Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.news From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: NAFTA Date: Sun, 1 Nov 92 20:06:09 EST Message-ID: \SE A;MONEY \HD NAFTA \SH WHAT FORCES WILL THE TREATY UNLEASH? \BY Anne Veigle \CR THE WASHINGTON TIMES For the next six months, business groups have a tough task in front of them: They must convince Congress and the public that the North American Free Trade Agreement won't destroy U.S. jobs or harm the environment. While labor groups criss-cross the country preaching the perils of the proposed trade pact, the business message will be dry, esoteric and couched in economic statistics. It's a message that will have to compete with the sad stories of laid-off American workers who blame job losses on a company's move to Mexico. But that won't deter the efforts of a broad sector of U.S. businesses that already have endorsed the proposed trade pact, which was announced in August. If Congress approves NAFTA, the agreement would add Mexico to the U.S.-Canada free-trade zone and reduce tariffs over a span of 15 years. "The United States just has to do this deal. We represent the most important trading bloc in the world," said James J. Albrecht, vice president and managing director of international trade at Hunt Valley-based McCormick & Co. As for jobs, Mr. Albrecht expects that McCormick won't phase out any U.S. jobs as a result of the agreement, although the company is likely to create around 200 jobs in Mexico over the next five to 10 years. McCormick has had operations in Mexico for 45 years. McCormick was one of about 50 Maryland companies cited in a recent report by a NAFTA lobbying group as likely to benefit from the trade agreement. Published by the U.S. Council of the Mexico-U.S. Business Committee, the report includes interviews with companies that support the agreement along with data on how it would help the state. The report is one of the tools that lobbyists are using to get out the pro-NAFTA message. Next year, business groups will launch a full-fledged effort to meet with key congressional leaders and convince companies across the nation to make their own testimonials about the benefits of the free-trade deal. "Congressional decisions are based on local constituent impact," said Colleen Morton, executive director of the council, explaining why the group published the state-by-state analysis. "We think this would have the most impact." The report, citing a number of other studies analyzing the free-trade pact, estimates that the agreement will produce 500 new jobs in Maryland over 10 years and will help the following businesses: oil and gas, chemicals, printing and publishing, machinery, and transportation equipment manufacturers. A separate report on Virginia predicts a gain of 900 new jobs over 10 years, with the biggest benefits going to manufacturing sectors, including mining, lumber, printing, chemicals and transportation equipment producers. Other major business groups such as the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are conducting their own lobbying efforts to try to create a positive view of the agreement in Congress. The chamber recently published a guide for small companies that describes how the trade pact's individual provisions would apply to their business. The chamber also has kept its state and local members aware of the status of the agreement through mass mailings and trade publication articles. This month, a handful of key business leaders announced a new coalition of trade associations that will lobby for NAFTA. Called the U.S. Alliance for the North American Free Trade Agreement, the coalition is led by Rochester-based Eastman Kodak Co. "We're trying to organize state by state to demonstrate grass-roots support for NAFTA," said Sandra Masur, Kodak's director of international trade. While the group does not require membership fees, those who join the movement are expected to testify on Capitol Hill or write legislators in an effort to get the agreement through Congress, she said. The alliance announced its campaign in New York at the Plaza Hotel just prior to the biannual meeting of the Business Council in Hot Springs, Va., a group of the nation's top business leaders. "We have strong across-the-board private sector support," she said. "The work of the national coalition will be to get the word out." The biggest hurdle that the business groups face is combating the impression conveyed by labor groups that NAFTA will encourage companies to move jobs to Mexico. It doesn't help that none of the studies assessing the employment impact of NAFTA agree on whether it will create or destroy jobs. Consider the data in these recent studies: * The Institute for International Economics forecasts job growth of 175,000 jobs by 1995. * The University of Maryland's Inforum predicts a gain of 44,500 jobs after five years. * The Economic Strategy Institute estimates a gain of 115,000 jobs by 1997, based on an anticipated increase in trade with Mexico. * The Economic Policy Institute foresees job losses of between 290,000 to 550,000. Adding to the confusion, the Office of Technology Assessment in September released a relatively pessimistic report saying that NAFTA would increase Mexican emigration to the United States, aggravate environmental problems on the border and threaten high-skilled U.S. jobs. The OTA, an independent Congressional research group, said its study was based on an "understanding" of the trade pact, but was conducted before the details were worked out. Studies predicting more positive results also were based on a preliminary understanding of the agreement. Not surprisingly, the Bush administration lashed out at the OTA study's conclusions, which recommended that parallel legislation such as that suggested by Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton accompany the trade pact. That legislation would provide protection for workers in the form of job training and unemployment benefits, and would require a funding mechanism for cleaning up border pollution. U.S. Trade Representative Carla Hills recently expressed her frustration with labor groups' focus on the jobs issue: "My heart goes out to these people, but let's try to give them a better future," she said. "They're being given slogans that are inaccurate. It's more difficult to say 'Look at the economic studies,' " she said, adding that "the man on the street knows trade is important, but doesn't know how it affects his well-being." A final study may put an end to some of the bickering over NAFTA's job creation potential. The U.S. International Trade Commission plans to release a study Jan. 29 analyzing the short- and long-term impact of the trade pact. The commission's report fulfills requests by the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee, which will be taking up the legislation implementing the agreement next year. This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM