Urge your representatives to Get US Out! of NAFTA & USMCA (clean thread)

Chief executives from American steel producers urged lawmakers to maintain strong U.S. tariffs on the metal on Wednesday to protect their industry, as Senate efforts to rein in President Donald Trump's tariff powers gained steam.The CEOs of top U.S. steelmakers Nucor Corp, United States Steel Corp, ArcelorMittal SA and Commercial Metals Co told the Congressional Steel Caucus that the "Section 232" steel tariffs were just starting to allow their industry to recover from damage caused by years of dumped imports and needed to be kept in place long-term.


Little has been done to reduce excess steel production capacity in China that U.S. producers blame for most of the industry's woes, and without the tariffs, unfairly traded imports would flood back into the U.S. market, the executives said.
"Now is not the time to blink," U.S. Steel CEO David Burritt told the lawmakers at a hearing on Wednesday. "Section 232 must continue to be applied to all countries, especially the largest import sources, whether that's a tariff or a hard quota. Even our best allies can be conduits for foreign steel from China or elsewhere."
Canada and Mexico are trying to negotiate a plan to lift U.S. metals tariffs from their products. The Trump administration is demanding quotas to limit import volumes in lieu of tariffs, but Canada and Mexico are resisting.
Earlier this week, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer made little headway in a meeting to resolve the issue, a Canadian official told Reuters.
"There was not a meeting of the minds," the official said. "That of course is an opportunity for the minister to reflect and think about what our next steps are."


Several Republican U.S. senators are combining forces on legislation to limit Trump's ability to impose tariffs under Section 232 of the Cold War-era Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, who represents the farming state of Iowa, on Tuesday said he would lead the effort aimed at restoring Congress' constitutional authority over trade matters. His plan calls for Section 232 tariffs to be limited to a defined period of time unless extended by Congress.
United Steelworkers President Leo Gerard told the steel caucus lawmakers that Canada should be exempted from the Section 232 tariffs because of the high level of cross-border integration and common ownership in the industry. His union represents about 9,000 Canadian steel workers and 50,000 at U.S. mills.
But Representative Mike Bost, a Republican whose district saw U.S. Steel restart two blast furnaces and rehire 800 workers at its Granite City, Illinois mill last year, made clear that he was focused on rebuilding steelmaking capacity in the United States, not Canada.
"I want to let you know that the focus of this committee should be our U.S. workers," Bost said.
The steel executives also called on the lawmakers to boost U.S. demand for steel by passing a significant infrastructure investment package this year.

"Please let this year be the time to stop talking and start investing," said ArcelorMittal USA President John Brett.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/dont-blink-tr...--finance.html
 
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said the House of Representatives would not consider approving the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) until Mexico adopts and implements a labor reform that the three countries agreed upon during USMCA negotiations, Politico reported April 2. Pelosi is also pushing for the inclusion of environmental protections and enforcement of agreements on pharmaceuticals in the deal.

More at: https://worldview.stratfor.com/situ...il-mexico-implements-labor-reform-pelosi-says
 
Following a suggestion by Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that changes to the USMCA needed to be made in the actual text of the agreement before Democrats would pass the USMCA, both Mexican and Canadian officials have rejected reopening renegotiations.

“We’re saying that enforcement has to be in the treaty, not in the implementing legislation,” Pelosi recently told Politico Playbook during an interview on Tuesday. Early on, high-ranking Democrats had sounded as if they would accept the USMCA if they could tweak the legislation to implement the USMCA — in an effort to assure that Democrat goals would be met.
On Thursday, Jesús Seade Kuri, the Undersecretary for North America for Mexico’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs shot down Pelosi’s request. “Reopening it is as good as killing it,” Seade Kuri said. Likewise, Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland also ruled out the possibility of reopening negotiations, comparing the suggestion to opening “Pandora’s box.”
“When it comes to the issue of actually opening up the agreement, that's where Canada's view is, we've done our deal,” Freeland told reporters on Thursday. “This was a very intense negotiation. A lot of time, a lot of effort went into it, compromises were made on all sides, and we believe that people need to be very careful around opening up what could really be a Pandora's box.”


