I wouldn't have given him ANYTHING to crow about, not just out of spite but also because there is literally nothing to crow about. The "new" NAFTA is just a reheated version of the old NAFTA. Plus we see how this president operates. He has a take-no-prisoners, damn the torpedoes attitude and cares not one iota about what is best for anyone other than himself. Why should the Democrats reward that behavior, even if they're going to impeach him? And, he may end up throwing the agreement back in their faces. Then what will have been the point of trying to appease a bully?
11
@Rhonda
Am i to presume you never take prescription drugs? At least this agreement will help someone in need.
2
@Rhonda They didn't do it for Trump..They did it for the country. We should act like Trump? He'll crow or complain whatever the outcome. So, we're all better off if there is some consensus when possible. Appeasement? No, it's called legislating. If Trump tears it up, that's on him and his Grim Reaper McConnell.
4
@Nancy G
For at least forty years if not 60 Congress has done NADA for the citizens of the USA. It/they voted for two lousy illegitimate wars far away -- in a formerly French colony -- I have no idea as to the historical status of Iraq. We are still involved in wars that are none of our business and we have not goyyen over the concept of communism even tho the Sovet Union has been defunct for some 30 years. It/ they permitted the off shoring of every possible industry beginning in the late 1950s which has led to the death of industries and communities. The equal rights for women amendment was not ratified by 37 states, thus did not become attached to the Constitution. We don't have universal single payer healthcare not even under Medicare. We have a super unfair tax system, an ever larger operating deficit... and a rotating door from governing to lobbying. Federal agencies are increasingly less powerful more beholden to "capitalist ventures."
Congress has become increasingly weak, disfunctional. Executive power is a terrible thing as is th electoral college... This needs to be a very long essay … someone else take it over.
1
trump harped on the do nothing Dems because they couldn't get anything done because of the impeachment issue? It would seem that it is the Republicans that are the party of Do Nothing considering that Mitch McConnell is unable to hold a simple vote because of his impeachment trial. Mitch McConnell is playing his usual game--politics.
So the questions now become whether Mitch McConnell will bottle up the agreement like the other 200 or so pieces of legislation in his office oubliette and, if he doesn't, will Trump veto the final deal over his pique about impeachment.
1
Nancy Pelosi again shows she is the adult in the room. Impeachment is not personal to her, but a duty given to her from a pledge to defend the Constitution of the United States of America. Now that she is carrying out her solemn duty, she is free to deliver other hard-worked for legislation to the American people. There is no conflict of roles in her actions.
3
" Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, said that the Senate would not bring the deal for a vote before Dec. 20, when lawmakers are scheduled to leave for a holiday break.
“That’ll have to come up, in all likelihood, after a trial is finished in the Senate,” he said, referring to the impeachment proceedings."
Guess Trump will blame the delay on Democrats, too? Or will everyone forget that congress has to approve treaties before they go into effect.
1
Ms. Pelosi is quoted as saying "We ate their lunch". Up here, that's egg-sandwich day. Don't forget to open a window. Whew. Tomorrow, beef dip for lunch. Timing is everything. /j.
1
Yeah! You finally passed NAFTA 2.0, which is what we call it in Canada. You should too!
The biggest change is from NAFTA to USMCA.
Reality Check wasnt NAFTA responsible for 2008 crash cost americans millions of jobs paid living wage? No such thing as free trade an this just another attemp to export millions jobs should gove to american workers who pay taxs. Where does our government think taxs come from?
Ah, yes, my favorite President. 40% in, still despise the guy, and have since the '80s.
That is how long I remember this (insert bad word here) guy.
But he can keep saying that, MAGA hats and all.
Subverting the Constitution is a very bad crime.
How many Republicans who can even read have read our Constitution?
Stronger unions here, and in Mexico, means more jobs move to China. That’s the game, as played the last 30 years. The ability of capital to move effortlessly across borders means that manufacturing unions will never have the power they used to have.
Not with tarrifs.
This is how our government is suppose to work. Congratulations to all involved to have completed an important piece of work during a very difficult political environment.
What was the outcome for ISDS, Investor State Dispute Settlements, which has been totally unfair? No one made any statements about the outcome of that.
1
This should be the norm in the government, the passage of a bill to help the country with bi-partisan agreement even if impeachment is in the process. Unfortunately, all to often political gain and party support overrides the good of the country.
Congratulations to the legislative and executive branches for acting like adults, even if only in this instance.
