[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 24, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H5999-H6000]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              NAFTA AND ITS EFFECT ON THE AMERICAN ECONOMY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, last Friday, Senator John McCain, 
campaigning for President in Canada, of all places, criticized 
opponents of NAFTA, the godfather of all troubled trade agreements. 
Incredibly, the Senator said, ``Since NAFTA was concluded, it has 
contributed to strong job growth and flourishing trade.'' He didn't say 
where. He then said, ``Since the agreement was signed, the U.S. has 
added 25 million jobs and Canada more than 4 million.''
  Wherever is he getting his data? Most Americans know this so-called 
free trade agreement is anything but free. We know it has created huge 
job losses and trade deficits, and we know the harm it has caused in 
this country and across our continent.
  NAFTA has created a gaping net hemorrhage of jobs, lost jobs and 
wealth for our country. I beg Senator McCain to look at the discipline 
of the numbers. Look at the trade accounts. They don't lie.
  Since NAFTA's passage in 1993, our country has suffered $1 trillion 
of NAFTA trade loss, amassing a huge deficit with both Mexico and 
Canada. The figures get worse every single year. NAFTA has not only 
cost our country over 1 million lost jobs, we would have added even 
more economic growth and jobs if we had not allowed all these jobs and 
production lines to be outsourced.
  Robert Scott of the Economic Policy Institute points out that 
``growing trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have pushed more than 1 
million U.S. workers out of higher wage jobs and into lower wage 
positions in non-trade related industries. Thus, the displacement of 1 
million jobs from traded to non-traded goods industries reduced wage 
payments to U.S. workers by $7.6 billion in 2004 alone.'' Those are 
staggering figures.
  That loss packs a wallop by any measure. I will place in the Record a 
list of just some of the factories that have outsourced production and 
relocated to Mexico. They go from A to Z: Allied Signal, Amana, Maytag, 
you can go all the way down the list, Medtronics, Stanley Works, 
Zenith. I will place the entire list in the Record.
  Now, it is interesting where Senator McCain was making his speech. He 
had not just outsourced himself to Canada to make the speech, he spoke 
before the Economic Club of Canada, a business organization whose 
membership cheered his remarks. And they should. They alone have made 
out handsomely under this lopsided trade agreement.
  Listen to what the leader of the New Democratic Party in Canada, 
Parliamentarian Jack Layton, has to say about what is going on in 
Canada. In a recent letter to Senator Obama, Leader Layton stated 
clearly: ``Despite the fact that most Canadians are working longer 
hours, 80 percent of families have lost ground or stagnated in both 
earnings and after tax returns compared to the previous generation. 
Real wages have not increased in Canada for more than 30 years. Yet the 
share of corporate profits in our Canadian economy is at its highest 
point since 1961.''
  Thoughtful leaders in Canada disagree with Senator McCain. They know 
the income washout that can come from ill-cast trade agreements. He 
should pay attention to their views.
  Before NAFTA, the United States had a trade surplus with Mexico of 
over $1 billion a year. Jobs were increasing in our country. Today, 
since NAFTA's passage, the U.S. has racked up an astounding $452.3 
billion deficit with Mexico and an even larger $606 billion trade 
deficit with Canada. At a minimum, our Nation should seek balance and 
reciprocity, not deficits with these nations.
  In Mexico, its civil society has been pleading with us to correct the 
abuses of NAFTA. Former Mexican Parliamentarian Victor Suarez pleads, 
``We want good trade, not free trade.'' He should know well. The 
Mexican countryside has been devastated as the result of NAFTA as over 
2 million poor farm families have been thrown off their land, uprooted 
in the most cruel of ways. A visible sign of their plight here is their 
illegal immigration to our Nation out of sheer desperation.
  A group of farmers in Mexico calling themselves ``The Countryside 
Can't Take It Anymore'' literally rode their horses down to the Mexican 
Parliament to draw attention to the washout of livelihoods of their 
country men and women.
  When NAFTA was first debated, many Members here tried to amend the 
agreement to avoid these negative consequences on people and 
communities. Senator McCain didn't lift a finger to help. Senator Obama 
was not a Senator then.
  America should advance trade agreements that produce jobs, balances 
and surplus, not deficits. Deficits are not good, in your checkbook or 
in America's accounts. Trade should lift all boats, not create a race 
to the bottom. Good trade means fair trade for all, not ``gotcha'' 
trade. Good trade means good jobs, living wages, the right to bargain 
the worth of your labor by contract, a sustainable environment, and 
sovereign food rights for all people.
  For a rich Nation like America, I think good trade also means a 
conscience for the poorest people on this continent, not exploitation. 
NAFTA has produced none of this. It has produced negatives. It is time 
America voted for positives.
  A Mexican worker observed to me, on one of my several trips there, 
that their futures were put at even more risk as these global companies 
work them for pennies an hour, always threatening to move elsewhere. 
The worker said to me: ``Poor countries are like crabs in a bucket. 
Every time one country starts to climb up out of the bucket, another 
one pulls it back down.''
  NAFTA has produced none of this. It has produced negatives for the 
vast majority, and vast wealth for a few.
  For Senator McCain and any others who do not know which outsourced 
firms have contributed to America's growing trade deficits on this 
continent with accompanying job and benefit losses, let me place them 
in the Record:

