House Democrats Differ on Path Forward on NAFTA After Meeting With Lighthizer
A senior member of the House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee said he sees a path forward for ratification of the new NAFTA, and thinks some of the concerns of Democrats can be solved without going back to the table. But some freshman Democrats who belong to the pro-growth New Democrat Coalition said U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer was unbending on a provision critical to their votes.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., told reporters at the Capitol April 2 that changes to the labor chapter and its enforcement can be done by getting Mexico and Canada to agree, but that the legal mechanism can be done through an implementing bill. He said the bill can contain language that says upon ratification, these changes will take effect in the treaty. "This cannot be a footnote or an ad lib or an ibid," he said. "It has to make it a lot more tangible than we’re used to." Pascrell said while passage of a labor law in Mexico is a necessary precursor, and then some evidence that the law will be enforced, he doesn't necessarily think Democrats will require waiting for evidence into 2020. He said he sees a path for passage. Pascrell has generally been a trade skeptic, and voted against the South Korea and Colombia free trade agreements.
Biologics, and the 12-year exclusivity period, dominated the hourlong discussion, several freshman members said.
Tom Malinowski, D-N.J., suggested that the exclusivity period could be changed without reopening the whole thing, because "I have no evidence that Canada or Mexico wanted that in the first place. One way or the other, it has to be fixed. That’s the bottom line." Rep. Susan Wild, a New Democrat elected in 2018 from a suburban Pennsylvania district, said everyone in the meeting promised voters they'd work to bring down drug prices. How can they "fulfill our promise to the voters that we are going to be working hard to bring down drug prices when at the same time we're voting for something that's going to raise the price of drugs in Mexico and Canada?"
In response to a question from International Trade Today, Wild said Lighthizer was absolutely not willing to shorten the 10-year exclusivity period in the treaty. "He was steadfast. That was a non-negotiable. He was unwavering on that issue." She said she has not made a decision either way, but said, "I was not impressed by anything I heard here today."
Rep. Veronica Escobar, who represents South Texas and is a NAFTA supporter, said she's hearing the same concerns echoed over and over again in every meeting. In response to an ITT question, she said biologics' exclusivity period "is absolutely a stumbling block. That is going to be a central issue to resolve."