84
A trade deal without labor unions is no deal at all. They could have removed the punishing anti labor legislation that has destroyed both unions and the middle class in this country but no one seemed interested. Once again American workers have been betrayed by a process guided by big business. The workers of America should remember this on voting day.
33
Quality comment.
2
@Bobotheclown I really wonder how they got Richard Trumka to agree to this.
3
@Bobotheclown Labor approves of this deal, brah.
7
To be clear, this is an a business-centered agreement. It addresses the needs and privileges of industries and monied interests. The chief promoters of the agreement are various business-centered organizations. The intercontinental negotiations behind the agreement sought to balance the financial interests of all concerned. Benefits to consumers are secondary outcomes. The interests of workers and the environment are at best by-products of any outcome.
10
Sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. You’re not satisfied with the outcome, you want the intent to be pure too?!!
2
@Mark I agree. Anyway, can any human’s intent be pure?
I think he wants the government to serve the people, not the corporations.
Re: Would strengthen the deal's worker protection
The the demand of the Democrats for US inspections of Factories in Mexico was rejected by the President of Mexico, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, as US disrespect of Mexican sovereignty.
What was agreed on has yet to be seen, as the final version of the treaty has yet to be finished.
1
Mitch McConnell is going to hold onto this final bill until after the impeachment. Surprise!
1
Big Pharma should realize the people are wising up to the games they play. Thought experiment: If they stumbled on an inexpensive cure for cancer or diabetes or any other profitable chronic disease, what are the odds these companies would bury the cure? My guess is, pretty high.
2
As a veteran of analysis of many a trade “agreement”, I must say, “let’s just see.”
1
This is how Trump and his cronies will tell the hoopleheads in flyover country, the impeachment is a joke. "If they really think I'm such a terrible president, then why did they pass my single most important piece of legislation?"
Obviously, it's a lot more nuanced than this, but once again the Democrats manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Almost expected Pelosi to endorse Hillary for the 2020 nomination during the same announcement.
4
@KCF On the contrary. The Dems, who have been accused of blindly and solely seeking Trump’s ouster, can show that they can deal with a corrupt man-baby and legislate at the same time (which they have been doing all along - just check Mitch’s desk for the pile of Democrat-passed bills he’s failed to take up).
So Mexico’s unions get strong rights while Trump and the GOP run over union rights in this country...
And we wind up having to pay more for cars and products to keep the unions happy...
If the pharmaceutical companies don't like it, it must be good.
5
Seems strange that Nancy Pelosi is doing presentations on this. Trump is the fella who campaigned against NAFTA, and played hardball to get the other countries inside.
Gotta admit, the man was right. He does good things for US.
3
@David
From what I read in the article, he played softball on the NAFTA negotiations while Ms Pelosi played hardball and made some improvements. "Good things" from all.
2
Interesting.. I don’t ever recall this paper giving credit to Obama’s “aids” for policy wins. Why the distinction this time?
7
@Midwest Josh Very good point. Clearly the writers are biased against Trump, so, if something positive occurs give credit to somebody else. Journalism is an art at influence, not informing.
2
@Midwest Josh
I'm guessing it's because the President and the Democrats aren't on particularly good speaking terms these days. To his credit and our benefit the legislative process and his work on NAFTA are still functioning via his aids. The article, once you read past the headline, clearly indicates this is a legislative victory for the President.
1
Because Trump doesn’t know how to do jack, is why.
And everybody’s biased against Trump. If they’re sane.
Nancy Pelosi is doing it backwards...in heels; at almost 80 years old.
She is the smartest, most mature, strategic, and genuinely sensitive person in Washington.
Her wisdom, experience, tenacity, and courage is unmatched by anyone - man or woman - so far as I can see.
This is what women bring to the table...every table; since we represent 50+ of the population, perhaps we should be included at every table.
Trade, impeachment, and Speaker Pelosi are inextricably linked; they're about serving the best interests of the majority of the American people...no matter what it takes.
10
Pelosi is awesome, but do her skills extend to you simply by virtue of your gender? Sounds to me you're just flipping stereotypically male overconfidence and calling it a virtue. Is anyone supposed to see that bravado as a strength?
Besides, Pelosi has her own limits. In her statement on Facebook "I mean, I lost" I read "I didn't really understand or care anyway".
1
Now after they've strung the Trump Administration along, the Democrats should vote it down. That's what the Republicans would do if the situation were reversed.
5
OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS?
The President should be given a medal; not impeached for obstructing the self-serving corrupt politicians who are trying to railroad the President of the United States solely because they can’t accept the results of the 2016 election.
