July 12-29, 2005
Printable version (pdf)
July 11, 2005 – Dignity in Work
Suggested Scripture:
Deuteronomy 24:10-15
CAFTA Facts: CAFTA will expand industries rife with labor abuses. Often these jobs are characterized by low wages, long hours, incredibly difficult working conditions, and few or no labor protections. In Central America (as in the United States), many workers in these sectors already report being denied the opportunity to take breaks (even to use the bathroom), reprimanded for talking with coworkers, and severe reprisals and harassment for attempting to form unions to fight for dignified working conditions and wages. Many women, the majority who work in the maquilas, also report sexual harassment and discrimination. Many work places lack sufficient toilet facilities, do not provide workers with protective equipment or instructions on the safe-handling of dangerous chemicals -- increasing the dangers they face. At the same time that CAFTA is expanding bad jobs in these factory settings, jobs will be lost in
agriculture and small- and- medium sized businesses as a result of competition with U.S. companies. These displaced workers will be pushed into the informal sector, as street vendors, domestic workers, home workers -- jobs which are outside existing labor laws. CAFTA supports a race to the bottom in labor standards and will negatively affect the dignity of work.
Reflective Action: Keep a tablet next to your desk and note every time you step away from your desk in one day -- whether to go to the bathroom, to get a drink or just to stretch your legs. Imagine having to ask permission for each time you want to get up and in some cases even being denied that request. These are the labor conditions which thousands of women, men and children must endure and which CAFTA permits.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 12, 2005 – Families, Migration and CAFTA
Suggested Scripture:
Numbers 15:14-16; Leviticus 19:33-34
CAFTA Facts: Since CAFTA is modeled after the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), we can expect many outcomes to be similar. CAFTA will destroy small and medium-size businesses in key sectors (particularly in rural areas) of Central America. Imports of subsidized agricultural goods from the U.S. will drive thousands of small farmers off their land. These dislocations will create an influx of vulnerable individuals and families migrating to Central American cities and the U.S. to have a better life. Many families are torn as apart as mothers and fathers, daughters and sons are forced to migrate out of economic necessity. Today, we in the U.S. lack the capacity to protect the human rights of the current Central American and Mexican immigrant population, (many of whom are undocumented) working in the U.S. By signing CAFTA, we do not increase the wealth for Central Americans. Rather, we further destabilize their status in an economy that is so linked to migration.
Reflective Action: Make time today to visit with or call an immediate family member or other family member living nearby. Spend time together just listening to honestly see how he/she is doing, take time to share your joys and concerns and enjoy each other’s company. Pray together in thanksgiving or meditate on the blessing that you live close enough to enjoy each other's company and aren't pulled away from each other through economic structures that leave no option but to migrate far from home in search of employment.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 13, 2005 – Leaving Behind the Sick
Suggested Scripture:
John 1:1-5; Luke 7:1-16
CAFTA Facts: According to the international organization Medicines Sans Frontiers (Doctors without Borders), CAFTA’s chapter on intellectual-property rights [IPR] would “prevent the marketing approval of generic medicines if a patented version of the product is registered.” By restricting access to safety research data done for patented drugs, CAFTA utilizes a backdoor strategy to delay the production of generic alternatives. This trade rule unnecessarily props up drug prices for lifesaving medicines, putting them further out of reach for those most in need.
There are an estimated 275,000 people infected with HIV in the Central America. Of an estimated 80,000 HIV-positive Guatemalans, only 3,600 receive life-prolonging antiretroviral treatment. "If a medicine is protected for five years and it's the one I need to buy, what will happen? I'll die," said Rosa, a HIV positive protester from eastern Guatemala.
Reflective Action: Think about someone close to you who is experiencing a serious illness. Reflect, in whatever way you see fit, on all the joy and happiness that person brings to your life and the lives of those around them. Now, imagine how painful it would be for that person, and those close to them, not to have access to the medicines he or she needed. Not having access to medicine impacts not only the ill individual, but also his or her whole community and support network. Imagine the ripple effects that not having access to medication will have throughout Central America and the Dominican Republic. Take a moment to write a note to a sick friend or relative to let them know that you are thinking about him/her. If you can make the time, you may want to consider volunteering at a local hospice or hospital.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 14, 2005 – The Hillsides are Wrapped in Joy
Suggested Scripture:
Psalm 65: 9-13
CAFTA Facts: Central America is one of the most biodiversity rich regions on the planet, with more than 8% of all living species in the world. Numerous tropical areas are identified as “critical regions” that require the protection of biodiversity. Moreover, three out of four migratory bird routes in the Western Hemisphere pass through Central America -- making the forests in this tiny strip of land an essential habitat for the survival of 225 species of birds.
