Pro-Trade Democrats Say Lighthizer Avoided Many Key Questions on USMCA

Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., said they asked Lighthizer to define "shortly," because the president said they'd be sending a draft over shortly, but she said there was no clarity there. "Some of us were pressing him on the timing," said Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis., a Trade Task Force co-chairman. "I'm afraid the president is setting us up for another budget/border wall fight this fall, which could suck the air out of getting anything done. I suggested that realistically, if we're hoping to move it, we're going to have to be serious about [the time period of the] pre-August recess, otherwise we're getting into the 2020 campaign and this thing could just not happen."

Many members brought up the retaliatory tariffs in place because of Section 232 tariffs on Canada and Mexico during the meeting March 12. International Trade Today asked if Lighthizer talked about the quotas he's seeking to replace those tariffs, and Kind said he was asked about that. "There's no question we have an administration and we have a trade ambassador that's addicted to tariffs," he said. "They love 232, using it as a point of leverage in order to coerce countries to go to the table and try to negotiate. They're doing the same thing with the threat of auto 232 tariffs, too. There are consequences to playing that game, and we're feeling it back home in our districts. Bob [Lighthizer] might be an expert in steel -- we're 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. That's been clearly communicated to him on numerous occasions."

New Democrats Chairman Derek Kilmer, D-Wash., said members told Lighthizer that a threatened withdrawal with NAFTA would harm the ability of members to get through their concerns on the NAFTA rewrite. He also heard "concerns about the president's abuse of 232 authorities, ostensibly for national security reasons." Kilmer said, "I think he also sort of walked around that issue as well."

Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, D-Texas, is a freshman and is also a chairwoman of the Trade Task Force. She said the top issue she's hearing from businesses and on the left is enforceability. She said under NAFTA, it's difficult to get panel members appointed, which prevents disputes from getting resolved.

In response to a question on whether Lighthizer said the biologics exclusivity period could be changed, Kind replied, "He kind of stepped around that issue, quite frankly. Current law here in the U.S. is 12, Mexico's I think is at zero, Canada is at five." Kind said a freshman in the room asked if the treaty would limit Congress' ability to shorten the U.S. exclusivity period in the future. "Obviously that creates conflict within our caucus," Kind said. Mexican officials and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, have said that can't be changed without reopening negotiations.

"I think [Lighthizer] is concerned, opening it up with the new government in Mexico, what they would do if they have a swipe at this themselves. [New Mexican President] AMLO was comfortable just inheriting this and letting it move forward, but if you open it up, I think the ambassador's concerned that all bets are off. And this could take a turn for the worse in a hurry."

Kind did not endorse that view, and said he shares the concerns that are being brought forward. "It's not unprecedented ... to have to go back and open up in order to accommodate concerns being made by members," he said. "We'll just see if there's a path forward in doing it."