Who is for/against the above? In general, I'm for free trade and believe it to be inevitable. For example, below is the argument of the good Senator DeFazio. However, I think his arguments are short-sighted. The rest of the world is globalizing whether we like it or not and all we can, by not entering free trade, is make ourselves uncompetitive. I also that we would have had even worse problems had we not entered into these agreements. Can you imagine if Europe and Asia purchased from China and we decide not to for example? It would be as foolish a decision as if we decided to tariff Japanese cars in the 80's and 90's. Well, that's my two cents. Let me know what you think of such an agreement with Peru. Agree? Disagree? Also, why Peru?? I thought it was Chile that was the wonder child of Latin America?? "From Previous trade agreements like NAFTA, CAFTA and the WTO have led to the export of millions of high-paying American jobs to low wage havens like China and Mexico; an erosion in U.S. living standards; soaring trade deficits and an increasing reliance on foreign investors to finance these deficits, threatening our economic and national security; a significant erosion of U.S. sovereignty to international trade bureaucrats; and the dumping of subsidized foreign goods, including agricultural products, into the US. According to the Oregon Blue Book, by 2000, work at 57 Oregon plants had been shifted to Mexico or Canada in response to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Between 1997 and 2002, the U.S. government issued 112 Trade Adjustment Assistance certifications relating to Oregon layoffs caused by NAFTA. These certifications were for more than 12,000 Oregon workers who lost their jobs as a direct result of NAFTA. Looking at the numbers beyond just NAFTA, Oregon has lost more than 40,000 trade jobs due to failed trade agreements since 1994. "