Trump’s Trade Deal Steals a Page From Democrats’ Playbook
"Trump’s trade policy is a disaster. Here’s what the next president should do. [...] Trade deals must be written by a broader set of stakeholders P - From NAFTA to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, our trade deals have not been about lowering tariffs and, you know, freeing up trade. They’ve been technical rulebooks on how to manage trading among countries with different legal, financial, labor, and environmental systems and standards. P - As you’d expect, whom these rules help is a function of writes them. Thus far, that’s been investors, not workers or consumers]"
With more consultation with unions mentioned below it looks as someone has been listening.
The president has made a trade agreement that caters to his opposition — and that’s why it stands a chance of passing Congress.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested that a deal on the new North American trade pact was close, but that a vote on it could slip into next year. Erin Schaff/The New York Times
By Ana Swanson and Emily Cochrane
Dec. 1, 2019
WASHINGTON — House Democrats return to Washington on Monday facing a difficult choice: Should they hand President Trump a victory in the midst of a heated impeachment battle or walk away from one of the most progressive trade pacts ever negotiated by either party?
The Trump administration agreed with Canada and Mexico on revisions .. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/30/world/americas/trump-trudeau-canada-mexico.html .. to the North American Free Trade Agreement one year ago, but the deal still needs the approval of Congress. A handshake agreement with the administration in the coming days would give the Democratic caucus a tangible accomplishment on an issue that has animated its base. It could also give Democrats a chance to lock in long-sought policy changes to a trade pact they criticize as prioritizing corporations over workers, laying the groundwork for future trade agreements.
Those factors have coaxed Democrats to the table at an improbable moment, when Washington is split by partisan fights and deeply divided over an impeachment inquiry. After months of talks, including through the Thanksgiving break, both sides say they’re in the final phase of negotiations. But Democrats insist the administration must make more changes to the labor, environmental and other provisions before Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California will bring legislation implementing the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement to a vote.
“By any standard, what we’ve already negotiated is substantially better than NAFTA,” said Representative Richard E. Neal of Massachusetts, who is heading the Democratic group negotiating with the administration. “Labor enforcement, in my judgment, is the last hurdle.”
The deal presents a dilemma for Democrats because it contains measures they have supported for years, from requiring more of a car’s parts to be made in North America to rolling back a special system of arbitration for corporations and strengthening Mexican labor unions.
In borrowing from the Democrats’ playbook, the revised pact reflects Mr. Trump’s populist trade approach — one that has blurred party lines and appealed to many of the blue-collar workers Democrats once counted among their base. It also reflects a broader backlash to more traditional free trade deals, which have been criticized for hollowing out American manufacturing and eliminating jobs.
“Taken as a whole, it looks more like an agreement that would’ve been negotiated under the Obama administration,” said Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio and a former trade representative .. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/18/business/congressman-from-ohio-is-chosen-for-trade-post.html .. during the George W. Bush administration, who supports the pact. “There are some aspects to it that Democrats have been calling for, for decades.”
In fact, it goes so far to the left of traditional Republican views on trade that some congressional Republicans only grudgingly support it — or may vote against the final deal.
Senator Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania, one of the most ardent Republican critics of the deal, has called the pact “a complete departure from the free trade agreements we’ve pursued through our history” and urged fellow Republicans to vote it down.
“If we adopt this agreement, it will be the first time that I know of in the history of the Republic that we will agree to a new trade agreement that is designed to diminish trade,” Mr. Toomey said at a hearing in July, sitting next to a large red sign that said: “NAFTA > U.S.M.C.A.”
Still, most Republicans have supported the pact and urged rapid action. If the deal is not approved soon, proponents fear it could become the target of more frequent attacks by Democratic presidential candidates, making it even more difficult for Democrats in Congress to vote for the pact.
Mr. Trump has spent weeks accusing Ms. Pelosi of being “grossly incompetent” and prioritizing impeachment over a trade deal that could benefit workers. “She’s incapable of moving it,” Mr. Trump said last week, warning that a “great trade deal for the farmers, manufacturers, workers of all types, including unions” could fall apart if the Democrats don’t take action.
President Trump sought to blame Ms. Pelosi, warning that a “great trade deal for the farmers, manufacturers, workers of all types, including unions” could fall apart if Democrats don’t act. Al Drago for The New York Times
While long demonized by Mr. Trump, Democrats and labor unions, NAFTA has become critical to companies and consumers across North America, guiding commerce around the continent for a quarter century. Entire industries have grown up around the trade agreement, which allows goods like cars, avocados and textiles to flow tariff free among Canada, Mexico and the United States.
