New Dems Trade Co-Chair Says Constituents Concerned About Labor, State-to-State Disputes in New NAFTA
Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, who defeated a nine-term Republican incumbent last fall, is clear that NAFTA has benefited her district in the Houston area and the whole state of Texas. But Fletcher, who has been chosen as a co-chair of the trade task force in the New Democrats caucus, said she's not being urged by constituents to get NAFTA's replacement ratified as soon as possible.
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.
Instead, Fletcher said during a sit-down interview with International Trade Today, she's hearing concerns from voters about the agreement, and she's trying to find out "whether and how improvements can be made." She said constituents are asking for changes, but not explicitly saying that if the changes aren't made they want her to vote no.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer met with Fletcher and about 30 other freshman Democrats last week, and he tried to impress on them that it's not realistic to ask for reopening the deal. "The administration's position is [that] reopening the deal is not likely or advisable," she said. But she said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is talking about reopening the deal, and Fletcher noted that four of the last five trade deals were reopened before ratification.
She said House members asked Lighthizer: "Are side agreements really enforceable or effective?" She said Lighthizer did not lay out why they were a good alternative to going back to the negotiating table, instead just talked about them as an alternative.
Fletcher said that Lighthizer offered to meet one on one with those who wanted to talk more about their problems with the deal. "I'm not sure that at the end of the day, minds will be changed on some of the issues," she said, even as he makes a favorable impression in his openness to listening to House members. "I do think there are strong sticking points amongst freshmen and amongst a lot of Democrats. It seems to me pretty clear that one of the key issues we have to deal with is the [Section] 232 tariffs."
Fletcher and other New Democrats were lobbied last week by both Canadian and Mexican diplomats on the steel and aluminum tariffs. Mexican diplomats are also arguing that the reforms under debate in the Senate will fundamentally change its labor system, and she said she feels that the Mexican government has "a real sincere commitment" to improving working conditions.
She did not say if she is convinced that the labor chapter is sufficient, after hearing from them. She said she's hearing consistently from constituents that they are worried that labor enforcement will not have teeth. "I've heard concerns from my constituents concerns about the state-to-state dispute system, as well," she said. "When you can't agree on who's on the panel and you can't move forward, it really makes for a huge problem in terms of moving forward on the agreements in the first place."
She said she hears a "mix of opinions" on whether she should condition her vote on more changes, but said there is agreement that a withdrawal from NAFTA would be bad for Texas. She added, "I've heard a lot of concerns lately about the threats to close the border."
She is not hearing from constituents about biologics, but she said the 10-year exclusivity period comes up over and over as Lighthizer meets with Democrats. She said they ask why it's 10 years, and not eight, as it was in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and why is it in there at all. Lighthizer explains that U.S. law is 12 years, and we'd like our trading partners to match that, but 10 years was a compromise. "I think his explanation was satisfying to some people and not to others," she said. Even though it doesn't change the cost of drugs currently, she said many members want to shorten that 12-year period "and so they don't want to have a trade agreement that would constrict their opportunities to address it."
"It doesn't surprise me as an issue because I think that many members of the caucus are committed to addressing the cost of health care," she said, adding that for many members, the cost of health care "is the No. 1 thing they hear from their constituents. It's true for me."