    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1993, Book II)]
    [September 14, 1993]
    [Pages 1485-1490]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks at the Signing Ceremony for the Supplemental Agreements to the
    North American Free Trade Agreement
    September 14, 1993

        Thank you very much. Mr. Vice President, President Bush, President
    Carter, President Ford, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to
    acknowledge just a couple of other people who are in the audience
    because I think they deserve to be seen by America since you'll be
    seeing a lot more of them: my good friend Bill Daley from Chicago and
    former Congressman Bill Frenzel from Minnesota, who have agreed to lead
    this fight for our administration on a bipartisan basis. Would you
    please stand and be recognized.
        It's an honor for me today to be joined by my predecessor, President
    Bush, who took the major steps in negotiating this North American Free
    Trade Agreement; President Jimmy Carter, whose vision of hemispheric
    development gives great energy to our efforts and has been a consistent
    theme of his for many, many years now; and President Ford, who has
    argued as fiercely for expanded trade and for this agreement as any
    American citizen and whose counsel I con-

    [[Page 1486]]

    tinue to value. These men, differing in party and outlook, join us today
    because we all recognize the important stakes for our Nation in this
    issue.
        Yesterday we saw the sight of an old world dying, a new one being
    born in hope and a spirit of peace. Peoples who for a decade were caught
    in the cycle of war and frustration chose hope over fear and took a
    great risk to make the future better.
        Today we turn to face the challenge of our own hemisphere, our own
    country, our own economic fortunes. In a few moments, I will sign three
    agreements that will complete our negotiations with Mexico and Canada to
    create a North American Free Trade Agreement. In the coming months I
    will submit this pact to Congress for approval. It will be a hard fight,
    and I expect to be there with all of you every step of the way. We will
    make our case as hard and as well as we can. And though the fight will
    be difficult, I deeply believe we will win. And I'd like to tell you
    why. First of all, because NAFTA means jobs, American jobs and good-
    paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this
    agreement.
        As President, it is my duty to speak frankly to the American people
    about the world in which we now live. Fifty years ago at the end of
    World War II, an unchallenged America was protected by the oceans and by
    our technological superiority and, very frankly, by the economic
    devastation of the people who could otherwise have been our competitors.
    We chose then to try to help rebuild our former enemies and to create a
    world of free trade supported by institutions which would facilitate it.
    As a result of that effort, global trade grew from $200 billion in 1950
    to $800 billion in 1980. As a result, jobs were created and opportunity
    thrived all across the world. But make no mistake about it, our decision
    at the end of World War II to create a system of global, expanded, freer
    trade, and the supporting institutions, played a major role in creating
    the prosperity of the American middle class.
        Ours is now an era in which commerce is global and in which money,
    management, technology are highly mobile. For the last 20 years, in all
    the wealthy countries of the world, because of changes in the global
    environment, because of the growth of technology, because of increasing
    competition, the middle class that was created and enlarged by the wise
    policies of expanding trade at the end of World War II has been under
    severe stress. Most Americans are working harder for less. They are
    vulnerable to the fear tactics and the averseness to change that is
    behind much of the opposition to NAFTA.
        But I want to say to my fellow Americans, when you live in a time of
    change the only way to recover your security and to broaden your
    horizons is to adapt to the change, to embrace it, to move forward.
    Nothing we do, nothing we do in this great capital can change the fact
    that factories or information can flash across the world, that people
    can move money around in the blink of an eye. Nothing can change the
    fact that technology can be adopted, once created, by people all across
    the world and then rapidly adapted in new and different ways by people
    who have a little different take on the way the technology works. For
    two decades, the winds of global competition have made these things
    clear to any American with eyes to see. The only way we can recover the
    fortunes of the middle class in this country so that people who work
    harder and smarter can at least prosper more, the only way we can pass
    on the American dream of the last 40 years to our children and their
    children for the next 40 is to adapt to the changes which are occurring.
        In a fundamental sense, this debate about NAFTA is a debate about
    whether we will embrace these changes and create the jobs of tomorrow,
    or try to resist these changes, hoping we can preserve the economic
    structures of yesterday. I tell you, my fellow Americans, that if we
    learned anything from the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the fall of
    the governments in Eastern Europe, even a totally controlled society
    cannot resist the winds of change that economics and technology and
    information flow have imposed in this world of ours. That is not an
    option. Our only realistic option is to embrace these changes and create
    the jobs of tomorrow.
        I believe that NAFTA will create 200,000 American jobs in the first
    2 years of its effect. I believe if you look at the trends--and
    President Bush and I were talking about it this morning--starting about
    the time he was elected President, over one-third of our economic growth
    and in some years over one-half of our net new jobs came directly from
    exports. And on average, those exports-related jobs paid much higher
    than jobs that had no connection to ex-