More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/worl...31940-mexico-and-canada-no-to-reopening-usmca
 
Members of the Democratic Party in the U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee have expressed skepticism that the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) will significantly improve labor standards in Mexico, according to an April 11 letter to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, Inside U.S. Trade reported.

The Ways and Means Committee's letter could pose a serious challenge to the USMCA's ratification as the agreement requires the panel's approval.

More at: https://worldview.stratfor.com/situ...dispute-usmca-effects-mexican-labor-standards
 
Mexico’s Senate this week approved a sweeping package that focuses on labor law enforcement in the country.

The move follows the successful negotiation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which includes unprecedented labor and environmental provisions and is designed to replace NAFTA.
But many Democrats on Capitol Hill argue the USMCA doesn’t provide for enforcement of the agreed-to labor standards.
“Clearly the vote [the Mexican Senate] took, the fact they did that is good for workers in Mexico, but we still have to have stronger enforcement,” said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
“This has been a problem in past agreements. When you don’t have the enforcement language in the same language as the trade agreement, it makes it less likely to be enforced,” said Pocan.
He added it “should be an easy lift” to add enforcement language before the USMCA is taken up by the House.
But there’s no guarantee the agreement will make it to the House floor. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said at a press conference Thursday that while she wants to add pharmaceutical and environmental provisions to the trade deal, “the overarching issue is enforcement.
“You can have all the good language in the world that you want, but if you don’t have enforcement, you’re just having a conversation. You’re not having a real negotiation,” she said.
Adding new language would mean reopening negotiations, something Mexico and the Trump administration are reluctant to do. Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney recently rejected Pelosi’s demand to renegotiate the USMCA.


More at: https://thehill.com/policy/finance/...fficial-hits-dems-for-opposition-to-new-nafta
 
President Donald Trump said on Thursday that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not understand the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade deal and had told the U.S. trade representative, Robert Lighthizer, she wanted two weeks to get to know the agreement."Pelosi does not understand the bill, she doesn't understand it ... so she's got to get up to snuff, learn the bill," Trump said at a White House event.
"She's a mess. Look, let's face it, she doesn't understand it," Trump said.
Pelosi, responding to Trump's remarks, tweeted: "When the 'extremely stable genius' starts acting more presidential, I’ll be happy to work with him on infrastructure, trade and other issues."
Pelosi was invoking a comment made by Trump earlier on Thursday, when he called himself "an extremely stable genius" as the two engaged in a heated war of words.
Republicans in Congress are pushing for ratification of the USMCA, which would replace the 25-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement, before lawmakers leave Washington for their August recess. As the House of Representatives speaker, Pelosi, a Democrat, controls when any initial vote could take place.
Text of the agreement has been published since October 2018, but some Democratic lawmakers have demanded stronger enforcement provisions for USMCA's new labor and environmental standards and it is unclear whether this can be achieved through the USMCA's implementing legislation.

A two-week study period would eat up a dwindling number of legislative days before Congress starts its break on Aug. 3. "I think that's a long time," said Trump, who has been feuding with Democrats over the probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/trump-says-house-speaker-pelosi-wants-two-weeks-202149202--finance.html
 
USMCA surrender agreement, NAFTA 2.0 - New World Order

NAFTA.jpg


USMCA surrender agreement, signed. Officially a third world craphole now.
 
Vice President Mike Pence may have assured Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that the Trump administration was "absolutely committed" to passing USMCA this summer, but that was before Robert Lighthizer infuriated Democrats by starting the clock on bringing legislation to ratify the treaty before Congress - and also before President Trump revealed his plans to impose tariffs on Mexican imports.