In the midst of already fragile ecological zones, Central America is battling with a wide range of environmental problems. Central America has already lost more than 70% of its forest cover, and the depletion of forests has led to increased soil erosion, the deterioration of watersheds, and decreased biodiversity. Urban pollution, including air pollution, low levels of sewage and solid waste treatment, and chemical and pesticide runoff into water supplies, are rampant. CAFTA would only exacerbate the existing problems in the region by opening Central America to substantial changes in industrial and agricultural development, many of which would worsen the environmental situation if left unregulated.
(Adapted from the Testimony of David F. Waskow, Director of the International Program of Friends of the Earth, before the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, April 28, 2005)
Reflective Action:
Take a moment to think back on how the natural landscape of your community has changed as businesses and homes have been built. How has the quality of life in your community changed as a result of this development? Have these changes impacted you spiritually, physically, mentally? What are ways you can support the preservation or reintroduction of nature in your community? Some ideas that we’ve come up with are to start composting at home, volunteer for a community garden, work for historic preservation of rural communities and environmentally-friendly zoning policies.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 15, 2005 – Water for Life vs. Water for Profit
Suggested Scripture:
John 5:1-9; Matthew 25:31-46; Proverbs 9
CAFTA Facts: CAFTA could have an enormous impact on the quality of the hemisphere’s water, on who has access to it, and on who controls that access. It does so by implicitly defining water – and just about every other aspect of our lives – as a “good” or commodity, as a “service,” as an “investment,” and in relation to the process by which governments purchase goods and services. In doing so, CAFTA trumps national, state, and local laws and turns one of our life-giving resources from something to be shared by all into something that is sold to the highest bidder.
Water, once a resource obtained primarily from private wells or municipal utilities, is increasingly provided on a commercial basis by private firms. Although corporations claim privatization is a way to extend access, their profit-driven strategies have proven to do the opposite for those most in need, often raising the cost of water. Under CAFTA, laws or regulations affecting the sale of water could be challenged under investment, services, or other parts of the agreement. The ability of the state and local authorities to regulate extraction of water destined for international commerce or, in some cases,the operation of water utilities would be limited by CAFTA's provisions.
Reflective Action: Put 25 cents in a jar for each gallon of water that your household uses in a day - including showering, flushing, cooking, brushing your teeth, washing your car, watering your lawn, etc. If water is privatized under CAFTA, Central Americans will pay higher prices for water access. This is of particular concern for those already teetering on the edge of object poverty. Donate the total amount of money collected from your day’s water usage to your place of worship or favorite charity.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 18, 2005 – Cementing the Chains of Debt
Suggested Scripture:
Matthew 18:23-35
CAFTA Facts: Groups calling for debt cancellation have widely criticized CAFTA’s rules for embodying a model of development that is certain to maintain, if not worsen, the debt woes of its developing country members. Many countries in Central America must use large amounts of their budgets to pay creditors. Under classic trade rules embedded in CAFTA, it is required that participating countries offer foreign creditors no less favorable treatment than that offered to domestic creditors, making it very difficult for the state to prioritize repayment to domestic creditors. Among the domestic debts that the state will not be able to prioritize under CAFTA are wages and pensions. In other words, the government is bound to treat these debts the same way that it deals with foreign debts held by transnational banks and institutional investors. If a country’s resources are enough just to cover a portion of its debts, they will not be able to choose to direct those funds to pay wages and pensions (at least not as long as it does not devote equal amount to pay foreign creditors).
Reflective Action: Think of the debt that you owe (mortgage, student loan, credit cards). Imagine if you were very restricted in which debt you could pay off, if you had to pay off the same amount to both high and low interest debts, rather than pay more towards the high interest debt. Imagine if your creditors were able to force you to forego spending on feeding your family, paying for your child’s education or health care costs just so you could repay your debt. Now imagine if you were being forced to pay back someone else’s debt and there were no means of relief. Take a moment to pray for the government leaders who are constrained by sovereign debt and the families in Central America who suffer when public spending is cut from essential services like education or health care.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 19, 2005 – Public Interests Take a Backseat to Corporate Profits
Suggested Scripture:
Genesis 1:1-31.
