Let's not confuse these treaties with free trade. The treaty may include some trade liberalization but it also includes a lot more, including a new bureacracy.
To counterquote your quote of the day, I quote Ron Paul, Republican, Texas:

We don’t need CAFTA or any other international agreement to reap the economic benefits promised by CAFTA supporters, we only need to change our own harmful economic and tax policies. Let the rest of the world hurt their citizens with tariffs; if we simply reduce tariffs and taxes at home, we will attract capital and see our economy flourish.

"The Central American Free Trade Agreement is just at the beginning of a century of trade liberalisation, more significant and powerful than any previous wave of liberalisation."

Cool down, mate. I'm skeptical. In my life I've seen hordes of such treaties signed. It's just so much nonesense.

As Fiona said: "Let's not confuse these treaties with free trade." These treaties are mostly creating employment oportunities for another layer of bureaucrats.
It is possible that that's better to have CAFTA than not have it, but I'm not sure, and if so, the difference isn't big.

I agree with Fiona and Jacob. I am not sure how much difference this treaty will make besides making everyone feel better about things. Free trade and treaties don't exactly go together because most of the treaties prevent truly free trade.

Free trade with the US is not a sure thing, no matter what procedures are in place. Here in Canada there is a problem with lumber exports to the US. Panel after panel have ruled in favour of Canada and against the tariffs and levies imposed, yet the decisions are ignored. The last appeal possible has yet again, just recently ruled in favour of Canada and ruled that all duies raised are to be refunded.
No compliance.
So. it seems, a good set of lobbiests and parisan contributers can trump any treaty negotiated.
Harry