Mara Lee

Two Ohio Democrats who voted against the original NAFTA -- Rep. Marcy Kaptur and Sen. Sherrod Brown -- have clearly not been won over by the efforts of U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to satisfy union autoworkers that the revised deal will stop the flow of jobs to Mexico. According to the Ohio state government, auto parts, auto manufacturing, and RV, tire and trailer manufacturing jobs employed more than 107,000 workers in 2019 -- though that included 1,700 who just lost their jobs at GM's Lordstown plant. That closure follows more than 38,500 jobs lost in the industry in the state between 2007 and 2009.

Nine members of the New Democrats -- free-trade oriented members whose votes will be needed to ratify the new NAFTA -- wrote to President Donald Trump March 27 arguing that imported cars are not a security threat and noting his response during a TV interview that acknowledged that they are not a threat. In the interview, he immediately added that the trade deficit is a threat. The letter, led by Rep. Terri Sewell, whose Alabama district is home to both Hyundai and Mercedes car plants, said, "We are pleased to hear that we are in agreement that no national security threat exists. Therefore, we urge you to remove any threat of unilateral tariffs on automobiles and auto parts under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act as soon as possible. Imposing tariffs under Section 232 on autos and auto parts for reasons not related to national security concerns clearly oversteps the authority granted by Congress."

As momentum seems to build in the Senate to rein in Section 232 tariffs, steel company CEOs told a sympathetic group of Congress members that the tariffs are working to increase domestic producers' market share and increase profits as well as employment numbers and pay for steelworkers. "The U.S. steel industry is still vulnerable. Now is not the time to blink," U.S. Steel CEO David Burritt said. Section 232 tariffs or a hard quota "must continue to be applied to all steel-producing countries, especially the top import sources. If the Section 232 doesn't apply everywhere, it's nowhere as border leaks will continue from global excess capacity."

After 25 Republican House members met with President Donald Trump and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to talk about how to ratify the new NAFTA, Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., said on Fox Business News March 26 that he thinks Congress can do it before the August recess.

Joe Comartin, Canada's top diplomat in Detroit, visited Capitol Hill to take the temperature of the chances of passage for the new NAFTA this year. He came away without much clarity.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, is finding a way to bridge the gap between an approach that would roll back existing Section 232 tariffs and prevent any new ones without congressional assent and an approach that would leave metals tariffs in place and give Congress the opportunity to rein in Section 232 authority only by disapproving tariffs that have been levied. The latter tack would require a veto-proof majority (see 1902120033).

Canada's top diplomat in Detroit, Consul General Joe Comartin, said the Canadians used to get assurances, whether from politicians or the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, that the tariffs on its steel and aluminum exports were going to come off soon. "We're not even getting those assurances anymore," he told International Trade Today March 27 in an interview. "We're just not seeing any movement on this side on the tariffs."

For months, Democrats have said that the 10-year biologics exclusivity period in the new NAFTA is a reason to reject it. A few days ago, House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., said it is one of the reasons he doesn't want to advance the treaty (see 1903250061). The U.S. gives biologic drug developers 12 years of data exclusivity, and the new NAFTA requires that all three countries provide 10 years of exclusivity. Currently, Canada provides eight years, and Mexico, five. During negotiations, two California Democrats, along with two Republicans, urged the U.S. trade representative to convince Canada and Mexico to grant 12 years' exclusivity, to preserve the U.S. biologic drug industry's economic position.

While a few Democrats on the House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee defended NAFTA's benefits, the largest segment of the Democrats at a March 26 hearing on trade and labor rules enforcement -- including the chairman -- agreed with union witnesses' arguments that the new NAFTA cannot help American workers unless negotiations are reopened. Shane Larson, the political director for the Communications Workers of America, talked about the job losses his members face when call centers go to Mexico and the Philippines. "The labor chapter is an improvement on the current NAFTA," he acknowledged, where it is a side letter. But, he said, "The enforcement piece is not there and that’s why we have to go back to the table. I know the administration has said, 'We can’t do that. We can’t do that.'

A bipartisan bill was recently introduced in the Senate to expand the Food and Drug Administration's oversight of cosmetics. The bill, co-sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, has been introduced in past Congresses, without advancing. In the House, new Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., has had an interest in dangerous additives to imported cosmetics (see 1802020044 and 1708020028), and is working on a bill to expand the FDA's authority on cosmetics.