    [[Page 1487]]

    ports. I believe that NAFTA will create a million jobs in the first 5
    years of its impact. And I believe that that is many more jobs than will
    be lost, as inevitably some will be, as always happens when you open up
    the mix to a new range of competition.
        NAFTA will generate these jobs by fostering an export boom to
    Mexico, by tearing down tariff walls which have been lowered quite a bit
    by the present administration of President Salinas but are still higher
    than Americas'. Already Mexican consumers buy more per capita from the
    United States than other consumers in other nations. Most Americans
    don't know this, but the average Mexican citizen, even though wages are
    much lower in Mexico, the average Mexican citizen is now spending $450
    per year per person to buy American goods. That is more than the average
    Japanese, the average German, or the average Canadian buys; more than
    the average German, Swiss, and Italian citizens put together.
        So when people say that this trade agreement is just about how to
    move jobs to Mexico so nobody can make a living, how do they explain the
    fact that Mexicans keep buying more products made in America every year?
    Go out and tell the American people that. Mexican citizens with lower
    incomes spend more money--real dollars, not percentage of their income--
    more money on American products than Germans, Japanese, Canadians. That
    is a fact. And there will be more if they have more money to spend. That
    is what expanding trade is all about.
        In 1987, Mexico exported $5.7 billion more of products to the United
    States than they purchased from us. We had a trade deficit. Because of
    the free market, tariff-lowering policies of the Salinas government in
    Mexico, and because our people are becoming more export-oriented, that
    $5.7 billion trade deficit has been turned into a $5.4 billion trade
    surplus for the United States. It has created hundreds of thousands of
    jobs.
        Even when you subtract the jobs that have moved into the
    maquilladora areas, America is a net job winner in what has happened in
    trade in the last 6 years. When Mexico boosts its consumption of
    petroleum products in Louisiana--where we're going tomorrow to talk
    about NAFTA--as it did by about 200 percent in that period, Louisiana
    refinery workers gained job security. When Mexico purchased industrial
    machinery and computer equipment made in Illinois, that means more jobs.
    And guess what? In this same period, Mexico increased those purchases
    out of Illinois by 300 percent.
        Forty-eight out of the 50 States have boosted exports to Mexico
    since 1987. That's one reason why 41 of our Nation's 50 Governors--some
    of them who are here today, and I thank them for their presence--support
    this trade pact. I can tell you, if you're a Governor, people won't
    leave you in office unless they think you get up every day trying to
    create more jobs. They think that's what your job is if you're a
    Governor. And the people who have the job of creating jobs for their
    State and working with their business community, working with their
    labor community, 41 out of the 50 have already embraced the NAFTA pact.
        Many Americans are still worried that this agreement will move jobs
    south of the border because they've seen jobs move south of the border
    and because they know that there are still great differences in the wage
    rates. There have been 19 serious economic studies of NAFTA by liberals
    and conservatives alike; 18 of them have concluded that there will be no
    job loss. Businesses do not choose to locate based solely on wages. If
    they did, Haiti and Bangladesh would have the largest number of
    manufacturing jobs in the world. Businesses do choose to locate based on
    the skills and productivity of the work force, the attitude of the
    government, the roads and railroads to deliver products, the
    availability of a market close enough to make the transportation costs
    meaningful, the communications networks necessary to support the
    enterprise. That is our strength, and it will continue to be our
    strength. As it becomes Mexico's strength and they generate more jobs,
    they will have higher incomes, and they will buy more American products.
        We can win this. This is not a time for defeatism. It is a time to
    look at an opportunity that is enormous. Moreover, there are specific
    provisions in this agreement that remove some of the current incentives
    for people to move their jobs just across our border. For example, today
    Mexican law requires United States automakers who want to sell cars to
    Mexicans to build them in Mexico. This year we will export only 1,000
    cars to Mexico. Under NAFTA, the Big Three automakers expect to ship
    60,000 cars to Mexico in the first year alone, and that is one reason
    why one of the automakers recently announced moving 1,000 jobs from
    Mexico back to Michi-