Get over it, and move on. You have wasted enough of the American taxpayers’ money with this impeachment charade. Throw the Bums out.
8
You know what this article’s about, right?
7
Not entirely sure I understand how Democrats believe that they can decide to change an agreement between 3 sovereign nations already negotiated and agreed to. This article should maybe touch on the opinion and reaction from Canada and Mexico - how are they reacting to US again deciding that the agreement that they carefully negotiated was unilaterally altered by US?
Were they even asked?
2
Why in God's name wasn't this attempted by Obama, eight years in office? Now, Trump a mere 2 plus yeas in office is going to get credit for this huge win for American, and Mexican, workers. Sure, Pelosi and the Democrats can claim until they are blue in the face that they were the ones that impoved the trade deal (and they were) but presidents get credit (and fault) with trade deals. They are the point person and it was Trump that actually started the process of revisiting the disastrous NAFTA trade deal. Tell me Trump won't be using this like a bludgeon on Democrats all through the Brexit swing states of the midwest. Leave it to Pelosi and the Democrats to again shoot themselves in the foot. This should have been done, or at least attempted and fought for, under Obama years ago. NAFTA was a disastrous trade deal passed under Clinton that wiped out manufacturing and the auto industry in the midwest. Obama, not Trump, could have addressed this, but when he and Hillary were out pushing the disastrous TPP trade deal, a NAFTA trade deal on steroids, workers could see, once again, that Democrats had abandoned them. Leave it to inept leadership of Pelosi and Democrats to have missed a golden opportunity during the Obama's presidency when they controlled both the House and had a filibuster-proof Senate to blow it. Now Trump walks away smelling like a rose and touting his bona fides as the president for American workers.
9
You know that Obama’s Big Advantage lasted maybe 18 months and he had a few eensy other things to do, right?
Maybe you shoulda voted.
@Robert
Look, I voted for that weak, lead-from-behind corporate sell-out, twice. The first time expecting real change given what we'd been through. The second time, actually knocking on doors in some of THE most Republican suburbs in the nation campaigning for him. So zip it about voting. Are you saying Trump has it easy? The guy has been an absolute pit bull ramming through all sort of legislation, all bad, and with the help of Democrats in many cases. And 18 months is a long time. Trump started this process last year and got it through given all the distractions. This should have been Obama's win. Maybe if he hadn't been such a sell-out and had taken up this issue the Democrats would have had a chance in the Rust Belt. Instead, he campaigned for the TPP during the election, totally undercutting Hillary's chances in those Brexit states. The incompetency and self destruction is stunning. No wonder Trump won.
The tone of this article is strange. It seems to imply that trade policy and impeachment should legitimately be linked.
Surely linking them would be "ignoring and injuring the interests of the nation."
2
I don’t care who gets credit for the deal. It’s kind of comical to read some of these comments that only see a win or loss for one side or the other.
I hope it is beneficial to North American workers. Canada and Mexico should be our most favored trading partners, while keeping a fair deal for our own workers.
14
we have been here before. today is the first day before Trump will huff and puff over the deal, the Democrats and possibly about the weather, and tear the agreement apart.
unless the ink is dry, an agreement with Trump means nothing.
12
As Scott Adams suggested on Periscope, the main reason the Democrats delayed passage of the USMCA was to prevent it having time to exert a positive effect on the economy prior to the election. The fact that Nancy agreed to pass it moments after pulling the trigger on their #shampeachment just shows the moral bankruptcy of the modern Democratic Party.
9
@Jack: This is how the process works. Republicans wrote a one sided trade agreement. To get approval, the president had to negotiate with the House, a co-equal branch of government. It took time to get an agreement that would pass Congress and is totally unconnected to the impeachment. That’s the way the Constitution works. As Mick Mulvaney said, “Get used to it. “
13
@Peter E Derry couldn’t we agree that each party is doing what is in their interests? No more, no less. Isn’t everything connected? The Defense Authorization for 2020 gives fed employees maternity leave. What does that have to do with military? Seems like everything is connected.
1
The pharma industry has too much protection, makes them a monopoly and pushes up drug prices.
Good for the democrats to fight for softening that protection. This helps to bring down drug prices and is a first step to a public option, which is inevitable.
Thank you, President Trump, Mr. Lighthizer, and Ms. Pelosi.
Thank you for creating a template for our future trade deal with post-Brexit Britain.
