Renegotiating NAFTA

During the presidential campaign, candidate Donald Trump repeatedly called for renegotiating NAFTA, the North America Free Trade Agreement.  NAFTA is the twenty-plus year old agreement negotiated by Pres. George Bush, the Senior and pushed through Congress by Pres, Bill Clinton.  It was the first trade agreement which contained an Investor-State-Protection Clause, known as Chapter 11 in the agreement.  So it cemented the corporate coup of international trade, a coup which had already achieved much via the World Trade Organization (WTO).  Following the Battle in Seattle, where the WTO was having their international meeting of ministers and in which the protesters in the streets forced the cancellation of the meeting, it became clear that large multi-national global agreements were no longer going to be possible and corporate chiefs decided that bi-lateral and regional agreements would be the way forward for the corporate masters. It was with that perspective that NAFTA was agreed to by the United States, Canada and Mexico, and enacted. 

Now with trade having been an issue in the 2016 presidential election, first because Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders bought it up repeatedly and then because Republican Donald Trump tapped into the fears of globalization with its damage to working families and the environment, President Trump has said that NAFTA will be renegotiated or tossed out entirely. 

But are the objectives of Trump the same as those who have opposed agreements like the US-So. Korea, Columbia, Panama and, most recently, the Trans Pacific Partnership?  Assuming they are not, then what are the objectives for opponents of corporate free trade?

Please see our page on Fair Trade for answers to these questions from a progressive American viewpoint. 

Common Frontiers, a coalition of Canadian social justice organizations, has issued a statement on these questions.  This is part of their statement and reflective the same objectives that American progressive non-corporate forces share. 
Revision to the terms of the treaty must have at its core the objective establishment of fair trade not free trade and economic relations based on social justice, sovereignty and sustainable development. 
  • Negotiations to replace NAFTA should be open and public.
  • Canadian Indigenous people should have a seat at the negotiating table.
  • NAFTA Chapter 11 should be eliminated.  Corporations should use the respective national court systems to settle complaints.
  • Nothing in a new agreement should prohibit governments from taking measures necessary to protect the environment and energy sovereignty.
  • A new agreement should return to governments the right to use procurement policies to promote national development and job creation. The current weak and unenforceable NAFTA "side agreement" to protect labour must be replaced by enforceable provisions that fully safeguard decent work and labour rights in all three countries.  
  • Remove all references to water as a tradable good, service or investment.
  • Any new deal to replace NAFTA should ensure the protection of Canadian Medicare and Canada’s Orderly Marketing System.
  • Restore local and national sovereignty over farm and food policy.
  • End the energy chapter’s proportional sharing provision - it stands as a major obstacle for Canada in addressing climate change.
  • A global agreement on migration should not be limited to business people or certain professionals but include the International Bill of Human Rights and labour rights for all migrant workers.

PETITION

9/16/17 - Petition demanding that our Representatives Vote NO on any agreement containing ISDS

​8/20/17 - Petition from Citizens Trade Campaign regarding ISDS

Post Card Campaign

Click the post card below to print and mail to your US Senators and Representative
Feb. 2017
US Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) introduces legislation requiring that NAFTA re-negotiations begin no later than June 1, 2017.  
Read the legislation here.
Read Rep. Peter DeFazio's press release here.
Read the statement from Sierra Club here.
Popular Resistance wrote these as objectives for a Fair Trade agenda:

We must demand that agreements are used to:
  • Protect workers and guarantee a living wage
  • Protect animals and the environment
  • Enforce climate agreements
  • Encourage a rapid transition to clean renewable energy
  • Guarantee access to necessary health care and pharmaceuticals
  • Raise food safety standards
  • Protect small and medium sized farms and businesses
  • End conditions of poverty and militarization that drive migration
  • Prevent privatization of public goods
  • Protect net neutrality

News and Articles

March 2017.  ISDS: The Threat That Keeps on Threatening.  While Trump talks about need to renegotiate NAFTA, he says nothing about Investor-State-Dispute-Settlement provisions of the agreement.

Feb. 2017.  US Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) introduces legislation requiring that NAFTA re-negotiations begin no later than June 1, 2017.   Read the legislation here. Read the statement from Sierra Club here.

Jan. 18, 2017.  Trump, Canada and the future of NAFTA by MATTHEW KRONBYMILOS BARUTCISKI, writing in the The Globe And Mail

Jan 18, 2017. Trump administration will press Canada, Mexico to reopen NAFTA, CBS News | Business

Statements

Feb 6, 2018  Letter to Pres Trump by 6 US Democratic Senators, calling for "fundamentally rewriting NAFTA to eliminate its incentives to outsource American jobs, and to level the playing field by adding strong labor and environmental provisions...."  

Jan 27, 2017  Principles of a new U.S. trade policy for North American agriculture  This is a statement on non-corporate farming organizations detailing the objectives of renegotiation of NAFTA.  These organizations co-sponsored this statement: Food & Water Watch, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, National Family Farm Coalition, National Farmers Union,
R-CALF, Rural Coalition  PDF copy

Jan. 18, 2017  Groups from Mexico, Canada and the U.S. Demand NAFTA Replacement.  Statement from the Citizens Trade Campaign (US), Common Frontiers (Canada) and Mexico Better Without the TPP (Mexico)