Our editorial board has not decided yet whether to support or oppose the Central America (and Dominican Republic) Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA.
That's not so bad. Most of North Carolina's congressional delegation is still on the fence, too.
We've met with a group from the American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition, which strongly opposes CAFTA.
We've had a teleconference call with Shaun Donnelly, principal deputy assistant secretary of state in the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, and other officials voicing the administration's pro-CAFTA line.
We regularly receive information from groups on both sides.
Interestingly enough, I consider our congressmen valuable sources of insight on this issue -- even truth-seekers, if you will.
Why? I think they want to do what's best for the people they represent. They're trying to figure out whether CAFTA will help or hurt.
I spoke with Howard Coble and Mel Watt last week. Neither has made up his mind. Normally, Coble and Watt come down on opposite sides of issues. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up agreeing on this one.
Coble is trying to count jobs: how many would the 6th District lose, how many might it gain, if CAFTA is enacted. I get the feeling he thinks the numbers line up against the deal.
Watt is looking at it from an interesting angle: jobs today vs. jobs tomorrow.
Assume for a moment that CAFTA will cost North Carolina jobs in the textile and apparel industry today. That hurts, but do those jobs represent our economic future?
On the other hand, if the Triad is building its economic future on transportation/distribution, along with fast-turnaround manufacturing, maybe anything that increases both exports AND imports is beneficial. Imagine new markets in Central America for Dell computers made in the Triad and flown out on FedEx planes from PTIA. And then inexpensive clothing, fruit or other goods returning for distribution throughout the Middle Atlantic area.
Granted, Central America may not be a big market for computers yet -- but it will be a growing market. CAFTA also eventually could increase opportunities for banking services in Central America, added Watt, whose district runs from Charlotte to Greensboro.
Although Watt is thinking along those lines, that doesn't mean he's tilting toward CAFTA. He's concerned about other issues, including labor and environmental standards.
However, when he voted against NAFTA, he told me, the decision was so much of a "slam dunk" that not even a personal appeal from President Clinton could move him. This time, it's a much tougher call.
Congress may vote before its Fourth of July recess. We'll make up our minds and write an editorial before then.
What do you think about CAFTA? Yes or no?