[CTC] House Democrats are right to push for stronger labor protections in Trump's revised NAFTA

Tue Nov 20 05:16:57 PST 2018

> https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/18/1813318/-House-Democrats-are-right-to-push-for-stronger-labor-protections-in-Trump-s-revised-NAFTA?detail=emaildkre <https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/11/18/1813318/-House-Democrats-are-right-to-push-for-stronger-labor-protections-in-Trump-s-revised-NAFTA?detail=emaildkre>
> 
> House Democrats are right to push for stronger labor protections in Trump's revised NAFTA
> 

Ian Reifowitz <https://www.dailykos.com/user/Ian%20Reifowitz>


Sunday November 18, 2018 · 7:30 PM EST


> Winning a majority in the House of Representatives will affect a whole host of issues. In recent days, House Democrats have stepped forward and declared that one of those issues will be Trump’s revised <https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/10/1/1800482/-Trump-gives-NAFTA-a-new-name-and-a-few-tweaks-brags-that-it-s-a-brand-new-deal> North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA. This may not be the sexiest one, but it is of great importance to millions of American workers and their families, and it’s one Democrats need to get right. So far, the signs are positive.
> 
> In remarks she made just before the midterms, the once- (and, in all likelihood, future-) Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi questioned <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/us/politics/nafta-trump-democratic-house.html> the impact of the agreement as it is currently stands, calling it a “work in progress.” She added:
> 
> Without enforcement you don’t have anything. Without it, you are, shall we say, just rebranding Nafta. Mexico has to pass a law about labor rights in Mexico, so that has not happened yet and that is a predicate of this agreement. Most important of all are the enforcement provisions in terms of labor and the environment. Enforcement, enforcement, enforcement.
> 
> Rep. Bill Pascrell <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Pascrell>, a New Jersey Democrat just elected to his 12th term, is expected in January to head up the trade subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee. That makes him the party’s point person on the new trade deal Trump negotiated with Canada and Mexico.
> 
> Pascrell, echoing Pelosi, was blunt in his assessment of the current deal’s chances of passing the House under a Democratic majority, saying <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-14/senior-house-democrat-says-trump-must-change-usmca-trade-deal> that what’s needed are “not only changes in the legislation but more enforcement,” in particular on matters relating to labor and environmental standards. According to Pascrell and labor leaders, achieving the changes they seek would not require reopening the negotiations with our neighbors because they can instead be achieved through legislation passed in the U.S.
> 
> One other important pro-labor voice weighing in is that of Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, who noted <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/12/us/politics/nafta-trump-democratic-house.html>: “words on a paper won’t stop jobs from going to Mexico, unless there’s real teeth behind them.” Brown—who voted <https://www.dispatch.com/news/20180612/dispatch-ad-watch-new-sherrod-brown-spot-on-trade-is-accurate> against the original NAFTA legislation—is the only Ohio Democrat who won statewide in the recent midterms. There’s been some recent chatter about a presidential run after he said <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/us/politics/sherrod-brown-ohio-president.html> he and his family were “thinking about it.”
> 
> On the deal itself, Trump bragged about his great victory—calling <https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/409250-trump-takes-victory-lap-after-nafta-deal> it, absurdly, “the most important trade deal we've ever made by far.” However, and here’s a shock: he drastically oversold <https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/10/1/1800482/-Trump-gives-NAFTA-a-new-name-and-a-few-tweaks-brags-that-it-s-a-brand-new-deal> the relatively minor changes contained within it.
> 
> On the surface, the most important provision that could benefit American workers, autoworkers specifically, sounds pretty impressive. However, as with much else that comes from the Trump White House, the reality is different, as per the New York Times editorial board’s analysis <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/02/opinion/trump-nafta-deal.html>:
> 
> 75 percent of the value of vehicles exported to the United States would have to come from North American-made parts, up from the current 62.5 percent. And 40-to-45 percent of the value would have to be made by workers who earn at least $16 an hour, even though no Mexican autoworkers earn $16 an hour, and none will. Otherwise, Mexican-assembled vehicles would be subject to a 2.5 percent tariff.
> 
> The logic here is that auto-related jobs would supposedly flood back to the United States as labor costs rise in Mexico. That logic is dubious <https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/31/business/economy/autos-nafta-trump.html?module=inline>. Automakers in Mexico would rather pay the 2.5 percent tariff, figuring it would not raise prices enough to hurt sales seriously. If it did, they could stop making those cars for the American market.
> 
> The deal, as it stands, will do little to help put more money in the pockets of working Americans. Lori Wallach, the head of Public Citizens’ Global Trade Watch <https://www.citizen.org/our-work/globalization-and-trade>, echoed the comments of elected Democrats. She made clear that changes are necessary:
