home > by publication type > daily analysis > Much Ado about NAFTA
Email
| Author: |
|---|
General Motors, once the largest employer in Ohio, has moved many jobs to plants outside the United States such as this one in Toluca, Mexico. (AP/Marco Ugarte)
In state after state, the economy trumps national security in the concerns of both Republicans and Democrats voting in presidential nominating contests. Residents of few states, though, can compare to Ohio in their mistrust of trade agreements as the cause of economic problems. The Midwestern state, which will vote in party primaries on March 4, has lost more than a quarter of a million manufacturing jobs in the last eight years. Median income has dropped more than 10 percent in that time. In this climate, notes the Columbus Dispatch, “nothing resonates better with blue-collar Democrats in Ohio than the idea that wealthy manufacturers have taken advantage of trade agreements to move their production facilities abroad.”
So it’s little surprise that Democratic candidates Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have ratcheted up their “fair trade” rhetoric (WashPost) ahead of the Ohio vote. But their vehemence in attacking the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has raised eyebrows among some economists and trade experts. Clinton has aggressively defended herself against Obama’s assertions that she was a NAFTA booster. “You know, I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning,” Clinton said in their February 26 debate. Obama disputed this while stressing he thinks NAFTA has not been good for the country. He referred to “entire cities that have been devastated as a consequence of trade agreements that were not adequately structured to make sure that U.S. workers had a fair deal.” Both agreed in the debate that they would “opt out” of NAFTA unless proper labor and environmental standards were renegotiated into the deal.
Many economic analysts believe the focus on NAFTA is misplaced. To New York Times columnist David Leonhardt, the candidates’ calls for tougher labor and environment standards are silly. “They call the country’s trade policy a disaster, and yet their plan to fix it starts with, um, cracking down on Mexican pollution,” he writes. Ned Hill of Cleveland State University tells NPR that Ohio’s economic woes are not the fault of NAFTA but “because of the failed strategy of three companies”—Ford, Chrysler, and General Motors. The latter has been supplanted as the state’s main employer by Wal-Mart. Syndicated columnist Froma Harrop asserts U.S. voters should not be blaming NAFTA for manufacturing job losses (RealClearPolitics) but China’s entrance into the World Trade Organization. She notes that the U.S. trade deficit with China is three times as large as it is with Mexico.
NAFTA has amassed a mixed record since it came into force in 1994, a Congressional Budget Office report found after its first decade. A CFR Task Force in 2005 said NAFTA has “ transformed Mexico, but it has also deepened and made much more visible the divisions that exist in the country.” Some economists note that illegal immigration from Mexico to the United States has increased since NAFTA took effect (NYT).
What’s important now, say trade watchdogs like Lori Wallach, head of the U.S.-based Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, is for the Democratic candidates to better articulate how they would “restore the economic security” of the U.S. middle class. In this regard, says the New York Times’ Leonhardt, Obama and Clinton have come up with good ideas about investing in infrastructure, science, and alternative energy. And they are joined by the front-running Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, in supporting beefed-up Trade Adjustment Assistance, seen as crucial in helping U.S. workers displaced by trade. McCain, however, voted for NAFTA in 1994.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
Explore international efforts to curb nuclear proliferation with a new interactive from CFR's program on International Institutions and Global Governance.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
In War of Necessity, War of Choice, Richard N. Haass contrasts the decisions that shaped the conduct of two wars between the United States and Iraq involving the two presidents Bush and Saddam Hussein, and writes an authoritative, personal account of how U.S. foreign policy is made, what it should seek, and how it should be pursued.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba’s unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
As Ray Takeyh shows in Guardians of the Revolution, behind the famous personalities and extremist slogans of Iran is a nation that is far more pragmatic—and complex—than many in the West have been led to believe.
Complete list of CFR Books
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
The Canadian oil sands present an important challenge to policymakers: they promise energy security benefits but present climate change problems. Michael A. Levi assesses the energy security and climate change effects of the oil sands and makes recommendations for U.S. policymakers within the context of broader bilateral relations with Canada.
This report explores an important element of the maritime policy regime: the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Author Scott G. Borgerson examines the international negotiations that led to the convention, the history of debates in the United States over whether to join it, and the strategic importance of the oceans for U.S. foreign policy today.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.