Former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull offered a full-throated defense of free trade in a speech to a Washington think tank. "There is no question that free trade and open markets means more jobs," Turnbull said Oct. 4 at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. He said his consistent rejection of protectionism seemed out of step with the global trend after the Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump. But he spoke with pride of how Australia, New Zealand and Japan led the charge to save the Trans-Pacific Partnership after the U.S. withdrawal. Even without the U.S., the remaining 11 countries account for 15 percent of global trade volumes, he said.
Witnesses from the United States Council for International Business, the Aluminum Association and the International Intellectual Property Alliance say that China is not living up to its World Trade Organization commitments on many fronts, even as there are some signs of movement away from practices that damage foreign competitors.
The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement is not a rewritten NAFTA, President Donald Trump said Oct. 1. Instead, "This one is a brand new deal," he said during a White House event. Lawyers who have begun reading the text say the treaty builds on the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the original NAFTA, while including some important new provisions. Mark Warner, a Canadian-U.S. trade lawyer, said that while Trump's speech was full of puffery, "the auto stuff is significant. I don’t think anyone should say it’s not significant."
Canada and the U.S. reached a deal on NAFTA 2.0 late Sept. 30, which was announced a half hour before the deadline to release the text.
As effusive as President Donald Trump was about the significance of his NAFTA rewrite, he was cautious about its chances of getting through Congress next year. Polls suggest Democrats could retake the majority in the House of Representatives, and there is a significant number of Democrats voted against the original NAFTA, or who pledged to vote against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The earliest a vote could come, because of timelines laid out in fast track, would be in February. But it's likely to be later, since that doesn't include the time needed for Congress to draft implementing legislation.
Democrats will be crucial to ratifying a new NAFTA if House Republicans lose the majority in November, whether the deal includes Canada or not. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has said repeatedly that he expects significant numbers of Democrats to support the new NAFTA. Changes he won from Mexico should be good for domestic manufacturing, he believes, between bringing labor provisions into the body of the agreement and changing auto rules of origin to encourage manufacturing in the U.S. (and Canada, if it decides to join the deal).
The U.S. will be seeking a quite different agreement with Japan than what was garnered through the Trans-Pacific Partnership, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said on a call with reporters Sept. 26. Lighthizer, who called TPP "a very weak agreement," said he didn't want to go into a litany of all of TPP's problems, but he mentioned rules of origin. Democrats criticized the TPP because it only required 45 percent of a car's content to be made in the region (see 1601120051), and given that Mexico and Canada were signatories to the agreement, that could have been a back door way to get cars into the U.S. duty free from its neighbors that had more Chinese or European content than North American content.
A bill that would allow Congress to reject safeguard tariffs and Section 301 tariffs, and that would require congressional approval before Section 232 tariffs could go into effect was introduced in the House of Representatives Sept. 26. The bill, called the Promoting Responsible and Free Trade Act, has co-sponsors Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., and Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C., who was defeated in a primary earlier this year, ostensibly in retaliation for being insufficiently loyal to Donald Trump.
When Mexico was confronted with an administration that doesn't agree that free trade is good for America, it had "no option but to play ball," given the interdependence of the Mexican and U.S. economies, said Karen Antebi, economic counselor for the Trade and NAFTA Office at the Mexican Embassy. Antebi, one of the speakers at the Global Business Dialogue event Sept. 26, said Mexico wanted to reassure foreign investors, preserve economic access to the U.S. market and maintain North American competitiveness in a new NAFTA. "Clearly U.S. demands drove the negotiations," she said. "What can I say? This was a pragmatic, not a principle-driven negotiation."
Both Democrats and Republicans said auto tariffs aren't going to help add U.S. manufacturing, and numerous members of the Senate Finance Committee questioned the logic of the Trump administration's national security rationale for threatening them. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, noted that he has a bill that would not allow the president to act unilaterally to raise tariffs on autos or auto parts under Section 232, and that Honda North America has endorsed it. But little of the two-hour hearing focused on how Congress could take back power on trade to constrain the administration. Even committee ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who criticizes the president's trade policy as chaotic and ineffective, hedged that "perhaps" it is "time for the Congress to think about reclaiming that authority," in his opening statement.