13
I'm willing to bet Trump renigns because the Democrats are claiming their own sort of victory in amending the agreement. This is not a victory for Trump, it is a victory for the Democrats and Americans. As such, he will quash his own bill rather than allowing the Democrats any credit.
7
@Jackson No, they’ve negotiated and improved it for over a year.
9
This deal is incredibly better than what We had....and if Trump was not President we would still be stuck with what we had or ....even Worse!
15
Much ado about nothing but a deal with the devil. Although if Toomey is unhappy with it,then it can't be all bad.
3
I don't know how long the euphoria will last but acknowledging responsibility for the welfare of citizens in another country may seal the Trump name in list of greatest achievers. For Americans information, workers in both Canada and Mexico has seen their security and welfare continue to get better for decades. It is America's workers for whom I have both fear and trepidation. Canadian and Mexican workers need little if any protection. Mexico has a healthy, happy and growing middle class.
Maybe this is the crack that lets the sunshine in. America no longer protects its citizens and having Canada and Mexico oversee how Americans are treated may save a dying country.
6
@Montreal Moe American workers have suffered primarily because of factory automation and technology that requires far less human labor. Sending menial jobs overseas hasn't helped much either.
One day, both Mexico and Canada will likely experience similar issues, assuming their respective economies develop to such a point.
2
MOE.. No bill gets presented and passed without the consent of the monied class. They own congress and SCOTUS. So if you want to blame someone for the plight of this group, BLAME the wealthy, republicans.
4
@Jack
Jack,
I deliberately left out skilled, unskilled and industrial from being modifiers of labour. We are in the midst of a revolution as big if not bigger than the industrial revolution which even in its twilight produces more jobs than are made obsolete.
China loses millions of manufacturing jobs every year but this isn't about jobs it is about globalism and what is our responsibility to the public welfare in a global village.
Canada is at war with the Saudis not because of trade but we are ashamed as fellow human beings as how they treat people.
No one is entitled to a job at high pay but in Canada everyone is entitled to healthcare, education and a minimum standard of living and oh access to broadband internet.
We have already experienced the issues and we decided that providing a solid floor is something we can do. We do however understand as wonderful as we Canadians are we do require oversight lest we are overcome by greed and avarice.
7
Is Pelosi using USMCA as leverage to get more impeachment votes?
I certainly hope not but it certainly looks that way.
I just hope the Democrats can hold on to the House. If the vote was today I don't think they could. Hopefully, the voters have a very short term memory and will forget this Schiff/Nadler Fiasco.
It's all very sad. Tragic really. Using impeachment as a political tool when you don't have anyone in your line up, who can give the President a good contest.
5
Looks like the Democrats can govern and do impeachment at the same time, showing discipline and focus they are not noted for.
I have read the Articles of Impeachment and think they are clear and sound. I have not read the new NAFTA but I hope it does have the enforcements promised.
7
I'll bet big pharma lobbyists are working with Mitch McConnell right at this minute to gut the new provisions that effect their profits. Too many political leaders owe too much money to these big fish. America is bought.
9
@Patrick Stevens If the GOP senate gut, it has to return to the house to vote on a compromise. The senate cannot gut and pass onto the WH for signature w/out the house.
3
@james locke I know the process, but also know the politics. Conference committees do terrible things in the dead of night all the time.
Intellectual property rights being stripped from pharmaceutical industries while they get away with price gouging and the drug war?
Glad to see we can impeach and chew gum, but can we please do something like pass the MORE Act and address the very reason we have babies in cages right now or the high predatory cost of synthetic poison and sick care when we could legalize the herb and drop the cost of pain management federally?
4
The risk of normalizing Trump with this agreement on trade far outweighs the benefit to the country from the agreement. No agreement should ever be made, no matter how good it is for the country, if it means giving Trump anything.
10
@Gene Gambale
This loose-loose argument sounds like « don’t administer prescription drugs to patients if it enriches pharmaceutical companies! »
1
You’re needlessly creating false choices, “lick this boot if you want some freedom”...you don’t see any other way?!
I can't believe the Democrats are handing Trump this victory on his "meet the new boss" version of NAFTA!
THIS is how they hope to win back working class voters next year?
7
Sounds like exactly the same agreement with a different name.
6
THANK YOU Speaker Pelosi for protecting worker's from President Trump's efforts to make a deal just for the sake of making a deal.
6
There's no follow-up details about the introductory reference to increased environmental protections. What are they?
5
Ok let's review history.
1-The original deal by Bush 1 and Slick Willie was basically the North American free trade slave labor deal between US and Mexico.
