Legislation introduced in the House that would compel the president to withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement within six months is causing some consternation among Canadian officials who are worried that it may be a sign of a coming wave of protectionism ahead of the 2010 midterm elections.

“We are closely following this bill, of course,” Canadian International Trade Minister Peter Van Loan said, according to The Vancouver Sun. “Our evaluation is that this is certainly inconsistent with the direction that the Barack Obama administration has chosen.” 

The effort, led by Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor of Mississippi, would require providing Canada and Mexico with a six-month notification of America’s intent to drop out of the trade pact. After that, the U.S. would be free to leave the tri-lateral agreement.

The bill, H.R. 4759, has bipartisan support with 28 co-sponsors representing 15 states both large and small.   
“Timing is everything in life and it’s the right time to pass this legislation. Proponents have had more than enough time to make this work – It didn’t,” Taylor said in a statement.

Prior to the implementation of NAFTA, the U.S. held a small trade surplus with Mexico of approximately $10 million. By 2007, that surplus had turned into an astounding $91 billion trade deficit. With Canada and Mexico combined, the U.S. has taken a $24 billion trade deficit prior to NAFTA and turned it into a $190 billion deficit – a 691 percent increase.

Since 1993, manufacturing employment in the U.S. has decreased from 16.8 million to 13.9 million in 2007, as the trade agreement put American workers in direct competition with Mexican workers.  This has encouraged a “race to the bottom” in which American companies are frequently relocating production facilities across the border. Iconic American companies such as Coca Cola, Ford, RCA, General Motors, General Electric and Nokia have all opened up assembly plants in Mexico. In fact, GE employs 30,000 Mexicans in 35 factories in the country.
 
“Tell me somewhere NAFTA created a job,” Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI), one of the bill‘s co-sponsors, told The Saginaw News. “You’re not going to find very many. Tell me where people have lost jobs because of NAFTA, and you’ll find thousands of them.”

The bill has been sent to the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Trade, where no action has been taken on it since its introduction.

Even some U.S. officials are predicting that the bill will languish in committee and eventually die.
   
“I believe that in the NAFTA agreement, every five years, there is a possibility of withdrawal,” U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Jacobson said, according to the Toronto Sun. “Every five years we go through this and every five years there are a handful of members of congress that support this initiative but I don’t think it’s going anywhere.” 

If you support this legislation, please contact John Tanner (D-TN), the acting chairman of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, and ranking member Kevin Brady (R-TX) and ask them to allow the bill to come to a full committee vote. 

Print PDF