10

Aerospace / Defense
The IAM has been urging the adoption of policies promoting a strong U.S. aerospace industry and responding to government-subsidized competition abroad. The IAM represents more workers in the aerospace industry than any other union. Keeping our aerospace industry strong is vital to the health of the U.S. economy. Aerospace industry related exports are by far the larger in percentage of the gross national product than any other industry in America and create 600,000 U.S. jobs.

The IAM has consistently supported and pushed for stronger enforcement of existing trade laws, incentives for the purchase of American made aircraft, disincentives for outsourcing of work to foreign manufacturers, and curbing the use of performance requirements, such as offsets—the transfer of technology and production.

The IAM has also supported funding for the Export Import bank, which provides loans and financial assistance to countries purchasing big-ticket items, such as aircraft and other aerospace components.

NASA—The IAM continues to fight for funding for programs such as the space station. Funding for NASA is not only important for the jobs it provides our members, but it also keeps the U.S. at the forefront in advanced technology and space exploration.

Defense—The IAM has fought for the 767 tanker program. This program contains a lease and purchase agreement of 100 American-made 767 tankers for the United States Air Force. We also fought for, and succeeded obtaining funding for, the F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, C-130 and the C-17 as well as other defense programs that provide livelihoods for our members and their families.

Buy America—The Buy America Act requires that items purchased for the defense of the United States must be at least 50 percent made in the U.S.A. Unfortunately, the Department of Defense (DOD) has sought, and in many instances was granted, exceptions to the Buy America Act. These tactics, compounded by offset agreements, memorandums of understanding with other countries and content manipulation, have greatly contributed to the decline of our domestic defense production. The American defense industry has been dealt two serious setbacks by the Bush Administration: diminished resources and the loss of high skilled technology jobs. The IAM will work to strengthen and demand the strict enforcement of the Buy America Act, and oppose any attempts to amend or weaken this law.

Trade
The IAM vigorously opposes trade agreements that ignore the interests of workers, both foreign and domestic, while catering to the demands of corporate and multinational institutions. It has been our longstanding position that the IAM will commit resources necessary to defeat such agreements that 1) Result in massive job loss in the U.S. and 2) Do not fully ensure that the rights and interests of workers are fully addressed and supported with enforceable protections.

Fast-Track—The Republican leadership used their majority status to jam fast track authority through during the 107th Congress. This undemocratic authority deprives members of Congress from amending any portions of a pending trade agreement. The passage of Fast Track trade negotiating authority by both the House and the Senate set the stage for a new wave of NAFTA-style trade agreements. After leaving the gavel open well beyond the 15 minute allotted time for votes, the U.S. House of Representatives was able to sell out American workers when they coerced a few members of Congress to switch their votes, and approved Fast Track by one vote margin of 215 to 214. The Senate also passed their version of Fast Track legislation. Differences in the two versions meant the final bill had to be hammered out in a House and Senate conference committee. Negotiators from the House and the Senate met behind closed doors and rammed through a final version that stripped worker friendly provisions out of the Senate version and also gutted language to stop illegal dumping of imports into the U.S. President Bush and his successors now have a blank check to negotiate trade agreements that will harm working families.

FTAA—The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) treaty is a near-clone of NAFTA and would spread NAFTA-like affects to 34 countries in the Northern and Southern hemispheres. But NAFTA’s negatives appear to be of little concern to the leaders of those nations now shaping the proposed trade deal. In fact, they say NAFTA is their model. It is a seriously flawed model.

NAFTA’s main outcome has been to strengthen the clout and bargaining power of multinational corporations, to limit the scope of governments to regulate in the public interest and to force workers into more direct competition with each other-reinforcing the downward pressure on their living standards, while assuring them fewer rights and protections. New reports on NAFTA’s impact on jobs and its contribution to the erosion of workers’ rights are frightening previews of what is in store if the trade deal is expanded more than tenfold by the adoption of the FTAA.

CAFTA—The Bush administration reached a free trade agreement (“Central American Free Trade Agreement”) with four Central American countries, setting up a tough trade fight in Congress this year. The trade accord would allow more than 80 percent of U.S. consumer and industrial products into Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Honduras duty-free as soon as it went into force. That figure would rise to 85 percent within five years and 100 percent in a decade. CAFTA will serve as the model for future bilateral and regional agreements. It would eliminate tariffs and give these Central American countries similar trade and investment preferences to those extended to Mexico. The IAM continues to oppose new trade agreements such as FTAA and CAFTA, because the model of economic integration that has been incorporated into these agreements, as embodied in NAFTA and the WTO, has devastated workers in this country and abroad. Unless new legislation incorporates fundamental changes in the approach to trade negotiations and trade policy, we will continue to use all our resources in opposition of these job destroying agreements.