CAFTA Facts: Under CAFTA's investment chapter (Chapter 10), foreign investors must be compensated for a direct or indirect expropriation (or takeover) of their investment. Thus, foreign corporations can directly file disputes against their host governments when the company feels that its expected profits have been diminished by a physical taking of their property or even by a regulation put in place to protect the public good but limits future profits. Using these investor rules under CAFTA, it might be possible for a foreign owner of U.S. property to challenge government changes in zoning regulations if it believes the change reduces its property values. Such a dispute would not be heard in a local court, but would be taken to a panel of arbitrators. The local governments' perspective would be represented by the federal government, not by the State’s own Attorney General or lawyers for the municipality involved in the dispute. Under similar rules in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a Canadian company has claimed California's ban on their product MTBE (a gasoline additive proven to poison ground water) is an indirect expropriation of its investment. The company, Methanex, has asked for nearly one billion dollars of compensation for the loss of future sales. The case is still in process. Under NAFTA, several other companies have won millions in compensation by claiming that environmental and consumer protection laws created unfair limits on their ability to sell their products. These rules give foreign company greater power than local governments and domestic companies.
Reflective Action: If you are able, you may want to go outdoors for this reflection. Take a moment to think about your favorite spot in nature – a mountain forest, a stream, the ocean. Try to imagine that you want to preserve this setting by passing environmental regulations to protect threatened wildlife or place stricter limits on pollution. As things are now it will probably be a difficult fight, but imagine how much more difficult it would be under CAFTA if a foreign company is producing a product in your community that is negatively impacting the environment in this habitat and could sue for millions of dollars in compensation if new environmental regulations are passed. Spend a few moments in silence reflecting on the beauty and wonder of the created world.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 20, 2005 – Limiting State and Local Spending
Suggested Scripture:
Daniel 3: 13-18 and 1 Maccabees 1:1-9
CAFTA Facts: CAFTA has a chapter that deals with how governments can award contracts to the suppliers of goods and services, a process called government procurement. Many state and local governments have used government spending to build up local economies, help minority and disadvantaged groups gain an economic foothold, or to support companies that share community values. For example, in the past many state governments have awarded contracts to companies that pay a livable wage that is locally determined or have targeted contracts to local providers of goods and services. Still other governments used their purchasing practices to avoid goods made by child labor or in countries with oppressive regimes (like the anti-apartheid sanctions of the 1980s).
Under CAFTA, government agencies have to treat foreign companies the same as domestic ones. Thus CAFTA may limit government from passing anti-offshoring policies that would require taxpayer funded jobs to stay in the country (e.g. with call-centers). Although CAFTA contains a carve-out that allows the U.S. to utilize policies that give preferences for contracting with woman- and minority-owned businesses, there is no such carve-out for small businesses. Similar to CAFTA’s treatment of foreign investors, any dispute over procurement policy would be settled by an arbitration panel, behind closed doors.
Reflective Action: Take a moment to think of those friends and family who have lost jobs in the past 10 years. Have any of those jobs been lost to companies moving over seas or contracting the work with an overseas provider? Have people found comparable jobs? How has your community or family been impacted by these lost jobs? Think about the locally-owned businesses in your area and what a vital role they and their owners play in maintaining not only the economy of the community, but the sense of community/neighborhood too. The next time you run errands, try to frequent only locally-owned businesses.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 21, 2005 – CAFTA Governments Favor Corporations Over the Poor
Suggested Scripture:
Psalm 72:1-20
CAFTA Facts: CAFTA is an undemocratic agreement that was negotiated in secret and did not include the meaningful participation and support of a broad cross-section of civil society in the U.S. or Central America. Instead the agreement was heavily influenced by the interests of only the largest corporations and industry leaders. The influence is evident in CAFTA’s language. In terms of health care, for example, CAFTA opens up the privatization of health services in Central America and extends the patent protection of brand-name medicines, but fails to take account of public health interests. The text of CAFTA was only made public when it was finally agreed upon so it was nearly impossible to know which public services would be affected in the negotiations. This blatant lack of transparency and democratic participation is resulting in growing unrest. More than 8,000 Guatemalans protested against CAFTA in March, 2005. Tens of thousands of workers in El Salvador demanded that their legislature vote down CAFTA. In Costa Rica, 30,000 demonstrators took to the street to voice their opposition. Proponents of CAFTA assert that “…CAFTA [is] as much a security issue as it is an economic issue – for them and for us. By approving CAFTA, the United States will bolster the advocates of freedom and openness in Latin America” (Donald Rumsfeld in the Duluth News Tribune (MN) June 11, 2005 “Hemisphere’s Security Tied to CAFTA’s Passage”). However, from its inception to its ratification, CAFTA is doing just the opposite and is promoting exclusion, non-transparency, and the abrogation of democratic rights.
