I'm glad you want to press this point. It's an area I have had much personal experience with. I worked in the institutional food distribution industry for about 15 years, serving both wholesale and retail establishments.
Every winter we rely heavily on imported fresh produce from Mexico. Every winter our warehouse staffs developed respiratory illnesses that persisted and lingered until crops in the US could be harvested. The problem is known, as is the cause. Mexico does not have the stringent bans on pesticides, fungicides, and other chemicals the US has. While debates have flourished over the effects of minimal exposure to these agents, there is no debate exposure in concentrated amounts is harmful.
The only debate left to be tackled is in what amounts do minimal exposures become harmful if the body cannot properly dispose of these agents over time? All the health data in our country points to steady increases of respiratory illnesses throughout our nation. While proponents of air control regulations have been pointing to automobiles and factory discharges as the primary culprit, the occasional exposure to harmful agents, such as those used on fresh produce imported from Mexico, has not been addressed. They should be. If for no other reason but to know with certainty, it should be addressed.
Once again, the FTAA should be discussed openly by those duly elected, and seeking elective office.
"Now are you making an argument against Fast Track authority?"
Yeah, I'm against that too. While some may argue this would be a good tool in the hands of President Bush, reality says GW will not be president forever. This same tool in the hands of another president could wreck havoc. Leave the Senate to do their job as outlined in the constitution.
And once again, the FTAA should be discussed openly by those duly elected, and those seeking elective office. An open discussion cannot harm the public. I agree with you the debates should be rational and informed.
Good grief. Your staff comes down with the flu and you blame NAFTA?