August 31, 2018 | By Alexander Hitch

NAFTA Pronouncements and Reality

Following the announcement that the United States and Mexico reached a preliminary agreement on the renegotiation of NAFTA, US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer signaled that he would notify Congress of the intent to sign the agreement shortly, after which the administration would be able to ink the agreement in 90 days time.  

For this newly updated agreement to be signed into law, however, assumes several major hurdles are cleared. The priority for the moment is determining the status of Canada’s involvement, and confirming if it is permissible for the administration to submit notice of intent to sign a bilateral agreement for a trilateral trade pact.

Yet perhaps the most lasting concern is determining if the newfangled agreement is palatable to the US Congress, and if it will garner the requisite Democratic support to ensure its passage. A particularly longstanding issue for critics of NAFTA is the lax enforcement of Mexican labor laws; resolving this is a crucial pillar for gaining Democratic support for a renegotiated agreement. Ranking Democratic lawmakers have insisted that few colleagues would back a retooled NAFTA without significant reforms to the agreement’s labor provisions.

Why Democrats, though? Traditionally, Republican legislators were far more likely to support trade deals. But with party allegiances shifting on trade, tepid reaction from the US Chamber of Commerce (usually a barometer of pro-trade Republican views), and the potential of a Democratic House in 2019 (when the vote on the new NAFTA would occur), the administration will likely need to reach across the aisle.

But what changes to the labor provisions would gain Democratic support? As a strong first step, the amended deal will purportedly institute a full labor chapter within the text of the agreement (per the US-Mexico agreement fact sheet), doing away with the labor side agreement developed during the original passage of NAFTA.

This new chapter will include an annex that supports rights for Mexican workers to collectively bargain and form independent unions. It also institutes labor value content rules promoted by labor unions that require 40-45 percent of auto content to be made by workers earning at least $16 per hour (for comparison, the current average hourly wage level of Mexican auto industry workers is just over $3 per hour). These updates are meant to incentivize greater labor regulation in Mexico and protection for auto assembly and auto parts workers in the United States.

But what remains unclear is how the updated labor regulations are to be enforced in the new NAFTA. In free trade pacts passed and updated after the “May 10th” agreement of 2007, restitution for a violating party’s labor transgressions is enforced using the dispute settlement procedure.

Yet this runs into two potential roadblocks. First, the initial reports of the renegotiated agreement demonstrate an effort to weaken the dispute settlement procedures in NAFTA, effectively restricting the manner in which labor provisions would be protected.

But even if the dispute settlement mechanism endures, organized labor is highly skeptical of its efficacy in protecting labor provisions. In a recent, nine-year dispute with Guatemala (through the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement), the arbitration panel ruled against the US position that Guatemala had not adequately upheld its labor standards. As a result of this finding – the only high-profile labor dispute within a free trade agreement – labor unions and Democrats remain unconvinced that workers’ rights are protected by standard labor chapter provisions.

Although legislators on both sides of the aisle would likely take a deal over nothing, threading the needle in Congress, and potentially a less friendly one this coming year, will be more difficult than the administration may have anticipated. To pass the legislation and end the uncertainty swirling around the trade pact, NAFTA’s new labor chapter may need further tweaking.

About

Phil Levy is senior fellow on the global economy at The Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Previously he was associate professor of business administration at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business. He was formerly a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and taught at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. From 2003 to 2006, he served first as senior economist for trade for President Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers and then as a member of Secretary of State Rice’s Policy Planning Staff, covering international economic matters. Before working in government, he was a faculty member of Yale University’s Department of Economics for nine years and spent one of those as academic director of Yale’s Center for the Study of Globalization.

His academic writings have appeared in such outlets as The American Economic ReviewEconomic Journal, and theJournal of International Economics. He is a regular contributor to Foreign Policy magazine’s online Shadow Government section and writes on topics including trade policy, economic relations with China, and the European economic crisis. Dr. Levy has testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Joint Economic Committee, the House Committee on Ways and Mean, and the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission. He received his PhD in Economics from Stanford University in 1994 and his AB in Economics from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor in 1988.

Archive

Just a Flesh Wound?

At the end of July, negotiators for the 12 Trans-Pacific Partnership countries failed to conclude a trade agreement. Was the failure just a flesh wound, or was it something more serious?

It’s all Greek to Me

As the Greek suffering mounts and they careen towards Sunday’s referendum, Senior Fellow Phil Levy has two additional questions surrounding the Greek crisis.

Previously, on Game of Trade…

It is traditional, in intricate ongoing dramatic sagas, to begin a new episode with a recap. If you are just tuning in to trade policy prospects in the US Congress, Senior Fellow Phil Levy breaks it down in his latest post on the World of Cents blog.
 

Venn Will They See How Serious This Is?

After the President’s trade policy was blocked in the US Senate yesterday, there was a divide among analysts over just how serious a setback the vote was. But it is difficult to see how the trade agenda could now advance, and the sensitive timing of trade talks means that a delay could be fatal.

Cities and Trade

Last week, the battle to gain trade promotion authority (TPA) began in earnest in Washington.

China Joins the Monetary Party

This week China took an unusually strong measure to goose its economy. It lowered the amount of money that Chinese banks needed to hold in reserve. In theory, this should allow the banks to take those sequestered funds and use them for new loans, thereby stimulating the Chinese economy.

International Ramifications of the Jobs Report

The big news of the morning was that the US economy created 295,000 jobs in February, pushing the unemployment rate down to 5.5 percent. Both numbers were better than expected, which seemed to paint a picture of an economy returning to normal after a long, chilly period of slow growth and painful joblessness.


An Economic Question about the President’s Immigration Action

There is a raging debate about whether the President stretched or exceeded his executive powers, but let us set aside the legal and political questions for the moment and consider a (wonkish) economic one: How does the administration envision the demand for low-skilled labor?

Can We Take a Hint?

Trade impasses between the United States and Japan are eminently predictable. They will continue until the Obama administration shows it has achieved domestic agreement on trade. 

New Deficit Numbers in Perspective

In this week of financial market turmoil, there was a notable bit of good news: the US federal budget deficit shrank to 2.8 percent of GDP, its lowest level since 2007. 

Are EU Sanctions Working?

Are EU sanctions on Russia working? If goal is to annoy Russians and make symbolic gesture, then yes. Otherwise, no.


Phantom French Austerity

The New York Times is reporting a brewing political crisis in France. The Prime Minister is planning to dissolve the government in a battle over budgetary belt-tightening.


Seals, Morality, and the WTO

I recently returned from a conference in which a coauthor and I presented some research on clubbing seals to death. The case raises issues of morality, extraterritoriality, and the dangers of a global trading system adrift.