Democrats Across Ideological Spectrum Express Hope for New NAFTA Fixes
Democrats on the working group asking for changes to the new NAFTA say the first meeting with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, on June 26, went well, and other Democrats on the left and center also expressed hope that Democrats are on the right path to get to ratification. Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., who's specializing in environmental issues on the working group, said it was a "great meeting." Larson, a senior member of the House Ways and Means Committee, added, "We're not there yet, I think Lighthizer has the right attitude, and his sleeves rolled up, and we're laying out our concerns, and hopefully we're going to get to yes."
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Terri Sewell, D-Ala., who is on the working group and assigned to enforcement, also said the meeting went well. "There's a few issues we have to negotiate, but everybody seems to be willing to negotiate in good faith." Larson said the biologics exclusivity issue was not solved in that first hour of talking. "I think Mr. Blumenauer made some very telling points," he said. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., is House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee chairman and a member of the working group.
Democrats who are not on the working group aren't sure where things stand with the deal. Denny Heck, D-Wash., said the tariff threat against Mexico derailed "a constructive conversation which seemed to be underway at the time" on how to modify the new NAFTA.
Rep. Elaine Luria, a freshman from Virginia who defeated a Republican incumbent, signed the letter freshman Democrats sent June 25 (see 1906260058) that said the new NAFTA's text right now is inadequate to fix the problems with the original. But as she spoke to International Trade Today just outside the House chamber June 26, she sounded more open to voting for ratification. "I think the enforcement issues were the biggest concern. I want to be in a position where we can get to a yes, and have a stronger trade deal, and it work for agriculture, but also protect labor and workers, so that's where I hope I see us going," she said. "I did get a chance to meet with Ambassador Lighthizer almost two months ago with the Problem Solvers Caucus. We want to see progress, we're just kind of hoping we can get to a point where everybody will be happy and we do something that's even better for our trade arrangements."
Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., has been a critic of NAFTA and the Central America agreement CAFTA, saying they were devastating to areas along the border. But he said he thought Democrats were on the right path to get fixes to environmental provisions, Mexican labor law, and what he called "the carve-out for the pharmaceuticals."
With regard to enforcement, Grijalva said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka's recommendation that goods be stopped at the border if the factories where they are made are violating labor rights is "a tough consequence," but since there is no consequence for violations under NAFTA, it's understandable why he'd insist on that. Grijalva acknowledged that Mexico would have to agree to this, and said, "That's probably going to be very difficult, if not impossible."
Larson called the AFL-CIO proposal plausible. "Will Mexico agree to it? I think it's more than worth the discussion, but I can't quite figure out yet where their mindset would be on that."
Democratic leadership is months away from vote-counting, but one complication will be how the Florida delegation -- Democrats and Republicans -- deal with the fact that seasonality was not in the agreement. Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, D-Fla., did not say she would condition her vote on how the tomato suspension agreement is worked out at the Commerce Department, but she said, "Obviously the tomato trade is extremely important. Agriculture is the No. 2 driver of Florida's economy, so in or out of the agreement, it's something that should be factored in."