U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan’s Anti-Sweathop Bill

On June 8^th, 2006 North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) put forth a bill to amend the 1930 U.S. Tariff Act to include goods made in Sweatshops. The bill’s main purposes is to include sweatshops in the language, prohibit all trade and sales of goods made, produced or mined in sweatshops and more specifically procured by the U.S. Government. As amended into law the bill will be placed under the protection and enforcement of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). It also allows for civil action to be taken if someone, a worker for example, were to find the use of sweatshop conditions in the trade of goods. Such action would entitle the plaintiff a minimum of $10,000 or more if the use of a sweatshop is found violating FTC regulations.

The definition of a sweatshop under the bill consists of any place of work that is in violation with the core labor rights established by the International Labor Organization¹. Including freedom of associated, which gives workers the right associate with unions and other organizations. This entails the freedom to organize and bargain collectively under a union or group. These provisions ensure that the other core labor rights can be protected such as no forced labor or forced overtime. Workers that organize, or unionize to demand rights most often do so for fair wages or a living wage, which is also a core right. Sometimes of more urgent need is the right of safety and health standards in the workplace, demanding employers take steps to ensure this. Core rights also extend to restrictions that workplaces comply with a country’s minimum child labor age, which can differ by region.

The bill includes a clause that allows the President to waive sections of the tariff for trade purposes necessary to national interest. This of course must pass through the House and be accompanied by reasonable explanation as to how national interest is at risk due to trade. The bill if passed, would be a watershed for critics who have been demanding greater transparency of corporate accountability as included in the measure a list of violators would be published every year. In enforcing greater transparency the bill also requires government parties under review of allegations to provide access to records in order to determine if goods procured were made in sweatshops.

The 1930 U.S. Tariff act is also known as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which when passed raised taxation on over 20,000 imported goods. In its historic light, Market Liberal economists who advocate for freer trade do not favor the Hawley-Smoot Act. According to the Wikipedia entry on Smoot-Hawley, some economists criticized the act for being a cause of the Great Depression of the 1930s.² Though the U.S. State Department’s Website states that the Act “was more a consequence of the onset of the Great Depression than an initial cause³. Author Ellen Israel Rosen notes that critics of the Act, “with its high tariffs, had helped generate the ‘beggar thy neighbor’ policies that contributed to international economic isolationism and laid the groundwork for the depression and World War II.”⁴ This view holds that trade protectionism causes tensions between countries when seek to create economic barriers and could lead to wars.

Some questions may arise as the Bill is reviewed in the Senate, such as is this a motion towards protectionism in today’s Free Market economy. Others might point out that the bill will distance Dorgan from his recent association to the Jack Abramoff Scandal, as Abramoff had involvement with Sweatshops on the Island of Saipan. Though Dorgan plans to return $67,000⁵ of the funds he acquired through Abramoff, something other politicians still refuse to do, and that association was through the Native American tribes scandal, not the sweatshops. Though Senator Dorgan’s action has directly addressed the 36,000 Asian workers who, according to the U.S. State Department’s definition, are victims of Human Trafficking in the country of Jordan. As described by State Deaprtment Dir. to Combat and Monitor Trafficking, John Miller, “human trafficking involves force, fraud, or coercion – legally sanitized words that cover intimidation, kidnapping, beatings, rape, deceit, abandonment, and murder. Victims describe mind-numbing varieties of torture, psychological abuse, and physical deprivation that are at the heart of the trafficking experience.”⁶

Making clothing for U.S companies like, Wal Mart, K-Mart, Gloria Vanderbilt, Target, Kohl’s, L.L. Bean, Liz Claiborne, Victoria’s Secret among others, workers are trapped in debt to the factories, and reports of abuse from violence to rape have surfaced. In an NPR interview, one Jordanian Factory owner said about the companies, “they are demanding us to be the lowest price, because they want to maintain everyday low prices, we are not in business to be the lowest price, we are in business to sustain business.”