Congress gets it right on Haiti

Legislation approved by Congress earlier this month to give the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere some reach into U.S. textile markets may not qualify as a Christmas season miracle. But it surely is an unexpected victory for the beleaguered Haitian people and for those who overcame formidable obstacles to make it happen.

First, some background.

The conclusion of a Congressional session is, even in the best of times, an untidy affair. And the messy wrap-up to the 109th Congress -- the Senate adjourned at 4:40 a.m. on Dec. 9 -- was no exception.

The usual interest group scramble to get last-minute priorities included in whatever piece of legislation seems likely to move in the rush to get out of town was worse than usual. Because Democrats are to take control of both Houses in January, lobbyists tied to the outgoing Republican majority had one last clear shot at the public trough. They made the most of it.

Weary lawmakers approved additional oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, authorized $38 billion in tax cuts, and expanded dubious “health savings accounts.” In an amazing act of outright negligence, Congress failed to act on the most basic of legislation -- 10 of the 12 appropriations bills that were scheduled to be completed last fall. Instead, lawmakers passed yet another continuing budget resolution, meaning that one of the first orders of business for the next Congress will be to fund the government for the remainder of the current fiscal year.

A sorry state of affairs, no doubt.

But in that last minute rush, and against significant opposition, both the House and Senate approved measures that incorporated the language of “The Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act.” The legislation gives trade preference to textiles produced in Haiti, where 10 percent of the meager gross domestic product is tied to that industry. The need is obvious: The per capita income of Haitians is less than $400 a year, poverty so great that life expectancy is just 53 years.

Opponents of the initiative included lawmakers from textile-producing states, such as North Carolina’s Elizabeth Dole and South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham. Leading the push for the legislation, meanwhile, was a coalition of conservative free traders and religiously motivated human rights activists, not least the U.S. Catholic church and Catholic Relief Services.

“The Catholic church has emerged as a strong champion for the Haiti provision, which to help spur industry there allows fabric from other countries to be used in the manufacture of duty-free goods destined to the [United States]. Domestic textile producers say it creates an effective loophole for low-cost apparel makers in China, but the Catholic bishops argue that Haiti, the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, deserves special attention,” wrote The Wall Street Journal’s David Rogers on the eve of the vote.

In unusually blunt language, Bishop Thomas Wenski, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ international policy committee, urged textile industry lobbying groups to back off. “Pitting hard-working manufacturers in our country against the poorest of the poor in Haiti and Africa is a disservice to the dignity all workers,” Wenski said in a statement prior to the vote. “While civil discussions and candid disagreements over the impact of trade agreements are reasonable conversations to have in a democracy, playing to the fears of anxious workers is irresponsible and reduces the debate over trade agreements to shallow sound bites.”

In a Dec. 5 letter, Wenski joined other religious leaders -- Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of the Episcopal church, Bishop Mark S. Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Rev. Felix Ortiz-Cotto of United Church of Christ, and James Winkler, general secretary of the United Methodist church -- in urging Congress to pass a measure they said was “essential to the future prosperity and security of the Haitian people, particularly when coupled with steps to generate employment and economic development.”

The religious leaders had some skillful advocates within Congress, not least Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio. DeWine, defeated in a re-election bid last month, has long had an interest in U.S.-Haiti policy. In 2004, he authored the original Haiti trade legislation. The two-term senator has visited Haiti more than a dozen times and a school in Cité-Soleil is named after his daughter, Becky, who died in a car accident. When Dole threatened to kill the broader trade bill that contained the Haiti initiative, DeWine responded that he would make sure the legislation died unless it contained the trade preferences for Haiti.

Dole, and other textile protectionists, blinked.

DeWine’s interest in Haiti, like his strong advocacy for anti-AIDS initiatives in Africa, was never politically motivated. There were few votes in Ohio that would be changed because of his stance. But almost no one would have noticed if the lame duck senator in his final hours in office simply walked away from the obscure debate about trade preferences for a country that barely registers in U.S. consciousness. DeWine, and those who worked for years to give a boost to Haiti’s battered economy, should be applauded for fighting the good fight. And for winning it.

National Catholic Reporter, December 22, 2006