Reflective Action: Think back on the various types of decision-making you have experienced in your own life. Perhaps you have experienced a top-down approach at work, or participatory democracy in your local government or place of worship, or even decision-making by consensus in a social movement or a personal relationship. How were decisions reached? Did a few individuals make the decision and impose it on everyone else? Was the process characterized by discussion, compromise and innovation by a much larger representative group or even the whole group? Were you included in the decision-making process? How did you feel about the process and final outcome? How do you think those who were not included felt? Who benefited from the decision? Who was harmed? Which processes yielded greater justice?
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 22, 2005 – Robbing the Poor through an Oppressive Statute
Suggested Scripture:
Micah 6:8; Isaiah 10:1-2
CAFTA Facts: At the moment, the very same model on which CAFTA is based is failing the poorest people in Mexico. Although the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has brought more investment to Mexico’s border towns, it has been at a high cost. Nobel Laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz has described NAFTA’s impact on Mexico within the first decade: poor Mexican farmers have faced an uphill battle in their effort to compete with highly subsidized American corn, local small-sized enterprises have lost access to credit from foreign-owned banks, growth has slowed, income disparities between the U.S. and Mexico grew and real wages have fallen (“Broken promises of NAFTA”, New York Times, 1/6/04). It would be simplistic to state that these problems in Mexico are entirely due to NAFTA. However, the reality is the wealthy are benefiting from the same trading system that is harming the poor.
In the U.S. too, income inequality is on the rise. In The State of Working America 2004/2005, the Economic Policy Institute reports that from 1979 to 2001, the average income of lowest fifth of the U.S. population increased from $14,100 to $14,900 - only $800. In contrast, the highest fifth of the U.S. saw their average income grow from $119,100 to $182,700 during that same period. This disparity becomes even more dramatic when you look at the top 1% of incomes in the U.S. who saw their average real income increase from $466,800 to $1,050,100. Evidence suggests that trade liberalization is not always the best way to reduce poverty. Neither is blanket protectionism. What is needed is a new economic system of trade justice that ensures that trade rules should prioritize the needs of poor people.
Reflective Action: One way to understand income inequality is to consider the quality and quantity of the food that the poor, the middle class, and the wealthy eat. Imagine that you have gone to buffet or party that is overflowing with delicious dishes: the ripest fruit, savory meats and side dishes, luscious desserts - and the supply of food seems endless. For many of us we may not have to stretch our imaginations to remember such an event, and it’s likely we remember “stuffing ourselves” on all the good food. But now imagine that you are a member of global poor, the poorest of the world’s population – 60% of all people? You don’t get to go to the buffet. You can smell the food, you can practically taste it, but you must wait. And in fact, you will only get a few bites – of rice and water. It’s not much to live on.
If you’re interested in moving from imagination to experience, try fasting for the remainder of today or tomorrow. As your thoughts turn to food, pray for those who do not have enough to eat, for the poor who will suffer even more under CAFTA.
You may also consider organizing a Hunger Banquet at your place of worship, social organization, or even as a dinner party. Oxfam’s Hunger Banquet Planning Kit is a great resource for organizing this powerful illustration of global inequality. It is available online at www.oxfamamerica.org.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 25, 2005 – Robbing Small Farmers
Suggested Scripture:
2 Timothy 2:1-7
CAFTA Facts: There are an estimated 80,000 rice producers in CAFTA nations and 1.5 million people depend on rice production. Through CAFTA these countries will be forced to eliminate import tariffs on rice, the U.S. will continue to maintain generous subsidies for domestic rice producers. In 2003, the U.S. provided support to rice producers to the tune of $1.3 billion – eclipsing Nicaragua’s entire federal budget of $900 million for 2004. Huge agri-business reaps the profits, as 20% of U.S. rice producers receive 85% of price support revenues. Plus, the hefty subsidies mean that U.S. rice can be exported at a price below its cost of production. For example the cost of rice production in the U.S. is $9.05/100 lbs (without transport costs), almost a dollar above the cost in Nicaragua of $8.14/100 lbs. Yet, the U.S. exports rice to Nicaragua at an average price of $7.32/100 lbs. Because of subsidies, even competitive farmers in Central America can’t compete with the artificially low price in the U.S.
