For long term, free trade is best policy

CAFTA is wonderful. CAFTA is horrible. It depends on whom you ask. "CAFTA could not stand on its merits," According to U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota. "The Administration recognized that the facts were not on the side of CAFTA and resorted to sleazy Washington deals. The checkbook was opened and deals were made right up until the last minute to force CAFTA through in the dark of night."

All three of Nebraska's representatives in the House voted for the Central American Free Trade Agreement, saying it would open up new markets for beef, pork, corn and soybeans.

Sugar beet growers have concerns, however, worried that cheap Central American sugar will flood the market. U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel doesn't buy it, however, saying a sugar quota is in place to limit imports to less than 1 percent of the daily sugar production in America.

Free trade will be the result of CAFTA, signed by the involved countries a year ago, eventually eliminates tariffs and other trade barriers between the United States and Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic.

Democrats said the agreement leaves U.S. workers vulnerable to losing their jobs, and Latin American workers vulnerable to sweatshop conditions.

The Bush Administration, however, insists CAFTA will enhance security, stability and freedom in the Western Hemisphere. CAFTA will be good for farm exports, and should be good for consumers with better prices.

As usual, there will be pain as the economy adjusts to new competition from Central America. But free trade will always be better in the long term than artificial barriers.