[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1993, Book II)]
[November 2, 1993]
[Pages 1882-1884]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



[[Page 1882]]


Remarks on Endorsements of the North American Free Trade Agreement
November 2, 1993

    Thank you very much, President Carter, Mr. Vice President, all the 
distinguished people who have spoken here today.
    I would like to begin by making two observations. First of all, 
after hearing what has been said, I'm pretty proud to be an American 
today. And I think all of you should be, too. Secondly, I have been sent 
an extraterrestrial telegram stating, ``I, too, am for NAFTA,'' signed 
Otto von Bismarck. [Laughter]
    You know, it is something of note that every living President, 
Secretary of State, Secretaries of Defense, national security advisers, 
Secretaries of Commerce, leaders of the Federal Reserve, distinguished 
contributors to the American spirit like John Gardner and Father 
Hesburgh and other great American citizens all support this agreement, 
for economic reasons, for foreign policy reasons. Our own Secretary of 
State, Warren Christopher, is in California even as we are here, talking 
about the foreign policy implications of NAFTA for our Government and 
our country.
    Why have all of us declared this issue above politics? Why have we 
come to agree that whatever else has divided us in the past, this will 
weld us together in the cause of more jobs for our people, more exports 
for our markets, and more democracy for our allies? Why do we all know 
down deep inside that this would be such a profound setback for America 
and the world economy and in the new global polity we are striving so 
honestly to create? Why are we so willing to say no to partisan politics 
and yes to NAFTA? I think it is because we know, as all of these have 
said in different ways, that NAFTA reflects this moment's expression of 
all the lessons we have learned in the 20th century. It reflects this 
moment's expression of what we learned not to do after World War I, what 
we learned we had to do during and after World War II. It reflects the 
sheer economic weight of argument that Mr. Samuelson referred to, that 
we have seen even more expressed just in the last few years when a 
higher and higher percentage of our new jobs in this country are clearly 
traceable directly to exports.
    I see it in my own work here. For years and years and years our 
allies in Europe and Asia said, ``Well, if America really wanted to 
promote global growth, you would do something about your deficit and get 
your interest rates down and quit taking so much money out of the global 
economy.'' And so we have tried to do that. And we have low interest 
rates and the deficit is coming down, and our own deficit this year was 
much lower, in no small measure because of those lower rates.
    But we still have this great global recession. Why? Because we are 
not trading with one another. We are not buying and selling and 
investing across national lines and sparking the kind of global growth 
that is the only way any wealthy country, anyway, generates any new 
jobs.
    No one attacking NAFTA has yet made a single solitary argument to 
refute this essential point: There is no evidence that any wealthy 
country--not just the United States, anyone, not one--can create new 
jobs and higher incomes without more global growth fueled by trade. If 
you strip away all the other arguments, no one has offered a single 
solitary shred of evidence to refute that central point.
    And I know there is great insecurity and instability in all the 
wealthy countries in the world. You can say whatever you want about this 
being the first Tuesday in November; you've seen a lot of other Tuesdays 
come along in other nations, great political upheavals all across the 
world. Why? Because people feel the walls are closing in on them.
    And in truth, I think when you strip all this away, we are facing a 
real decision about whether the psychological pressures of the moment 
will overcome what we know in our hearts and our minds is the right 
thing to do. Whether the same pressures that people in Canada feel, or 
France, or Japan, in a time when wealthy countries are not generating 
new jobs and people are working harder for stagnant wages, will those 
pressures make us do what is easy and perhaps popular in the moment? Or 
will we do what we should really do? The honorable thing to do to 
respond to those pressures is to take an action that may not be popular 
in the moment but that actually holds the promise of alleviating the 
pressures.
    If we believe the feelings, the anxieties are