Reflective Action: Seek out your local farmers’ market and take a moment to speak with the growers about their livelihoods as farmers. Possible questions include:
• What has the process been from seed to market?
• How does that small farmer see a market for his or her products in the U.S.?
• How much does it cost to have a booth at the market?
• What happens when a big company ships in a product at below market cost?
• Do the small producers have access to the local grocery stores and super markets?
Don’t forget to pick up some fresh fruits and vegetables before heading home!
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 26, 2005 – Tilting the Scales on Sugar
Suggested Scripture:
Amos 8:4-7
CAFTA Facts: You may have read that U.S. sugar producers strongly oppose CAFTA. The U.S. sugar program is the only major U.S. commodity program that guarantees fair prices to farmers, operates at no cost to taxpayers and prevents export dumping at below the cost of production. However, the program relies on maintaining a careful balance of supply and demand. It is essential to the maintenance of the sugar program for imports not to exceed a Congressionally mandated “trigger level” of 1.39 million metric tons of sugar imported into the U.S. If sugar imports do exceed the trigger level, which they could with CAFTA’s increased imports from Central America, the three-tiered approach of the program would be knocked out of balance. These events would dramatically lower prices paid to sugar farmers. As prices drop, U.S. sugar producers and sugar mills would go out of business – but the negative effects would not be limited to U.S. sugar growers. Prices would also drop for Central American sugar producers selling in the U.S. and it is not likely that they will be able to make up in volume what they lose in price by gaining a greater share of the U.S. domestic market.
Don’t be fooled into thinking that lower sugar prices mean lower prices for consumers, in the U.S. between 1984 and 1998, consumer prices for a basic basket of foods increased by 3 percent, while the prices farmer’s received fell 36 percent. [Taylor, R.E (1999, Jan. 26). Economic Concentration in Agribusiness. Written testimony before the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.] .
Note: Unless otherwise noted, the information on CAFTA and the U.S. sugar program is taken from the International Agriculture and Trade Policy report, Sweet or Sour? The U.S. Sugar Program and Threats Posed by DR-CAFTA (April, 2005). The report is available online at www.iatp.org.
Reflective Action: Look at the labels of everything you eat in one day. Count every product that has sugar in it. Pray for the sugar beet and cane farmers in the United States and Central America who will loose their livelihood under CAFTA.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 27, 2005 – The Exploitation of One Woman
Suggested Scripture:
Luke 10:1-7, James 5:1-6
CAFTA Facts: The reflection from July 11, 2005 focused on the poor conditions and abuses in the industries CAFTA will promote in Central America. For today, Carolina Sic, a worker and union organizer in an export apparel factory in Guatemala City, Guatemala will share her story.
Carolina’s Story
[Inside the maquila] It was really hot. The atmosphere was really tense also, because you couldn’t leave. They would say, ‘Hurry up! We’ve got to make the goal!’ They’d scold you. They’d use offensive words. They’d say they weren’t going to give you your salary. We would want to leave, but they would make us stay later and then not pay us overtime—instead they’d just pay like it was regular hours. I wasn’t used to being treated like that, because I’d only worked in workshops before, with my mom, and they hadn’t treated us like that. In this factory though, the pressure was extreme, but since all of us needed the job, we dealt with it…[After the first strike] [t]he company fired us—46. [Afterwards], the majority of us were able to get our jobs back because the company didn’t want to pay severance for us all. They lowered our pay for 15 days for having gone on strike…
After leading a series of strikes at the union and working through the full-term of her pregnancy, Carolina was repeatedly not credited for the full hours she worked, was suspended many days each pay period, and saw her meager social security benefits docked because her employer reported less than a third of her earnings.
So now I was nine months along, and one Saturday we were working when I felt some pains and knew I was going to have the baby. When I asked for permission to leave, since I might be going into labor, they wouldn’t give it to me. They said overtime was obligatory until 4:30 pm. I felt so awful at that point. So I worked that day until 4:30 pm, with labor pains that had started at 1:00 pm. I gave birth early Sunday morning.
