Eduardo Porter
ECONOMIC SCENE
Mickey Kantor has a vivid memory of August 1993. The North American Free Trade Agreement was in trouble. Though the agreement had been signed the year before, during the administration of George H.W. Bush, the newly elected Bill Clinton had promised to attach side deals to the pact to guarantee minimum labor and environmental standards.
The Mexican government hated them — they were thinly disguised protectionist tools to reward Mr. Clinton’s union friends, it thought. Mr. Kantor, then the nation’s chief trade negotiator, had to convince the Mexicans that Congress would not ratify the deal without them.
“There was not a lot of space to negotiate,” he told me. “We could negotiate how to do it but not whether we would do it.”
–
European workers displaced by China can rely on a deeply rooted network of public support. American workers are pretty much on their own.
Considered this way, trade agreements offer a different sort of opportunity to level the playing field. It’s not about forcing countries along the Pacific Rim to bring labor standards up to American norms. Rather, when it gets down to negotiating the details of a trade agreement with the European Union, the United States might import the region’s more expansive labor standards and its more generous social policies.
This is an idea that organized labor could rally around. “We would like to build on the strengths that Europe has achieved, not weaken them,” Ms. Lee said. “We want very strong and ambitious labor standards in a European deal.” And it will do much more for American workers than imposing a “level playing field” on Mexico, China, Peru or Vietnam.
Email: eporter@nytimes.com; Twitter: @portereduardo
Go to Home Page »