But Mr. Trump and other critics have blamed the deal for encouraging companies to move their factories to Mexico. The president has routinely called NAFTA the “worst trade deal ever made” and promised during his campaign that he would rewrite it in America’s favor — or scrap it .. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/02/us/politics/trump-withdraw-nafta.html .. altogether.
The revised pact took over a year of rancorous talks .. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/us/politics/us-canada-nafta-deal-deadline.html .. to complete, resulting in a complex 2,082-page agreement covering a wide range of topics. While much of it simply updates NAFTA for the 21st century, it also contains changes intended to encourage manufacturing in the United States, including by raising how much of a car must be made in North America to qualify for zero tariffs.
The new agreement requires at least 70 percent of an automaker’s steel and aluminum to be bought in North America, which could help boost United States metal production. And 40 to 45 percent of a car’s content must be made by workers earning an average wage of $16 an hour. That $16 floor is an effort to force auto companies to either raise low wages in Mexico or hire more workers in the United States and Canada, an outcome Democrats have long supported.
The pact also includes, at least on paper, provisions that aim to do away with sham Mexican labor unions that have done little to help workers by requiring every company in Mexico to seek worker approval of collective bargaining agreements by secret ballot in the next four years.
Some Democrats are skeptical that the Mexican government will allocate the necessary funds to ensure that companies are complying with these changes. But if the rules are enforced, Democrats say they may help stem the flow of jobs to Mexico and put American workers on a more equal footing.
Several sticking points remain, including a provision that offers an advanced class of drugs .. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/us/politics/nafta-drug-prices.html .. 10 years of protection from cheaper alternatives, which Democratic lawmakers say would lock in high drug prices.
Other Democratic proposals aim to add teeth to the pact’s labor and environmental provisions. Democrats want to reverse a change made by the Trump administration that they say essentially guts NAFTA’s enforcement system. They are also arguing for additional resources that would allow customs officials to inspect factories or stop goods at the border if companies violate labor rules.
----- [INSERT:Mexico Offers Compromise to End Impasse with U.S. Over New Nafta
By Nacha Cattan and Lorena Rios December 4, 2019, 3:04 AM GMT+11
* AMLO won’t permit inspectors, willing to allow joint panels * Mexico business group called U.S. labor demands unnacceptable
Mexico is offering an olive branch to U.S. Democrats after rejecting a demand they say is key to approving a new North American trade agreement.
President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said he’s willing to allow panels with U.S. and Mexican judges to resolve labor disputes at specific factories.
He made that promise at his morning press conference on Tuesday, when he firmly rejected requests by Democrats in the House of Representatives to allow international inspectors to enter Mexican factories to ensure they’re complying with labor laws.
Democrats are negotiating with Mexico and Canada changes to the new trade agreement known as USMCA which they consider vital for passage of the accord. USMCA has been approved by leaders of all three nations, but only Mexico’s Senate has ratified it.
“We don’t accept a kind of inspector to see that companies are carrying out what’s established in the law,” Lopez Obrador said. “What’s being proposed is that, if there’s a dispute with a company, we accept that there could be a panel, which is different, where we participate together.”
Mr. Neal told reporters late last month that he believed House Democrats could soon work out their differences with Robert Lighthizer, Mr. Trump’s trade representative.
“Labor enforcement, in my judgment, is the last hurdle,” said Representative Richard E. Neal of Massachusetts, who is heading the Democratic group negotiating with the Trump administration over the trade deal. J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press
Ms. Pelosi, who has continued to suggest that she wants to “get to yes” on the deal, responded to Mr. Trump’s rebuke last week by saying that she needed to see the administration’s commitments in writing before moving forward.
“Unless Donald Trump agrees to add stronger labor and environmental standards and enforcement, and secures progress on labor reforms in Mexico, NAFTA job outsourcing will continue,” said Lori Wallach, the director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch. “And the Big Pharma giveaways Trump added must go: They make U.S.M.C.A. worse than NAFTA.”
But Democrats say that if the additional changes they are seeking get made, the deal would be more progressive than the original NAFTA and the Trans-Pacific Partnership — both of which were negotiated by Democratic administrations. Mr. Trump pulled the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership within days of taking office.
Jesús Seade, Mexico’s chief negotiator for the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, said many tweaks Democrats want are “improvements.”
“If the amendments suggested are acceptable improvements, then there’s no reason we should not be shaking hands next week,” he said on Friday, after meeting with Canadian officials.
Some congressional Republicans, who generally oppose unions and believe the deal’s new rules could burden auto companies, have been taken aback by how far the administration has gone to woo Democrats.
At a private lunch on June 11 at the Capitol, Republican senators peppered Vice President Mike Pence with questions about why the administration was not lobbying Democrats harder to back the deal. Mr. Pence claimed that it already had the support of 80 Democrats, a high number that caught some Republicans by surprise, according to a person familiar with the meeting who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“What’s in it for Pelosi?” asked Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska.