Despite the official recognition of their union in December 2003, Carolina and her co-workers continue to face threats and harassment while their collective bargaining agreement remains unsettled. As of August 2004 there were only three unions in the Guatemala maquila sector, which officially employs just over 140,000 workers.
Source: Pushing Back: Women Workers Speak Out on Free Trade. STITCH, August 2004.
CAFTA would support these troubling tendencies and undermine women’s fundamental labor rights. The investment rules in CAFTA that favor profit over people coupled with current labor practices in Central American maquiladoras, make it unlikely that any jobs created under CAFTA would be stable and well paid. In addition, CAFTA’s language on labor rights do not address problems such as sexual harassment and discrimination, which could have serious repercussions on women who work in the maquiladora sector through the region.
In Carolina’s words:
What we would agree with, for the workers of Guatemala, would be to have more work, but not just maquila jobs. Instead, I think there could be other kinds of work, something that gives Guatemalan workers opportunities. The maquila only pays enough for beans and tortillas. You lose your whole day being exploited, the pay is so low.
Reflective Action: Write down a list of where all of the products that you're wearing one day are made and pray for the garment workers and other maquila workers in those countries over your lunch. Pray that the economic systems we create provide dignity, justice, and opportunity to workers everywhere.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 28, 2005 – Healthy People vs. Healthy Profits
Suggested Scripture:
Luke 10:25-37
CAFTA Facts: As we mentioned in the July 13, 2005 reflection, CAFTA places severe restrictions on the production of generic drugs by creating rules that extend pharmaceutical patents through delayed approval and production of generic drugs by 5 to 10 years. Before it was even ratified in Guatemala, CAFTA was already impacting public health policy. Last year, the Guatemalan Congress passed legislation to allow the sale of generic drugs to give its citizens more consumer choice and to bring down the price of name-brand drugs. Consumers in Guatemala cheered them on.
Then the U.S. drug industry, where the annual revenues of the major drug makers are three times the combined gross domestic product of the six Central American CAFTA countries (New York Times “Drug lobby got a victory in trade pact vote” 7/2/05), and its allies in the Bush Administration moved in. Even though international trade law through the World Trade Organization (WTO) allows for the sale of generic medicines in member countries, the U.S. CAFTA negotiators told Guatemalan leaders that there will be no CAFTA unless the Guatemalan government gives the drug companies what they want. Not surprising, and against the vociferous opposition of millions of Guatemalans, the government repealed its own public health law. Police used tear gas and water cannons to disperse the crowds after demonstrators hurled rocks and bottles at them. Many were arrested and detained. In one of the demonstrations, a protester was killed by police and many were injured.
CAFTA effectively shuts the door for Guatemala and the other Central American countries to protect their citizens’ rights to affordable medicines.
Reflective Action: Clean out your medicine cabinet today (a good thing to do every once and a while anyway) and count how many generic and over the counter medicines you have. For prescription drugs, estimate what the cost of the medicines would be without insurance to cover the fees. Take a moment to think how your health, or that of your family, would be without access to affordable medicines.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
July 29, 2005 – Food for the Hungry
Suggested Scripture:
Matthew 12:1-8 and Mark 8:1-10
CAFTA Facts: The majority of the two poorest groups in Central America, indigenous people and women, reside in rural areas and are involved in agriculture. Under CAFTA their way of life would be severely threatened. CAFTA privileges agribusinesses that promote the production of cash crops, jeopardizing the food security of over half the people in Central America whose livelihoods depend on family farms. CAFTA would increase the cost of basic necessities borne by women. The flood of foreign goods into the local markets throughout Central America caused by CAFTA, would not only force out local competition, but also increase prices of basic commodities; and, along with prices, increase the number of households living in poverty. Even more numbers would face poverty as small- and medium-size businesses close in Central America, forcing workers out of secure formal employment and into insecure informal employment (e.g. street vending or home cottage industry).
Reflective Action: For tonight, plan your evening meal on less than $5.00 total, not per person. Take a moment to pray or reflect over the meal that while this may be an unusually humble meal for your family there are those who survive like this daily - and with even less under CAFTA.
If you would like to share your thoughts on CAFTA with your Representative in Congress, click here.
Back to the top
For More Information Contact:
U.S. Interfaith Trade Justice Campaign
1225 Otis St. NE, Washington, DC 20012
202.635.2757 E-mail: info@tradejustice.org