> 
> After this election, only trade deals that can earn Democratic support will get through Congress.
> 
> [snip] If trade officials are willing to work with congressional Democrats, unions and other groups on the improvements needed to stop NAFTA’s ongoing job outsourcing and raise wages, there clearly is a policy path to a renegotiated NAFTA that could gain wide support next year.
> 
> Wallach did add one important caveat, one that we’ve all come to accept as par for the course with this president: “Of course,” she said, “who knows what lunatic things unrelated to trade that Donald Trump might do in the meantime to derail that prospect.” Other labor leaders have made similar statements about the agreement, including Leo Gerard, the United Steelworkers Union president and chair of the U.S. trade representative’s labor advisory council. Gerard wrote <> to U.S. trade representative Robert Lighthizer, warning that the revised NAFTA would “undermine the interests of workers and consumers,” yet at the same time fail to substantively “curtail the illegal suppression of wages in Mexico.”
> 
> So elected Democrats and labor leaders are on the same page here, and that’s very heartening to see. This unity will hopefully lead to real improvements being made to the trade agreement, which will thus bring real benefits to working Americans. Moreover, this unity is vital to the ability of progressives to win elections and help all of our various constituencies and the country as a whole.
> 
> Democrats cannot allow Trump to present himself as the champion of labor when it comes to trade, in the way this Politico piece—titled “In the NAFTA Deal, Trump Got What Democrats Couldn’t”—argues <https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/02/trump-nafta-deal-democrats-220813> he can. As absurd as that argument is on the merits, our party has, in recent years, left an opening for Trump to make that argument.
> 
> Anyone who’s read my stuff here over the years knows how I assess the presidency of Barack Obama. He is the best president we’ve had in recent decades, to say the least. The fact remains that he promised, on the campaign trail in 2008, to renegotiate <https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/oct/15/john-mccain/obamas-been-critical-of-nafta/> NAFTA. He called it "devastating" and "a big mistake." In a February 2008 debate, then-Sen. Obama, to some degree presaging Trump, declared: “We should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.” He also stated <https://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-carlsen/obama-reaffirms-promise-t_b_157316.html>: “NAFTA’s shortcomings were evident when signed and we must now amend the agreement to fix them.”
> 
> One month into his first term, President Obama reaffirmed <https://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-carlsen/obama-reaffirms-promise-t_b_157316.html> his commitment to amending NAFTA. No serious negotiations to amend NAFTA took place, and no legislation was brought before Congress, despite Democrats having a strong House majority and, if only for a few months, a 60-member Democratic caucus in the Senate.
> 
> On a related note, nor <https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/112613-obama-says-hell-keep-on-fighting-to-pass-card-check-bill> did Democrats in 2009-10 pass what was then <https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/us/politics/09labor.html> labor’s “No. 1 priority”—the Employee Free Choice Act, also known as card check legislation—which would have made it easier for workers in a given workplace to form a union. Given labor’s strong support for Democrats, passing a law that would have created more union members should have been a no-brainer. Republicans certainly know <https://www.thenation.com/article/right-to-work-laws-are-killing-democrats-at-the-ballot-box/> how to pass anti-union legislation that reduces the number of union members and directly weakens the Democratic Party.
> 
> Of course Democrats under Barack Obama, and right now, are far better for working families and union members than are Republicans. That doesn’t change the fact that by not being even better for those working families when we had the chance, we let them down. In doing so, we might just have left enough votes on the table in states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan to allow Trump to defeat Hillary Clinton. Given the closeness of those states, the smallest of shifts could’ve made the difference.
> 
> The Democratic Party must always be the party of working people. The push to give real teeth to Trump’s largely cosmetic revisions to NAFTA is so important because it demonstrates our party’s continued commitment to working people, to unions. What we’ve seen so far—talk—is good, and a necessary first step. What we need to show next, when the next Congress comes to order, is that we can get results.
> 
> Ian Reifowitz is the author of Obama’s America: A Transformative Vision of Our National Ide <https://smile.amazon.com/Obamas-America-Transformative-National-Identity/dp/1612344720/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1500989834&sr=8-1&keywords=ian+reifowitz+obama%27s+america>ntity  <https://smile.amazon.com/Obamas-America-Transformative-National-Identity/dp/1612344720/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1500989834&sr=8-1&keywords=ian+reifowitz+obama%27s+america>(Potomac Books).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20181120/5cc2ebf0/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: avatar_80491.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20181120/5cc2ebf0/attachment-0001.jpg>