FWD: Latino Report on NAFTA

[MDOLAN <mdolan@citizen.org>]

  This is a significant story.
  >From our "fair trade" perspective -- very good news.
  Enjoy -- Mike Dolan
  *******
  
  Hispanic Lawmakers Fault NAFTA's Effects
  Pact Hurts U.S. Minorities, Group to Tell Clinton
  
  By Paul Blustein
  Washington Post Staff Writer
  Wednesday, July 16, 1997; Page C13
  The Washington Post
  
  In a blow to President Clinton's trade agenda, a group of mostly Hispanic 
  members of Congress plan to publicly warn today that they cannot support 
  extending the North American Free Trade Agreement to other Latin American
  countries unless major improvements are made in federal programs designed 
  to help U.S. workers adversely affected by the pact.
  
  The group, led by Rep. Esteban Edward Torres (D-Calif.), includes 14 
  lawmakers, 13 of them Hispanic, some of whom voted for NAFTA and others who 
  voted against. The members plan to release a letter to Clinton and a study 
  showing that NAFTA's burdens have fallen disproportionately on Latino and 
  other minority workers.
  
  The group's chief complaint is not that NAFTA has created enormous job 
  losses of the sort predicted by some of its critics during the 1993 debate 
  over the pact. Rather, it is that the administration has failed to provide 
  enough
  training and other adjustment assistance to help low-skill workers whose 
  jobs were shipped over the border after trade barriers were lowered.
  
  This echoes an increasingly common refrain among mainstream economists, who 
  argue that free trade creates more winners than losers but that the 
  government must do more to help the losers. The stance by the Hispanic 
  lawmakers is a setback for the administration's hopes to win "fast track" 
  authority from
  Congress this fall for the negotiation of a hemisphere-wide agreement to 
  eliminate trade barriers. Such authority is necessary because it allows the 
  president to submit trade pacts to Congress for an up-or-down vote without
  crippling amendments.
  
  "This would be a turnaround -- and not a positive one," said a House 
  Democratic aide active in the effort to round up support for fast-track 
  legislation.
  
  The study to be released by the group, authored by Raul Hinojosa Ojeda of 
  the University of California at Los Angeles and two colleagues, comes on 
  the heels of an administration study contending that NAFTA has generated a 
  "modestly
  positive" impact on jobs and exports. Hinojosa has gained a reputation as 
  one of the foremost academic experts on NAFTA's impact, so the fact that 
  his study takes a more critical view may weaken the credibility of the 
  administration's
  report.
  
  Ojeda's study concludes that "over 315,000 jobs have been lost or 
  threatened compared to 225,000 jobs gained or supported, for a net labor 
  market impact of 90,000 under NAFTA," according to the letter being sent to 
  Clinton.
  
  
  While those numbers are relatively minor in an economy that often creates 
  200,000 jobs a month, job losses have been particularly severe in regions 
  and industries where Latinos, African Americans and women are employed 
  because
  their jobs are particularly vulnerable to imports or factory moves abroad, 
  according to the study. For example, El Paso has lost 6,000 apparel jobs 
  "as a result of NAFTA . . . contributing to an increase in its unemployment 
  rate from 9 to almost 12 percent."
  
  "The job impact is manageable, but what we haven't seen is the 
  follow-through by the administration on the commitment to manage the 
  impact," Hinojosa said in an interview. He and Torres said that Latinos 
  displaced by NAFTA are underserved by the trade adjustment assistance 
  program designed to help such workers. They also accused the administration 
  of failing to deliver on promises to create an effective North American 
  Development Bank to help promote business, especially in border regions.
  
  Besides Torres, signers of the letter who voted for NAFTA are Reps. Ed 
  Pastor (D-Ariz.), Solomon P. Ortiz (D-Tex.) and Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.).
  
  Asked for comment, Jay Ziegler, a spokesman for the U.S. Trade 
  Representative's Office, said: "More opportunities have been created for 
  all demographic groups between 1993 and 1996. And while it's difficult to 
  separate out the NAFTA
  factors, it's quite clear that NAFTA has had a decidedly positive impact on 
  the economy."
  
   Copyright 1997 The Washington Post Company
  ******************************************
  
  IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY, NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO CONTACT THE DISTRICT 
  OFFICES OF YOUR CONGRESS MEMBERS AND SCHEDULE DISTRICT OFFICE MEETINGS FOR 
  THE UPCOMING AUGUST RECESS TO DISCUSS NAFTA EXPANSION AND THAT LEGISLATIVE 
  LAXATIVE THAT'S BAD FOR THE CONSTITUTION -- SO CALLED "FAST TRACK."
  
  DON'T YOU AGREE?