    [[Page 1488]]

    gan.
        In a few moments, I will sign side agreements to NAFTA that will
    make it harder than it is today for businesses to relocate solely
    because of very low wages or lax environmental rules. These side
    agreements will make a difference. The environmental agreement will, for
    the first time ever, apply trade sanctions against any of the countries
    that fails to enforce its own environmental laws. I might say to those
    who say that's a giving up of our sovereignty: For people who have been
    asking us to ask that of Mexico, how do we have the right to ask that of
    Mexico if we don't demand it of ourselves? It's nothing but fair.
        This is the first time that there have ever been trade sanctions in
    the environmental law area. This ground-breaking agreement is one of the
    reasons why major environmental groups, ranging from the Audubon Society
    to the Natural Resources Defense Council, are supporting NAFTA.
        The second agreement ensures that Mexico enforces its laws in areas
    that include worker health and safety, child labor, and the minimum
    wage. And I might say, this is the first time in the history of world
    trade agreements when any nation has ever been willing to tie its
    minimum wage to the growth in its own economy. What does that mean? It
    means that there will be an even more rapid closing of the gap between
    our two wage rates. And as the benefits of economic growth are spread in
    Mexico to working people, what will happen? They'll have more disposable
    income to buy more American products, and there will be less illegal
    immigration because more Mexicans will be able to support their children
    by staying home. This is a very important thing.
        The third agreement answers one of the primary attacks on NAFTA that
    I heard for a year, which is, ``Well, you can say all this, but
    something might happen that you can't foresee.'' Well, that's a good
    thing, otherwise we never would have had yesterday. I mean, I plead
    guilty to that. Something might happen that Carla Hills didn't foresee,
    or George Bush didn't foresee, or Mickey Kantor or Bill Clinton didn't
    foresee. That's true. Now, the third agreement protects our industries
    against unforeseen surges in exports from either one of our trading
    partners. And the flip side is also true. Economic change, as I said
    before, has often been cruel to the middle class, but we have to make
    change their friend. NAFTA will help to do that.
        This imposes also a new obligation on our Government, and I'm glad
    to see so many Members of Congress from both parties here today. We do
    have some obligations here. We have to make sure that our workers are
    the best prepared, the best trained in the world.
        Without regard to NAFTA, we know now that the average 18-year-old
    American will change jobs eight times in a lifetime. The Secretary of
    Labor has told us, without regard to NAFTA, that over the last 10 years,
    for the first time, when people lose their jobs most of them do not go
    back to their old job; they go back to a different job. So that we no
    longer need an unemployment system, we need a reemployment system. And
    we have to create that. And that's our job. We have to tell American
    workers who will be dislocated because of this agreement, or because of
    things that will happen regardless of this agreement, that we are going
    to have a reemployment program for training in America. And we intend to
    do that.
        Together, the efforts of two administrations now have created a
    trade agreement that moves beyond the traditional notions of free trade,
    seeking to ensure trade that pulls everybody up instead of dragging some
    down while others go up. We have put the environment at the center of
    this in future agreements. We have sought to avoid a debilitating
    contest for business where countries seek to lure them only by slashing
    wages or despoiling the environment.
        This agreement will create jobs, thanks to trade with our neighbors.
    That's reason enough to support it. But I must close with a couple of
    other points. NAFTA is essential to our long-term ability to compete
    with Asia and Europe. Across the globe our competitors are
    consolidating, creating huge trading blocs. This pact will create a free
    trade zone stretching from the Arctic to the tropics, the largest in the
    world, a $6.5 billion market with 370 million people. It will help our
    businesses to be both more efficient and to better compete with our
    rivals in other parts of the world.
        This is also essential to our leadership in this hemisphere and the
    world. Having won the cold war, we face the more subtle challenge of
    consolidating the victory of democracy and opportunity and freedom. For
    decades, we have preached and preached and preached greater democracy,
    greater respect for human rights, and more open markets to Latin
    America.