[[Page 1883]]

legitimate, as has been said already by other speakers, then don't we 
have the obligation to do what will alleviate the anxieties over the 
long haul, instead of play to them in the moment? That, in the end, is 
what this decision is all about. That is really what we mean when we say 
the secret ballot on this issue has already been won.
    These students over here to my left are from my alma mater, 
Georgetown. And when I was in their place 25 years ago now, when we were 
studying global affairs, we came out really worrying about and thinking 
about the cold war and trying to debate exactly how much the pattern of 
the bipolar world could be manifested in every--[inaudible]--
development, in every country in the world, in every region of the 
world. And sometimes we were wrong, and sometimes we were right. But at 
least we had a framework within which to view the world.
    As Dr. Kissinger said, we are in the process now of creating a new 
framework. And a lot of people are complaining about how we don't have 
all the answers. I don't mean we, the administration, I mean we, the 
people. But I say to you--many of you in this room are old enough to 
remember, and I think I now qualify in that category--there are a lot of 
generations of Americans who would kill to be alive and of age in this 
time with this set of problems. I mean, who are we to complain about 
this set of problems? Very few mornings do I come to work in the Oval 
Office and wonder about whether some decision I make can spark a nuclear 
war. Very few mornings do I wonder whether, even in all the difficulties 
we face, we might make an economic error and a quarter of our people 
will be out of work, as they were during the Great Depression.
    We see people in positions of responsibility going around wringing 
their hands about the difficulties of the moment. Yes, it's a new time. 
It's always difficult in a new time to see the future with clarity and 
to have the kind of framework you need. But none of that is an excuse to 
give in to the emotional pressure of the moment instead of to take steps 
that will alleviate the pressure. That is the dilemma before us.
    You know, it's true that it's good for us economically. It's also 
true that what Mexico gets out of it is investment, so that if we don't 
take this deal somebody else probably will. And that will be bad for us 
economically, as has already been said by President Carter. But the real 
thing that this is about is how we are going to view ourselves as we 
relate to the rest of the world. Keep in mind, this is not an isolated 
incident. This is not just a trade deal between the United States and 
Mexico; not even a deal that affects our relationships with the rest of 
Latin America, although that's where the real jobs and long-term 
economic benefit to us lie, perhaps; not even a deal that will help us 
to get the GATT agreement by the end of the year, although, I tell you, 
it will give enormously increased leverage to the United States to push 
that agreement through by the end of the year if this passes, enormous, 
and great incentive to other nations to support this. But over and above 
that, this is a decision which will demonstrate whether in this 
difficult moment we still have confidence in ourselves and our 
potential.
    And I would say to all of you, anything you can do to the people at 
large and to the Congress in particular to instill that confidence again 
is very important. If we have lost our way at all in the last couple of 
years, it is in not having any historic memory. These are difficult 
problems. But for goodness sakes, give us these problems as compared 
with many of those our forebears faced, and give us these problems as 
compared to those we are about to create if we start turning away from 
the world that is plainly before us. Help us to give the Congress the 
freedom, the confidence, the courage that is inside every Member of the 
Congress waiting to be brought out. Help to give them the space they 
need to take the steps they know are right for America.
    This is about whether we really have confidence in ourselves. I 
believe with all my heart the next 20 years can be the best we ever had. 
But they're going to require some tough decisions, some difficult 
moments, some uncertain moments. What do you do in moments like that? Do 
what the priests would tell you to do: Fall back on what you believe and 
what you know is right. What we know is right for America is to be 
confident, to reach out, to believe in ourselves and our potential, to 
believe that we can adjust to change, just as we have been doing for 200 
years now.
    Make three calls. Make 12 calls. Make two dozen calls. For goodness 
sakes, make however many you can. But remember, this is a test of our 
confidence. Every one of you can give confidence to someone else by the 
life you have

[[Page 1884]]

lived, the experiences you have had, the things that you know. Give it 
now. We need it.
    Thank you very much.

Note: The President spoke at 3:20 p.m. in the East Room at the White 
House. In his remarks, he referred to John Gardner, writer and founder 
of Common Cause; Theodore M. Hesburgh, president emeritus, University of 
Notre Dame; Paul A. Samuelson, Nobel Prize-winning economist; and Henry 
Kissinger, former Secretary of State.