               Companies Relocated to Mexico Since NAFTA

       20th Century Plastics; 3 Day Blinds; Aalfs Manufacturing; 
     Acer Peripherals; Advance Transformer; Alcoa Fujikura; Allied 
     Signal; Amana; American Olean Tile; American Standard; 
     Ametek; AMP; Amphenol; Anchor Glass Container; Anvil 
     Knitwear; Autoliv

[[Page H6000]]

     ASP; AZT Sewing; Bali Company, Inc.; Bassett Furniture 
     Industries; Batts; and Bayer Corp./Medsep.
       BMW; Borg Warner Automotive; Breed Technologies; Brunswick 
     Bicycles; Burlington Industries; Capital Mercury Apparel; 
     Canon Business Machines; Casio Manufacturing; C-Corps 
     Electronics; Champion Products; Chrysler; Clothes Connection; 
     Commemorative Brands; Cross Creek Apparel; Daewoo; Dayco 
     Products; Dean Foods Vegetable Company; Dyersburg Fabrics; 
     Dixon Ticonderoga; and Eastman.
       Eaton Corporation; Kodak/Verbatim; Eberhard-Faber; Eli 
     Lilly Corporation; Emerson Electric; Ericsson; Exide; Federal 
     Mogul; Fisher-Price; Fiskars; Flexel; Ford; Foster Grant; 
     Fruit of the Loom Corporation; General Electric; JVC; General 
     Motors; Gerber Childrenswear; Haggar Clothing; and Hamilton 
     Beach-Proctor-Silex.
       Hasbro; Henry I. Seigel; Hershey Chocolate; Hewlett 
     Packard; Hitachi Home Electronics; Honda; Honeywell, Inc.; 
     House of Perfection; Household Perfection; Hughes Aircraft; 
     Hyundai Precision America; IBM; Ithaca Industries; Jeanerette 
     Mills; John Deere; Johnson Controls; Kellogg Company; Kemet 
     Electronics; and KLH Industries.
       Kodak Polychrome Graphics; Lee Apparel; Levi Strauss; 
     Lexington Fabrics; Mallinckrodt; Martin Mills; Master Lock; 
     Matsushita; Mattel; Maytag; Maxell Corporation; McCulloch 
     Corp.; Medtronic; Mercedes Benz; Mitsubishi Electronics Corp; 
     Monon Corp.; Motorola; Nissan; and Nokia.
       Oneita Industries; Oshkosh B'Gosh; Oxford Industries; 
     Parker Habbifin; Philips; Pioneer Speakers; PL Industries; 
     Plaid Clothing; Ransom Industries; Regency Packing Company; 
     Russell Corporation; Samsonite Corporation; Samsung; Sanyo 
     North America; Sara Lee; Scientific Atlantica; Seton Company; 
     Siemens; Singer Furniture; Smith Corona; and SMTC 
     Manufacturing.
       Spangler Candy; Sola optical; Solectron Corporation; Sony 
     Electronics; Square D; Stanley Works; Stony Creek Knitting 
     Mills; Strick Corporation; Stroh Brewery; Sun Apparel; 
     Sunbeam; Texas Instruments; Thomas and Betts; Tiffany; and 
     Toshiba.
       Tri-Con Industries; Trinity Industries; TRW, Tultex 
     Corporation; Tyco Electronics; United State Leather; United 
     Technologies; Automotive; Vanity Fair Intimates; VF; VW; 
     Walls Industries; Weiser Lock; Westinghouse; Wilkins 
     Industries; William Carter; Woolrich; Wrangler; Xerox; and 
     Zenith.
                                  ____


             McCain Criticizes Obama's Opposition to NAFTA

                            (By David Espo)

