The US Senate voted 54-45 to approve a controversial free trade agreement with Central America on Thursday, setting the stage for a bruising final battle next month in the US House of Representatives. The vote was a victory for the Bush administration, which finished the pact months before last year's presidential election and has faced stiff opposition from labour, textile and sugar groups who fear it will cost jobs.
"I appreciate the bipartisan support in the United States Senate for the CAFTA-DR agreement, which is good for American workers, good for our farmers and good for small businesses," President George W. Bush said in statement.
Ten Democrats and one Independent joined 43 Republicans in voting for the pact. Twelve Republicans - many from sugar and textile-producing states - voted against CAFTA, despite White House efforts to sell the pact as strategically important.
"The agreement is also a strong boost for young democracies in our own hemisphere whose success is important for America's national security and for reducing illegal immigration," Bush said.
The US-Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA, eliminates tariffs on US exports to Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic. It also locks in and expands the duty-free access those countries already have in the US market.
The American Farm Bureau Federation estimates the pact will boost US farm exports to the region by $1.5 billion annually, once it is fully implemented. The National Association of Manufacturers also expects substantial gains.
But many Democrats complained CAFTA's labour terms aren't tough enough for a region with a poor workers' rights record.
"There is only one labour provision in CAFTA that is enforceable - a nation's commitment to enforce its own laws," said Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat who pledged last year to renegotiate CAFTA if he defeated Bush in the election. "That sounds good ... but in reality this provision does nothing to protect workers because there is no stipulation whatsoever as to what those laws are."
The Bush administration argues the labour provisions are the strongest of any free trade agreement so far. It points to a study by the International Labour Organisation, which it said shows labour laws in the six countries generally are in line with core international labour standards.
The Senate tally was significantly lower than votes for recent free trade pacts with Australia, Morocco, Singapore and Chile. But US Trade Representative Rob Portman said he was encouraged it would help CAFTA win approval in the House, where the vote is expected to be very close.
Earlier on Thursday, the House Ways and Means Committee approved the agreement. Only two Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the pact. The full House will take up CAFTA after next week's Fourth of July holiday break.
"If the members vote the way they have expressed themselves, I think CAFTA will not be approved. Obviously, the administration is doing what they can to peel off votes," said Rep. Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat.
Opponents estimate that as many as 190 Democrats and 40 Republicans in the House are opposed to CAFTA, more than the 218 needed to defeat the pact. Supporters say those numbers include some undecided members who could still be swayed.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, a California Republican, told reporters there would be "enough" votes to pass the bill, even if the victory margin is slim.
The Bush administration struck a number of deals to ease the way for Senate approval.
That included a pledge to support $160 million in funding over the next four budget years to help the CAFTA countries enforce their labour and environmental laws.
To win over senators from sugar-producing states, it promised to take action, if necessary, to keep overall sugar imports below a key farm program threshold.
That persuaded some senators from Florida and Minnesota to vote for CAFTA, but others - including Republicans - from Louisiana, Idaho, North Dakota and Montana still voted no.