- Costa Rica's Referendum on CAFTA
- SHARE's 25th Anniversary Celebration in San Francisco
- Salvadoran Civil Society Achieves Closure of River Polluting Battery Factory
- Opportunity to Work with SHARE in El Salvador
- Reflection: CAFTA and the Option for the Poor
Costa Rican De Pie: The Vote on CAFTA
By Tara Carr-Lemke, Washington, DC Office Director
On Sunday, October 7th, thousands of Costa Ricans voted in the only referendum of its kind: a referendum on the fate of the United States-Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). While CAFTA has been in effect for varying lengths of time in the U.S., El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic over the past eighteen months, Costa Rica has not implemented the agreement, largely due to the serious concerns expressed by its civil society. Last week, I had the privilege to travel to Costa Rica with other U.S. faith-based and solidarity activists, at the invitation of organizers on the NO to CAFTA side, to observe the referendum and learn about how Costa Ricans view the agreement.
Our delegation was greeted by members of Costa Rican unions, environmentalists, students, faith-based groups, engineers, scientists, farmers, and small and medium-sized business people, a diverse group that crossed ages, ethnicities, and income levels. We soon learned that Costa Rica is a country proud of its history of democracy and stability in a region long plagued by dictatorships and war. Furthermore, it is a country, although struggling with poverty, which has the basics of a functioning social system: a national health insurance system which assures that all Costa Ricans are covered, a telecommunications and energy sector which is low-cost and accessible, and high rates of literacy and professional preparation, due to a relatively well-supported educational system. As a result of this history and reality, Costa Ricans have been startled and upset by the pro-CAFTA campaign waged in their country over the past three years.
Pro-CAFTA forces have been led by President Oscar Arias, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in the cessation of the Central American wars. When I arrived in Costa Rica, I assumed that Arias was a visionary, consensus-based leader, a man committed to justice. Yet I quickly learned that Arias, much like other Central American politicians, has personal economic interests in CAFTA, including sugar and ethanol, and to make matters more unbalanced, he is a primary stockholder in major Costa Rican media outlets. It turns out that Central American and Mexican business people financially supported Arias' bid for presidency, in clear violation of Costa Rican law, with the aim of ensuring that Arias would win the election and push for the passage of CAFTA.
The U.S. has aided pro-CAFTA forces at strategic moments. Prior to the referendum, Costa Rican law indicates that there must be a 72 hour campaign "silence:" that is, there is to be no campaign messaging covered by the media leading up to the vote. Yet just one day before the referendum, the White House stated that Costa Ricans should vote for CAFTA, or else risk losing trade preferences and any chance of a newly negotiated agreement. Since the statement was made during the silent period, the leaders on the NO to CAFTA side were unable to respond. In the lead-up to the referendum, the U.S. government, through its ambassador to Costa Rica, its Trade Representative, and other officials, sent strong messages of support for the agreement. The Costa Ricans we met know that these messages made a difference in the opinion of the electorate, even if the information sent was inaccurate or even misleading.
In the midst of this media blitz, our delegation had the chance to visit organizers educating people on the expected effects of CAFTA. We stopped by a number of community centers preparing for the referendum and heard positive reports on the 100,000+ person march against CAFTA the weekend before (this turn-out, in a country of only 4 million, represents a significant segment of the voting population). We marveled at the grassroots education campaign, financed by Costa Ricans who pledged $1, $5, or $10 to support the NO side. We heard from dairy and rice producers who worried that CAFTA would flood the Costa Rican market with subsidized U.S. goods, and from workers who wondered if their health care would continue in a competitive market dominated by large multinational corporations.
The day of the referendum was electric. We saw families and friends gathering at the voting centers, sharing opinions, and exchanging ideas, even those clearly on different sides of the issue. Voter turn-out was strong: over 60% (I tried to imagine 60% of U.S. voters coming to the polls to vote on a trade agreement). The sense of history loomed large: not even in the U.S. did citizens have the opportunity to voice their opinion on the agreement. Many Costa Ricans were clear that they were voting on an issue that would intimately impact their families and communities.
Our delegation waited for initial results of the referendum in a large plaza. At about 8:30pm, the crowd was silenced by the flicker of the television screens turning on: the initial results were in. To a hushed crowd, the representative of the Supreme Electoral Council announced results: approximately 51% for SI and 48% for NO. The crowd was incredulous and, in some cases, tearful.
Reports of fraud at voting centers have surfaced and a vote recount is currently in process. The final results have yet to be certified. Yet the Costa Ricans with whom we spoke felt that the damage had been done prior to the day of the vote itself: the well-financed pro-CAFTA campaign waged in the media, supported by the messages sent by the current U.S. administration.
In spite of the overwhelming odds, nearly half of the Costa Ricans who voted on Sunday voted against an agreement which has meant increased inequality and poverty for its neighbors in Central America: this statement rings loud and clear across the region. Our Costa Rican colleagues are focusing on the next phase of their work: the attempt to prevent the passage of 13 laws needed to implement the agreement in the Legislative Assembly. Perhaps most importantly, they are discussing ongoing education and mobilization of the Costa Ricans who are now well-informed on CAFTA and who will be soon affected by the agreement. Time will tell what will happen in Costa Rica when it comes to CAFTA—but we left, although disappointed by the results, energized by the grassroots mobilization and civic participation of thousands of Costa Ricans who reminded me of the tireless workers for social justice that I have met in El Salvador. Centro America - De Pie - Stand Up, Central America!
To find out more about the trends and initial effects of CAFTA on Central America, go to http://lasolidarity.org/CAFTA_report.