The chances of USMCA passing were already looking tenuous, as Democrats have appeared reluctant to work with President Trump to facilitate what would be his biggest trade triumph to date. But now that Trump has angered Mexico and Democrats with the new tariffs, chances of USMCA passing have fallen from 'low' to 'nearly zero', according to a team of analysts at Goldman Sachs.

In a note to clients published on Friday, Goldman explained that it believes Trump will move ahead with 5% tariffs on Mexican imports on June 10 - at least that's the bank's base case, even as its analysts concede that Trump never followed through on threats to close the southern border.
And, assuming the tariffs do take effect, Democrats in the House will likely slow consideration of USMCA - likely missing the 90-day window for consideration triggered by Lighthizer on Thursday - and greatly increasing the chances that the deal won't be ratified until after the 2020 election

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019...ont-be-ratified-until-after-2020-goldman-says
 
This is a horrid treaty. I hope Rand can get to him on it, or this may be a deal killer for me. Lighthizer is a CFR globalist tool.
 
The top Mexican official leading negotiations with the U.S. over President Donald Trump’s newly announced tariffs previously compared Trump to Hitler and described him as an “enemy” of Mexico.

Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard arrived at the Mexican embassy on Saturday and is scheduled to meet with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday, Ebrard announced on Twitter.
Ebrard, a former Mexico City mayor who has served as foreign secretary since December 2018, has been open in his disdain for Trump in the past.

“He, like Hitler, is a good communicator,” Ebrard told The New Yorker in 2016, referring to Trump.

The New Yorker’s article profiled Ebrard’s get-out-the-vote efforts for then-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
“It was after hearing Donald Trump speak that I decided to get much more involved, beyond just giving opinions,” Ebrard told the magazine. “The risk represented by el Señor Trump, the things that he says, in particular about Mexico, but in general, too, are like nothing else I’ve encountered.”
Roughly a week before the 2016 election, Ebrard called Trump the greatest “enemy” that Mexico has faced in “many years.”
Trump es el peor enemigo que México haya enfrentado en muchos años. Debemos esforzarnos para frenarlo con votos en E.U.A.
— Marcelo Ebrard C. (@m_ebrard) October 31, 2016

Cada voto cuenta, apoyemos a Hillary Clinton. Derrotemos la xenofobia anti mexicana de Trump pic.twitter.com/Qpb314m3Qq
— Marcelo Ebrard C. (@m_ebrard) October 29, 2016
Now, Ebrard is in the position of leading negotiations with the Trump administration over the tariffs Trump slapped on his country.

More at: https://www.infowars.com/mexican-of...red-trump-to-hitler-called-him-mexicos-enemy/
 
Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s decision on when (and whether) the deal will get a vote depends on talks with the Trump administration to address Democrats’ concerns, according to a senior Democratic aide.“We’re not ready,’’ Representative Debbie Dingell, a Michigan Democrat, said Sunday on Fox News. “The votes in the House are not there yet until these changes take place.’’

During last week’s uncertainty over trade with Mexico, most Democrats publicly separated USMCA deliberations from Trump’s tariff plan, which means that removing the tariff threat doesn’t necessarily clear the way for a new deal to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement. Dingell said she wants changes to the agreement’s labor, environmental and enforcement provisions that would satisfy her skeptical colleagues.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-hold-usmca-trump-walks-133507650.html
 
Mexican labor unions have requested injunctions in Mexican federal court against labor reform tied to the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), El Economista reported June 23. The labor unions, all organized under the umbrella of the Mexican Laborers' Confederation (CTM), argue the labor reform's stipulation that each labor organization adopt direct, secret votes for the election of new leaders harms them.

A lower court ruling temporarily suspending the unions' obligations under the labor reform would send the message that Mexico isn't serious about implementing the requirements of USMCA. In Mexico, such a ruling could cause a snowball effect, in which unions enter a de facto state of noncompliance with USMCA's labor reform. If USMCA were still pending in the United States and a Mexican injunction were awarded to a CTM-sponsored union, House Democrats might see this as a sign that labor rights in Mexico won't significantly improve — making the issue yet another sticking point for USMCA.

