How the USMCA trade deal differs from NAFTA -- and how it doesn't - YouTube

Channel: unknown

[0]
JUDY WOODRUFF: We were just talking about the USMCA, as it's called.
[3]
Let's break down this trade agreement further and examine what was agreed to and what it
[8]
means.
[9]
Amna Nawaz has that part of the story for us.
[11]
REP.
[12]
NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): It's a victory for America's workers.
[14]
AMNA NAWAZ: Today's agreement would replace the 25-year-old North American Free Trade
[18]
Agreement first signed into law and hailed by President Bill Clinton.
[22]
BILL CLINTON, Former President of the United States: NAFTA will tear down trade barriers
[24]
between our three nations.
[26]
It will create the world's largest trade zone and create 200,000 jobs in this country by
[32]
1995 alone.
[33]
AMNA NAWAZ: Politicians and economists have long debated NAFTA's impact on economic growth
[39]
and jobs in this country.
[41]
But many workers, labor unions and political leaders say the deal made it too easy for
[46]
Mexico to lure manufacturing jobs and factories out of the U.S. President Trump has long pledged
[53]
to either get rid of NAFTA or substantially rewrite it.
[56]
It was a crucial promise of his campaign.
[58]
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: I'm going to renegotiate NAFTA, one of the
[62]
worst trade deals ever signed in the history of our country.
[66]
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
[67]
AMNA NAWAZ: NAFTA won't exactly be eliminated.
[69]
Many of its provisions governing trade between Mexico, Canada and the U.S. will still be
[74]
intact.
[75]
But the new deal has provisions aimed at increasing manufacturing here.
[79]
Specifically, a greater percentage of a car and its components will have to be produced
[83]
in North America, and by workers who get better wages.
[87]
The Trump administration, Democrats and labor unions all say USMCA will provide tougher
[93]
labor enforcement, including some inspections in Mexican factories.
[98]
It also includes a loss for the pharmaceutical industry by stripping out a rule that would
[102]
have protected expensive biological drugs from generic competitors for 10 years.
[108]
Meanwhile, today in Mexico City, U.S. trade Representative Robert Lighthizer signed the
[113]
deal with his Mexican and Canadian counterparts.
[115]
ROBERT LIGHTHIZER, U.S. Trade Representative: The result, I think, is the best trade agreement
[121]
in history.
[122]
AMNA NAWAZ: Mr. Trump has indicated he will sign the USMCA once it is passed by Congress.
[128]
For a closer look at some of the provisions in this new deal and what their impact will
[132]
be, I'm joined by Christopher Wilson, who closely follows NAFTA and Mexico for the nonpartisan
[137]
Wilson Center.
[138]
Welcome to the "NewsHour."
[139]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON, Wilson Center: Thanks a lot for having me.
[140]
AMNA NAWAZ: So, let's take a step back here.
[142]
Some of the provisions from the previous NAFTA deal do remain in this new deal.
[146]
How substantially different is this new USMCA from the old NAFTA?
[151]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON, The Wilson Center: Yes, I would say the new USMCA is really 90 percent
[155]
NAFTA.
[156]
And that's actually the most important thing here is that what happened is that this cloud
[159]
of uncertainty about the future of NAFTA, the possibility that the president might withdraw
[162]
from NAFTA, goes away with the agreement around the completion of the USMCA.
[168]
That matters because companies have invested billions of dollars in the creation of a North
[171]
American system of manufacturing production.
[174]
So we have now not just sort of regular trade of finished goods happening between the United
[178]
States, Mexico, and Canada.
[180]
We're actually building things together.
[181]
And so all of those products, all of that trillion dollars of trade was put at risk.
[186]
Now investors, companies that are involved in the trade can sort of breathe a sigh of
[190]
relief and continue doing business.
[192]
That said, there were, of course, some important changes as well.
[194]
AMNA NAWAZ: Important changes, important updates, too.
[196]
Why were those necessary?
[197]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON: Well, that's matter of huge debate, whether those were necessary
[201]
or not.
[202]
And I think, in certain areas, different people would sort of have different opinions.
[205]
So, on labor, for example, the idea that there was a need for changes to Mexican labor law,
[210]
Mexico agreed to a major labor reform through the USMCA, that, in my opinion, was absolutely
[214]
necessary.
