<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;" class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;" class=""><i class=""><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;" class="">Two articles below</span><font face="Times New Roman, serif" size="3" class="">…</font></i></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><a href="https://www.newsweek.com/trump-uses-footnote-dodge-lgbtq-rights-new-trade-deal-mexico-and-canada-1242937" style="color: purple;" class="">https://www.newsweek.com/trump-uses-footnote-dodge-lgbtq-rights-new-trade-deal-mexico-and-canada-1242937</a><o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><br class=""></div></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><b class="">Trump uses footnote to dodge LGBTQ rights in new trade deal with Mexico and Canada<o:p class=""></o:p></b></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">By: Shane Croucher </span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">12/04/2018<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">The United States used a footnote to deflect anti-discrimination requirements set out in the new trade deal with Mexico and Canada after congressional Republicans called them “insulting to our sovereignty.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">President Donald Trump put pen to paper <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/justin-trudeau-blasts-donald-trumps-trade-tariffs-after-general-motors-1238810" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">on the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA)</span></a>, which will replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), after forcing the U.S.'s neighbors to negotiate a new trade deal.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class=""><a href="https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/FTA/USMCA/Text/23_Labor.pdf" target="_blank" style="color: purple;" class="">Article 23.9 of USMCA</a></span>, titled “Discrimination in the Workplace,” states: “The Parties recognize the goal of eliminating discrimination in employment and occupation, and support the goal of promoting equality of women in the workplace.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">“Accordingly, each Party shall implement policies that it considers appropriate to protect workers against employment discrimination on the basis of sex (including with regard to sexual harassment), pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, and caregiving responsibilities; provide job-protected leave for birth or adoption of a child and care of family members; and protect against wage discrimination.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">Many states still have laws allowing for the discrimination of LGBTQ people by companies and efforts in Congress to pass a new Equality Act to end such practices have been rebuffed.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">But the Trump administration added a footnote to Article 23.9, essentially relieving it of the obligation to change federal law in America so discrimination would no longer allowed anywhere in the private sector in any state.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">“The United States’ existing federal agency policies regarding the hiring of federal workers are sufficient to fulfill the obligations set forth in this Article,” the footnote states.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">“The Article thus requires no additional action on the part of the United States, including any amendments to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in order for the United States to be in compliance with the obligations set forth in this Article.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">Geoffrey Gertz, a fellow at the Washington, D.C., think tank Brookings Institution, called the footnote “ridiculous.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">“Honestly, whatever you think of the LGBTQ provisions in the new NAFTA, this outcome—to include them but nullify them with a footnote—is ridiculous,” Gertz <a href="https://twitter.com/geoffreygertz/status/1068529052724559873?" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">tweeted</span></a>. “And it's the kind of thing that will make progressives even more suspicious of engaging with trade liberalization.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">After learning of the new trade deal’s provisions on discrimination, a group of <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/these-38-gop-lawmakers-want-lgbt-protections-removed-new-nafta-deal-1221751" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">Republicans in Congress co-signed a letter</span></a> to President Trump urging him to rethink, saying there were “deeply concerned” by the “sexual orientation and gender identity language.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">“As a sovereign nation, the United States has the right to decide when, whether and how to tackle issues of civil rights, protected classes, and workplace rights,” the letter, sent in November, reads.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">“A trade agreement is no place for the adoption of social policy. It is especially inappropriate and insulting to our sovereignty to needlessly submit to social policies, which the United States Congress has so far explicitly refused to accept.”</span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><div style="font-size: 11pt; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><a href="http://fortune.com/2018/12/04/new-nafta-usmca-lgtbq-rights/" style="color: purple;" class="">http://fortune.com/2018/12/04/new-nafta-usmca-lgtbq-rights/</a><o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><b class="">‘New NAFTA’ Was Supposed to Include Robust LGBTQ Protections. But the U.S. Has All but Nullified Them in a Footnote<o:p class=""></o:p></b></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">By: Grace Dobush </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;" class=""> </span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">12/04/2018<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">When President Donald J. Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and (now former) Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto signed the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on Friday, the final draft was notably missing a proposed anti-discrimination clause—and it signals a win for Congressional Republicans<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">Last month, <a href="http://fortune.com/2018/11/16/house-conservatives-want-lgbtq-protections-removed-from-u-s-mexico-canada-trade-pact/" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">House Republicans</span></a> said the proposed discrimination protections in the USMCA, aka the ‘new NAFTA,’ infringed on U.S. autonomy, and they threatened to block approval of the deal in Congress if it included language specifying what constitutes sexual discrimination, as Trudeau has pushed for. “A trade agreement is no place for the adoption of social policy,” <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/16/house-conservatives-lgbt-protection-trade-pact-977288" target="_blank" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">read a letter signed by 40 lawmakers in November</span></a>.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">The <a href="https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/car-quotas-and-labour-rights-two-key-changes-in-the-newly-signed-usmca" target="_blank" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">original text</span></a> of the proposed agreement said all three countries must support “policies that protect workers against employment discrimination on the basis of sex, including with regard to pregnancy, sexual harassment, sexual orientation, gender identity.” The new wording asks each country to implement policies each “considers appropriate to protect workers against employment discrimination on the basis of sex.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">The United States <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/4720968/usmca-auto-sector-labour-rights/" target="_blank" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">added a footnote</span></a> saying: “The United States’ existing federal agency policies regarding the hiring of federal workers are sufficient to fulfill the obligations set forth in this Article. The Article thus requires no additional action on the part of the United States, including any amendments to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in order for the United States to be in compliance with the obligations set forth in this Article.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">The United States’ opting out of any further protections drew criticism from a fellow at the <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/10/02/5-things-to-know-about-usmca-the-new-nafta/" target="_blank" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">Brookings Institution,</span></a> who called the gist of the footnote “ridiculous.”<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">It’s unclear how “policies regarding the hiring of federal workers,” as mentioned in the U.S. footnote, would suffice to cover U.S. workers in the private sector. <o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">What’s more, there is no federal law in the United States barring discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. It’s currently legal to discriminate against gay employees in 29 states and transgender workers in 34 states. Discrimination based on sexual orientation was outlawed in Canada in 1996, <a href="https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/12/03/trump-usmca-mexico-canada/" target="_blank" style="color: purple;" class=""><span style="color: blue;" class="">PinkNews</span></a> reports, and discrimination based on gender identity or expression was banned n 2017. Mexico outlawed discrimination based on sexual orientation in 2003, but it has not banned discrimination based on gender identity or expression.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">The office of U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer did not immediately return <i class="">Fortune</i>‘s request for comment on the</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;" class=""> sexual orientation and gender identity bias clause in the USMCA.</span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">Before USMCA comes into effect, it must be approved by Congress, and the U.S. International Trade Commission has 100 days to create a report on the effects of the new deal.<o:p class=""></o:p></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class=""><br class=""></span></div><div style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt;" class=""><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" class="">Another notable point in the USMCA is the extension of drug patent protection across North America to at least 10 years—Canada’s current rules protect drug makers from generics for eight years, and Mexico’s just five years.</span></div></div></body></html>