[CTC] After meeting with Lighthizer, New Dems eye path forward on NAFTA

Tue Mar 12 14:54:19 PDT 2019

Two articles on the New Dems and NAFTA below...

New Democrat Coalition freshmen look to influence USMCA

Politco
By Megan Cassella and Sabrina Rodriguez
03/12/2019 03:18 PM EDT

Nearly two dozen newly elected House Democrats are urging the Trump administration to take their voices into account on the new U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

In a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, the New Democrat Coalition's 23 freshmen asked the trade envoy for a meeting "to walk through the various provisions of the agreement and provide our feedback." The letter was delivered today when he met with the coalition.

The letter noted that while they "strongly support replacing NAFTA" with an updated agreement that raises labor and environmental standards and covers new issues not addressed in the original deal, their votes "should not be taken for granted" given that they were not in Congress and were not consulted throughout the negotiating process.

"We would like to meet with you and your team to answer our questions, address our concerns, and demonstrate to us the benefits of USMCA to our constituents," they wrote in the letter.

"Just as we have a range of views on trade agreements in general, we have a range of views on the various provisions of USMCA and would welcome an opportunity to share those with you and your team," they added.

"The ambassador did seem to agree with the request to meet with our freshmen members, so hopefully there will be a meeting there soon," said Rep. Suzan DelBene <http://go.politicoemail.com/?qs=176639a1e4768cf55ada8630859c625907793464723434369661d9d7b3fd255fd1987297cdec45e3114f3e08184fb7db> (D-Wash.), the coalition's vice chair for policy, after the meeting with the trade chief.

After meeting with Lighthizer, New Dems eye path forward on USMCA
Inside US Trade,
March 12, 2019 at 5:33 PM

Several members of the New Democrat Coalition said on Tuesday that while significant concerns about the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement remain, they hope to ensure the deal is passed before an August recess.

Following a meeting with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, Reps. Suzan DelBene (WA), Ron Kind (WI), Lizzie Fletcher (TX) and Derek Kilmer (WA) told reporters the goal was to ensure the deal's passage by August. Kilmer serves as the pro-trade coalition’s chair and DelBene is a vice-chair. Kind and Fletcher are co-chairs of the group’s trade task force <https://insidetrade.com/node/165741>.

“The clock is ticking,” Kind said after the meeting. “We may be in another border wall fight this fall, which can just paralyze this place given the president’s budget that he just submitted this week and then we are slipping to 2020.”

If the deal is to be passed before Capitol Hill retreats in August, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) "is going to have to make a determination on the schedule around here if she sees an opportunity," Kind told Inside U.S. Trade.

On Wednesday, Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic caucus are slated to be briefed on USMCA by the trade representative.

Kind pointed to concerns over enforcement issues, in addition to the Congressional Progressive Caucus's call for a slew of changes <https://cpc-grijalva.house.gov/a-fair-trade-agenda-renegotiating-nafta-for-working-families/> to the deal before they can support it. The liberal group's leaders on Tuesday said “We are taking a position as the Progressive Caucus against the current proposal,” according to Politico <https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/12/democrats-against-nafta-replacement-1263704>.

“But obviously we already have a divided caucus, with the progressives coming out this afternoon opposing USMCA as a group, so that’s a big chunk right there,” Kind said. “And that’s one of the things we were emphasizing with Ambassador Lighthizer -- the clock has already started running on this. Courses of opposition are mobilizing already, so if he thinks he’s got some time to dither, that window is going to close pretty quickly."

DelBene urged the administration to introduce implementing legislation and a statement of administrative action to Congress soon as a way to provide “a lot more specifics” and inform members more broadly. “So, any drafts of those that they put forward I think would help provide some answers that people have,” she told reporters.

Kind told Inside U.S. Trade the USTR was hoping to ease lawmakers’ concerns through that implementing legislation rather than re-opening talks, which has been proposed by some Democratic senators.

“I think their hope is that they can address the concerns that members are bringing to them through the implementing language as opposed to having to open the entire agreement up. That is kind of what he was intimating [today],” Kind added.

The implementing legislation and a statement of administrative action have long been seen as likely vehicles to address controversial issues such as Section 232 tariffs as well as language on de minimis thresholds. The tariffs on Canadian and Mexican steel and aluminum are considered major hurdles to USMCA's passage.

One source suggested the administration could include a line in the implementing legislation akin to saying “all tariffs will be removed once the third party ratifies the deal,” and then include clarifying Section 232 language in the statement of administrative action.

But Kind said the removal of Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum was essential to advancing the deal before the implementing legislation drops. He said the USTR has meetings with Canada and Mexico this week to discuss the issue.

Asked if Lighthizer clarified any concerns about USMCA dispute settlement provisions, Kind said the USTR walked the group through “what the dispute resolution would look like and he said [Section] 301 is the ‘last resort’ when all other opportunities are exhausted.”

The USTR told senators last month that Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 could be used as a unilateral tool to enforce certain parts of the deal with Canada and Mexico.

But Kind again poured cold water on the idea <https://insidetrade.com/node/165950>, contending “the question is how quickly does the president exhaust all other options before going to [Section] 301? I mean he could just bypass everything and go it alone, which he has shown a propensity to do now over and over again.”

Kilmer and DelBene said the USTR side-stepped direct Section 232 questions, acknowledging only that the tariffs were a problem without providing details on any potential solution.

“He also sort of walked around that issue as well,” Kilmer told reporters. Kilmer later told Inside U.S. Trade that there is clearly a “recognition of the problem … but not necessarily a recognition of how this gets resolved."

“Bob might be an expert in steel but we are an expert in the economic damage that’s happening every single day in our respective districts because of the retaliation of this trade war, which appears to have no end in sight,” Kind said of Lighthizer, who for years represented the steel industry as a private attorney. “And that has been clearly communicated to him, so I think they realize they’ve got to find a place to resolve 232 in order to move forward.”

Rep. Ami Bera (D-CA), another member of the New Democrat Coalition, said a deal passed before the August recess was “obviously” the hope for supporters.

“I just sometimes feel like the administration is overconfident in recognizing how difficult trade deals are,” he told Inside U.S. Trade. “I think they are overly optimistic.”

Asked if Lighthizer provided any specifics on how USTR planned to address Democratic concerns related to enforcement, Bera replied: “No, other than they recognize that’s an area where they’ve got to do a little bit more.”

And on Section 232, Bera said “We made sure [Lighthizer] understood that we still have some real concerns here.”

Kilmer told Inside U.S. Trade that while the “crystal ball is still a little bit fuzzy,” it’s clear the USTR is trying to engage lawmakers “more out of an acknowledgment that for something to move in this regard it actually has to pass through Congress.”

In addition to this week’s sessions, a group of 23 first-term Democrats has requested a meeting with Lighthizer to address USMCA concerns before the administration submits implementing legislation to Congress.

“We were not in Congress when President Trump signed the revised NAFTA,” the group said in a March 12 letter <https://insidetrade.com/sites/insidetrade.com/files/documents/2019/mar/wto2019_0081.pdf>. “As such, we were not consulted in the negotiating of the agreement and therefore, our votes should not be taken for granted.”

The lawmakers wrote that they expect “continuous and meaningful consultations with you and the Administration to shape President Trump’s trade agenda this Congress” and added that they looked forward to meeting with the USTR to “walk through the various provisions of the agreement and provide our feedback.”

DelBene said Lighthizer “did agree to have a meeting with freshmen, so hopefully that happens soon.” -- Isabelle Hoagland (ihoagland at iwpnews.com <mailto:ihoagland at iwpnews.com>)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20190312/82084677/attachment-0001.html>