Mr. Pence responded that the pact had the most aggressive labor and automotive standards ever put in a trade agreement — an admission for some Republicans in the room that it was the worst trade agreement they had been asked to support.
Senator Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania is one of the most ardent Republican critics of the deal. Erin Schaff/The New York Times
Jennifer Hillman, a trade expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said many of Mr. Lighthizer and Mr. Trump’s views on trade “are basically borrowing what Democrats have said for many, many years.”
“To the extent that Trump gained votes in the industrial Midwest, it was by espousing Democratic trade ideas,” she said.
Throughout the negotiations, Mr. Lighthizer has kept up a steady dialogue with labor unions like the United Steelworkers and Democrats like Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Neal and Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio. At times, Mr. Lighthizer appeared more at odds with congressional Republicans and traditional allies like the Chamber of Commerce, who he said should give up “a little bit of the sugar” that had sweetened trade agreements for multinational corporations.
Robert Lighthizer, the United States trade representative, has at times appeared more at odds with congressional Republican than with Democrats. Anna Moneymaker/The New York Times
“If you can get some labor unions on board, Democrats on board, mainstream Republicans on board, I think you can get big numbers,” Mr. Lighthizer said in January 2018. “If you do, that’s going to change the way all of us look at these kind of deals.”
Ana Swanson is a trade reporter in the Washington bureau. She previously worked at The Washington Post, where she covered trade, the Federal Reserve and the economy. @AnaSwanson
Emily Cochrane is a reporter in the Washington bureau, covering Congress. She was raised in Miami and graduated from the University of Florida. @ESCochrane
"Trump’s trade policy is a disaster. Here’s what the next president should do."
Mostly False
"NAFTA, supported by the Secretary (Clinton), cost us 800,000 jobs nationwide." — Bernie Sanders on Sunday, March 6th, 2016 in the Democratic debate in Flint, Mich.
By Jon Greenberg on Monday, March 7th, 2016 at 3:02 p.m.
[...]
Our ruling
Sanders said that NAFTA, which Clinton used to support, cost the U.S. economy 800,000 jobs. There is a report from a left-leaning policy group that reached that conclusion. On the other hand, many other nonpartisan reports found that the trade deal produced neither significant job losses nor job gains. This is a result of competing economic models and the challenges of teasing out the effects of NAFTA from everything else that has taken place in the economy.
The report Sanders cited is an outlier, and his use of its findings ignores important facts that would give a different impression. We rate his statement Mostly False.
Editor's note: Soon after we published, we heard from Robert Scott of EPI and added his comments.
Trump to drop labeling China a currency manipulator, report says
"Trump’s trade policy is a disaster. Here’s what the next president should do. [...] In fact, while China did for years suppress the value of its currency in a powerful and successful effort to gain a trade advantage, it has not done that for a few years now,though some other countries still do so .. https://www.piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/currency-manipulation-continues-decline . This includes what happened in China last week: This latest fall in the value of the yuan is market-driven, as the People’s Bank of China had been propping up the currency (when the bank stopped for a moment, it tanked)."
So, according to the above, though Trump and others have continued to label China a currency manipulator they haven't been for years.
Administration preparing to drop charges as the two superpowers move closer to a trade deal
Dominic Rushe @dominicru
Tue 14 Jan 2020 06.21 AEDT Last modified on Tue 14 Jan 2020 06.25 AEDT
The decision to drop the designation comes ahead of the announcement of a trade deal between the two sides. Photograph: AFP via Getty Images
The Trump administration is preparing to drop charges that China has been unfairly manipulating its currency as the two economic superpowers move closer to a trade deal.
The decision to drop the designation, first reported by Fox Business News, comes ahead of the announcement of a trade deal between the two sides, expected on Wednesday. The trade dispute has rocked US manufacturing and caused an economic slowdown in China.
Senior Chinese officials arrived in Washington on Monday to finalize the “phase one” trade agreement, which will be signed at the White House.
Last month, the US and China agreed to a partial trade deal with Beijing pledging to purchase up to $200bn of American products over the next two years, including agricultural goods from the US’s hard-hit farmers.
Donald Trump has long argued that China undervalues its currency in order to game international trade, charging the country was perpetrating one of the “greatest thefts in the history of the world”.
But the dispute has hurt both sides. On Monday the car giant Ford said its China sales had fallen for the third year in a row in 2019, dropping to less than half of what it sold at its peak in 2016.
Wednesday’s agreement is expected to contain a promise from both sides that they will not use their currency to unfair advantage.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