    [[Page 1489]]

    NAFTA finally offers them the opportunity to reap the benefits of this.
    Secretary Shalala represented me recently at the installation of the
    President of Paraguay. And she talked to Presidents from Colombia, from
    Chile, from Venezuela, from Uruguay, from Argentina, from Brazil. They
    all wanted to know, ``Tell me, is NAFTA going to pass so we can become
    part of this great new market--more, hundreds of millions more of
    American consumers for our products.''
        It's no secret that there is division within both the Democratic and
    Republican Parties on this issue. That often happens in a time of great
    change. I just want to say something about this because it's very
    important. Are you guys resting? I'm going to sit down when you talk, so
    I'm glad you got to do it. [Laughter] I am very grateful to the
    Presidents for coming here, because there is division in the Democratic
    Party and there is division in the Republican Party. That's because this
    fight is not a traditional fight between Democrats and Republicans and
    liberals and conservatives. It is right at the center of the effort that
    we're making in America to define what the future is going to be about.
        And so there are differences. But if you strip away the differences,
    it is clear that most of the people that oppose this pact are rooted in
    the fears and insecurities that are legitimately gripping the great
    American middle class. It is no use to deny that these fears and
    insecurities exist. It is no use denying that many of our people have
    lost in the battle for change. But it is a great mistake to think that
    NAFTA will make it worse. Every single solitary thing you hear people
    talk about, that they're worried about, can happen whether this trade
    agreement passes or not, and most of them will be made worse if it
    fails. And I can tell you it will be better if it passes.
        So I say this to you: Are we going to compete and win, or are we
    going to withdraw? Are we going to face the future with confidence that
    we can create tomorrow's jobs, or are we going to try against all the
    evidence of the last 20 years to hold on to yesterday's? Are we going to
    take the plain evidence of the good faith of Mexico in opening their own
    markets and buying more of our products and creating more of our jobs,
    or are we going to give in to the fears of the worst-case scenario? Are
    we going to pretend that we don't have the first trade agreement in
    history dealing seriously with labor standards, environmental standards,
    and cleverly and clearly taking account of unforeseen consequences, or
    are we going to say this is the best you can do and then some?
        In an imperfect world, we have something which will enable us to go
    forward together and to create a future that is worthy of our children
    and grandchildren, worthy of the legacy of America, and consistent with
    what we did at the end of World War II. We have to do that again. We
    have to create a new world economy. And if we don't do it, we cannot
    then point the finger at Europe and Japan or anybody else and say, ``Why
    don't you pass the GATT agreement; why don't you help to create a world
    economy?'' If we walk away from this, we have no right to say to other
    countries in the world, ``You're not fulfilling your world leadership;
    you're not being fair with us.'' This is our opportunity to provide an
    impetus to freedom and democracy in Latin America and create new jobs
    for America as well. It's a good deal, and we ought to take it.
        Thank you.

    [At this point, the President signed the NAFTA supplemental agreements.]

        I'd like to ask now each of the Presidents in their turn to come
    forward and make a statement, beginning with President Bush and going to
    President Carter and President Ford. And I will play musical chairs with
    their seats. [Laughter]

    [At this point, President Bush, President Carter, and President Ford
    made remarks in support of NAFTA.]

        I wanted you to welcome Mrs. Carter. [Applause] Let me again express
    my profound thanks on behalf of all of us to President Bush, President
    Carter, and President Ford and close the meeting by invoking a phrase
    made famous last year by Vice President Gore: ``It's time for us to
    go.''
        Thank you very much.

    Note: The President spoke at 10:39 a.m. in the East Room at the White
    House. In his remarks, he referred to William M. Daley, NAFTA Task Force
    Chairman, and Bill Frenzel, Special Adviser to the President for NAFTA.
    The President was introduced by the Vice President.

      On September 14, Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers issued the following
    statement:

    [[Page 1490]]

      Due to a staff error, the President incorrectly stated that NAFTA
    would create 1 million new jobs over 5 years.

      The NAFTA will create 200,000 new export-related jobs in the first 2
    years after it is passed. By 1995, 900,000 U.S. jobs will be dependent
    on exports to Mexico. NAFTA will help secure those jobs, and trade with
    Mexico will help create even more jobs in future years.