I n 2000, in order to spur development, democratic reforms and economic stability, Congress unilaterally opened up our markets to Latin American nations. As a result 99 percent of agricultural products and 75 percent of manufactured goods from Central American nations and the Dominican Republic now enter the United States duty free. That fact alone makes the Central Americans’ Free Trade Agreement CAFTA a no-brainer.

Today, U. S. farmers and manufacturers face major barriers in CAFTA countries. Duties on pears, apples and grapes are 20 percent or more. Beef exports face duties as high as 30 percent in those countries. Wheat exports are also hurt by high duties. But if CAFTA passes, duties on most grains and fruits will be eliminated immediately, as will many duties on beef, while others are phased out over five to 10 years.

During my years in the U. S. Senate, I was an unwavering supporter of increased global trade as beneficial both to American producers and consumers. This position makes sense for our nation and world’s economy, but it is a position that especially makes sense for the people of Washington.

Measured on a per capita basis, Washington is the largest exporter of all the United States. In 2003, our exports exceeded $34 billion. Transportation and aeronautics – think Boeing, of course – is our top export, followed by agricultural products, software, electronic and scientific equipment and wood products. Our exports span a range of industries and they benefit every corner of our state.

Eastern Washington has dozens of manufacturers with customers in the CAFTA countries.

CAFTA will create new opportunities for Washington state to increase its exports. We may not think of the trade bloc covered by the agreement – the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua – as an economic powerhouse, but these nations are important trading partners that could see strong growth in the coming years. Our nation’s trade agreements need to look toward the future, which is exactly what CAFTA does.

In 2000, I voted to grant China permanent normal trade relations, which opened the way for that country to join the World Trade Organization. China was already prospering, but it made sense for our nation to strengthen trade ties further. In 1998, Washington’s exports to China were valued at $1.2 billion. By 2004, that figure had more than doubled, to $3 billion. The CAFTA countries represent a smaller market than China, but a robust and growing market nonetheless.

In the case of many highly specialized, technology-based products and services, U.S. companies do not have to fear competitive imports from CAFTA nations. But we do need to be concerned about other nations taking those markets away. U.S. companies will be able to compete effectively because CAFTA eliminates information technology tariffs, creates fair government contracting policies and helps protect intellectual property rights, such as patents and trademarks.

We should also remember that economic interaction is an important cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. Many of the CAFTA countries are finally enjoying political stability after years of turmoil and civil war. CAFTA is the next step in promoting further political reform and economic development among our neighbors.

Just before the Fourth of July, the U. S. Senate approved CAFTA by a bipartisan 54-45 vote. Later this month, it will be the turn of the House of Representatives. Every vote will be important.

CAFTA represents an important turning point. Do we continue to embrace free trade and the competitive marketplace or do we reverse course and return to an era of protectionism? In 1995, I supported sanctions against Japan in response to its closed markets. Japan is Washington’s largest trading partner, but its barriers to U.S. companies were unfair. Many members of Congress, including me, wanted to send a message that free and fair trade should be a global standard.

That standard should now be carried to the CAFTA region. These nations are ready. The U.S. and CAFTA countries should be on equal trade footing for the benefit of all parties. For economic and political reasons – locally and globally – the U.S. House needs to follow the Senate’s lead and approve CAFTA.

.