[216]
Workers in Mexico were not well-represented previously, are not currently well-represented,
[220]
but under the new labor reform, they will have real unions that represent the workers,
[225]
instead of employer-dominated unions that have probably artificially suppressed wages
[229]
to a certain extent in Mexico previously.
[231]
So, hopefully, that will change for the better following this agreement.
[234]
AMNA NAWAZ: There's also been sort of a rebalancing, right?
[236]
There was this big push to try to bring back those manufacturing jobs to the U.S., protect
[240]
the wages here.
[242]
Will this deal have a significant impact on that front?
[244]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON: I mean, I think the reality is that most of those jobs in manufacturing
[248]
that have been lost in the United States were lost due to automation, technological change,
[252]
robots on the factory floor, things like that.
[255]
So we shouldn't expect any major changes.
[256]
I mean, the reality is, in my opinion, NAFTA wasn't the main problem there.
[260]
So changes to NAFTA can't solve that big problem.
[263]
That said, there are some specific areas where there are important changes.
[265]
And the auto industry was one that was mentioned, right?
[268]
So there will now be rules that say, a larger portion of what goes into an automobile needs
[274]
to be made in -- somewhere in North America.
[276]
That's going to bring some auto jobs back to the United States.
[280]
But it's going to come at a cost, because cars will be a little bit more expensive.
[283]
And this is what the ITC, the International Trade Commission, of the U.S. government found
[287]
when they did a study on the change from NAFTA to the USMCA.
[290]
They said, there will be jobs gained and sort of production gained in the U.S. auto industry,
[295]
but there's actually a larger loss in the rest of the economy, because it takes money
[299]
and new investments to meet these new rules.
[301]
AMNA NAWAZ: So, we could see car prices go up.
[303]
I want to ask you, from the American farmer's perspective, because the auto industry gets
[306]
a lot of attention when it comes to this.
[308]
Mexico's a huge purchaser when it comes to American wheat.
[311]
And barley farmers have had a lot of uncertainty, not just with this deal, but also under the
[314]
trade tariffs.
[316]
What does this deal do for them?
[317]
What does it give them today?
[318]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON: Yes.
[319]
And this is sort of back to that first message.
[320]
It gives them back certainty about their market.
[322]
And Canada and Mexico are incredibly important markets for our agricultural community in
[327]
the United States.
[328]
There's, of course, huge challenges right now because of the trade war going on with
[331]
China as well.
[333]
Whenever there's a trade war, agriculture is the place in the United States that gets
[336]
hit first.
[337]
China will respond with tariffs on agriculture in the United States.
[341]
Mexico and Canada responded when there were steel and aluminum tariffs being fought over
[344]
last year with tariffs on U.S. agricultural exports.
[347]
And that's because they're politically sensitive.
[349]
People know, other countries know that, if they hit agriculture in the United States,
[353]
it's a way of exerting political influence on Congress in the United States.
[356]
And so this deal just gets us back to having certainty.
[359]
It also provides a little bit of new access to the Canadian dairy market.
[363]
There's a few extra good things in there for agriculture.
[366]
But it gives them a platform on which they can continue to do business.
[369]
AMNA NAWAZ: And we mentioned the stripping away of protection for drug companies against
[372]
generic competitors.
[373]
Does this mean prices could come down?
[375]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON: Well, we will have to see what happens in the future there, because
[378]
the -- what we have is, this is specifically about biologic drugs, a specific set of sort
[381]
of pretty expensive, cutting-edge types of drugs generally.
[385]
In the United States right now, there's 12 years of intellectual property protection
[388]
for those drugs.
[389]
Under the USMCA before, there had been a commitment to 10 years of protections for them.
[394]
Democrats might like to lower that level from 12 years to something lower than 10 years,
[400]
possibly in the future.
[401]
And now, with the update to this, the agreement that they just negotiated, they will be able
[406]
to do that if they want to.
[407]
But this is all going to depend on what happens in the 2020 elections in the United States.
[411]
But maybe sometime in the future, there will be a change on that specific set of drugs.
[415]
AMNA NAWAZ: Like a lot of things, it's going to depend on what happens in the 2020 election.
[418]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON: Absolutely.
[419]
AMNA NAWAZ: Christopher Wilson of the Mexico Institute at the Wilson Center, thanks so
[422]
much for being here.
[423]
CHRISTOPHER WILSON: Thank you, Amna.