       In a cross-border political attack, John McCain said Friday 
     that Barack Obama's opposition to the North American Free 
     Trade Agreement is ``nothing more than retreating behind 
     protectionist walls.''
       The Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting added that 
     if he wins the White House, ``have no doubt that America will 
     honor its international commitments and we will expect the 
     same of others.''
       McCain did not mention Obama by name as he spoke before the 
     Economic Club of Canada, a business organization whose 
     membership cheered his remarks.
       Obama, on the campaign trail in Florida, shot back: 
     ``What's interesting to me is that he chose to talk about 
     trade in Canada instead of in Ohio or Michigan. . . . I think 
     Senator McCain should have shared some of his views there to 
     American voters.''
       Obama said he talked to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen 
     Harper on June 9 after he secured the Democratic presidential 
     nomination. ``I believe that the U.S. has an enormous 
     interest in maintaining robust trade relationships with 
     Canada and Mexico, and I expect those to continue under an 
     Obama administration,'' he said.
       McCain's trip to Canada was unusual if not unprecedented 
     for a presidential candidate, one that his campaign paid for 
     yet aides insisted was not political.
       Democrats criticized plans for a scheduled $100-per-person 
     ``finance event,'' and raised questions about U.S. Ambassador 
     David Wilkins' involvement in the trip. McCain's aides said 
     Wilkins had done nothing wrong. They also countered that the 
     money was to pay the cost of the Economic Club luncheon, then 
     canceled the event without explanation.
       The free trade agreement is intensely controversial in the 
     United States, supported by most businesses, opposed by many 
     unions, and has already emerged as a flashpoint in the 
     presidential race.
       McCain supports it, while Obama and former rival Hillary 
     Rodham Clinton vied for support among blue-collar workers in 
     the Democratic primaries by stressing their desire to force 
     changes.
       ``Since NAFTA was concluded, it has contributed to strong 
     job growth and flourishing trade. Since the agreement was 
     signed, the United States has added 25 million jobs and 
     Canada more than 4 million,'' McCain said.
       In an unmistakable reference to Obama, he added, 
     ``Demanding unilateral changes and threatening to abrogate an 
     agreement that has increased trade and prosperity is nothing 
     more than retreating behind protectionist walls.''
       Aides said that was a reference in part to comments the 
     Illinois senator had made in a Feb. 26 debate during the 
     primaries.
       ``I will make sure that we renegotiate in the same way that 
     Senator Clinton talked about,'' he said at the time. ``. . . 
     I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as 
     leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and 
     environmental standards that are enforced.''
       In his speech, McCain expressed his appreciation for 
     Canada's deployment of 2,500 troops to Afghanistan, and 
     skipped lightly over Iraq, where the government declined to 
     send forces.
       ``. . . This nation has done all that those differences 
     would allow to help the Iraqi people. In characteristic form, 
     Canada has given generous humanitarian aid and development 
     assistance,'' he said.
       Later, at a news conference, he said he hoped officials 
     from the two countries could resolve the issue of Omar Khadr, 
     a young Canadian citizen who is imprisoned at Guantanamo as a 
     detainee in the war on terror.
       ``I have always opposed torture and any interrogation 
     technique that would be constructed in any way as torture,'' 
     McCain added, unprompted.
       McCain has made several trips outside the United States 
     since he became a presidential contender, including European 
     and Middle Eastern countries.
       He arrived in the Canadian capital aboard his chartered 
     campaign jet and was greeted on the tarmac by Wilkins. The 
     senator said it was not a political journey, yet told 
     reporters he did not feel it was appropriate to have U.S. 
     taxpayers pick up the cost.
       McCain was still on Canadian soil when the Democratic 
     National Committee filed a Freedom of Information Act request 
     with the State Department seeking information about possible 
     violations of federal law in connection with the trip. Under 
     the law, federal officials are limited in their ability to 
     undertake political activity.
       Aides said in advance McCain would come to Canada to 
     highlight trade, and there has been widespread speculation 
     that he will soon travel to Mexico and perhaps elsewhere to 
     make the same point as he made before his lunchtime audience.
       ``Last year alone, we exchanged some $560 billion in goods, 
     and Canada is the leading export market for 36 of the 50 
     United States,'' the Arizona senator said.
       ``This country stands as America's leading overall export 
     market, and America is Canada's leading agricultural market. 
     With 60 percent of all direct foreign investment in Canada 
     originating in the United States some $289 billion in 2007--
     our economies draw strength from one another.''
       He also said improvements are needed.
       ``Complying with NAFTA's rules of origin can be cumbersome 
     and costly. Border delays can pose a serious impediment to 
     trade, the equivalent of a tariff,'' he said.

                          ____________________