More at: https://worldview.stratfor.com/situ...s-ask-injunctions-labor-reform-required-usmca
 
It is both fortunate and unfortunate that House Democrats tend to oppose the deal as presently constituted. This is fortunate as without the votes from a significant number of Democrats, the deal cannot be passed, but it is unfortunate because the changes sought by the Democrats are generally not good.

In other words, if the Trump administration agrees to changes sought by the Democrats, USMCA would be even worse than it is now — and it is bad enough as it is.
The New Democrat Coalition told U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer on Monday not to submit USMCA to Congress unless the administration first addresses concerns of the Democrats. The New Democrat Coalition of 103 members told Lighthizer, “We were troubled that you sent up the draft Statement of Administrative Action on May 30 without sufficient consultation, and strongly urge you to not make the same mistake twice.”

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usne...-deal-moving-closer-to-submission-to-congress
 
The Trump administration is expected to submit the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), a government-managed trade deal, to Congress sometime after September 1, with hopes for ratification by the end of this year. As is usual in Washington’s contentious political climate, differences between what the White House wants and what the Democrat-run House of Representatives wants could complicate that hope, even killing the deal for now.

The Democrats want any trade deal with Mexico and Canada to reflect their desire to impose more government regulations on businesses and attain provisions favoring their goals in the way of environmentalism (CO[SUB]2[/SUB] limits), labor unions (making it easier to force unions on workers), and other issues dear to their “progressive” agenda. The deal already has provisions on these issues — USMCA would place all three countries under the control of the International Labor Organization (ILO) by specifically committing them to the ILO’s Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and the Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization.
The problem for the Democrats is that they contend the USMCA does not go far enough in adopting more government control over private business.
Another factor in Democrat reluctance to sign off on USMCA has little to do with what is or is not in the deal right now. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) does not want to give President Trump a major legislative “victory” on the eve of the 2020 presidential election. And Pelosi has used her power as speaker of the house to thwart a Republican president before. In 2007, Pelosi suspended what is known as “fast-track” bargaining authority indefinitely when Republican President George W. Bush had sent a so-called free-trade deal with Colombia to Congress.
“Fast-track” allows a president to negotiate a trade deal and submit it to Congress for an up-and-down vote. This would appear to violate the Constitution’s provision in Article I, Section 8 that gives Congress, not the president, the authority “to regulate commerce with foreign nations.”
Bush’s trade deal was never approved during his tenure. Tim Keeler, then chief of staff for then-U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab, recalled the struggle over the Colombia trade deal with CNBC. “At the time, no president had sent an FTA [free trade agreement] under fast track rules where a speaker was opposed, so we didn’t know how Speaker Pelosi would react.”
This history gives some hope to USMCA opponents, as Pelosi was able to stop the deal then. Unfortunately, this history also indicates that Pelosi’s opposition was more to a trade deal of a Republican president, rather than a Democrat president. Five years later, Pelosi supported virtually the same deal when Democrat President Barack Obama renegotiated the deal.
Pelosi showed similar hypocrisy recently when she (rightly) said that any military action against Iran by President Trump would require congressional approval, but a few years ago, she argued that President Obama did not need congressional approval to take military action against Libya.
Still, even if Pelosi’s opposition is of impure motives, champions of American national sovereignty should be thankful, if it kills the deal.
Under the rules of “fast-track,” once the bill is officially sent to Congress to implement USMCA, a “clock” starts ticking. Members of Congress would then have 90 working days after receiving the legislation to hold a vote.
This should alert patriotic Americans concerned about more of our national sovereignty being surrendered and cause them to contact their members of Congress. Republican members will be under tremendous pressure to go along with a president of their political party.

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usne...-despite-hopes-for-ratification-by-year-s-end
 
Back
Top