2-It did nothing to bring back American blue collar jobs from slave labor Mexico.
3-The demagogue Trump then came up with a deal that was very similar to the original deal but claimed he was the greatest president since Lincoln.
4-In theory, the same guys, the democrats who aided and abetted the original slave labor deal, now says they have improved it with long on hopes and short on reality.
5-Time will tell, if some blue collar jobs start coming back the democrats can claim a victory, if not, it is another scam.
7
Crafty move by Speaker Pelosi. By agreeing USMCA today, she ensures that announcement overshadows the articles of impeachment, and signals to moderates that she appreciates the Schiff+Nadler show is a partisan farce, that she only reluctantly agreed to, to get her left wing off her back well in advance of an election year.
9
Considering that this impeachment process against Trump is only the 4th in our nation’s history, if the timing means anything then the announcement of the articles and the trade deal on the same day shields the latter from scrutiny.
1
The deal should have included that the senate must vote on the 275 bills passed in the house and now lying in the graveyard of McConnell’s office. We don’t elect our representatives to do nothing and that is exactly what senate republicans are doing- nothing.
9
If you go to Washington to actually --you know --govern, these are the sort of adult decisions you make. You pass legislation that helps Americans--choosing country over party--while you uphold your oath, and our Constitution against corruption and abuse.
10
This is a joke, because by next week or sooner Trump will have decided that this agreement is not in his best interest.
2
So what’s actually in the agreement?
5
I heard Pelosi on the radio praising this. Yet she is part a movement to rid the country of Trump without whom this would not have come about.
The Dems prefer to ignore Trump's accomplishments because the Dems don't have a viable candidate for 2020, and because they're still upset that their darling Hillary lost while employing the premise that Trump was using his influence with Zelensky to encourage Zelensky to investigate suspected wrongdoing by the Bidens.
So if the Biden's committed no wrongs why is Quid Pro Joe Biden talking about how if he's elected he'll make sure that none of his relatives work for a foreign enterprise? Why didn't he think of this in 2012 when he was the sitting vice-president and his son Hunter took a do-nothing job for big bucks with Ukraine's Burisma?
Are the Dems trying to obscure wrongdoing by St. Obama?
8
The democrats are discovering they have greater power over Trump. Trump's back is against the wall, he feels threatened, and he's trying to wriggle off the hook by being nice to the other kids in the playground.
Unfortunately, China, Russia and N. Korea are well aware of his weakness and are capitalizing. Never before has Kim been so brazen to advertise a Christmas missile surprise for the USA. China has NOT capitulated to Trump's ill-advised tariffs and Russia has not returned Crimea to Ukraine.
Every day Trump remains in office he weakens America. If he had a shred of decency and concern for the country, he'd resign but that will never happen.
Actor WC Fields said it best in 1941 with these words. "Never give a sucker an even break". Unfortunately, the "suckers" are the 99%. The 1% is loving Trump.
3
Has anyone read that new agreement? It is worse than the one it is allegedly replacing.
2
Why "big victory"
As Krugman says it's mostly NAFTA re-branded.
1
No sunset clause, no end of supply management, increased employment and environmental standards. Gotta love Nancy Pelosi and Trudeau/Freeland besting Mr. Art Of The Deal!
2
Won't the Senate just undermine whatever gains the Democrats made in this agreement? Just wondering.
2
My bet: Trump ultimately refuses to sign the resulting legislation... claiming that Democrats destroyed his "perfect trade deal" with said concessions.
Plenty of precedent for this kind of "lucy and the football" antics by Trump.
You heard it first here folks.
10
Well done Trump administration and congress. Finally you have shown that you can work together on something good and leave the bitter partisanship caused by the impeachment behind. For Pelosi to say this is better than NAFTA passed during Clinton years is a compliment hopefully not a left handed one as the clap of Pelosi.
4
For the Democrats "giving Trump a win" on this trade deal while announcing articles of impeachment allows it to be buried as the day's lead under an avalanche of coverage of impeachment news.
3
Would anyone be surprised if Trump now came out against this trade pact because....well, just because?
3
Pelosi. Is. Ultimate. Fighter.
This is essentially a Democrat trade deal.
Thank God for 2018!!
2
Well, now that's a bit odd.
Congress actually getting some substantive work done with naughty boy Trump.
2
Trump owns the Dems. Pelosi pretending like she did anything here but obstruct the USMCA is ridiculous. She raced through an impeachment of Trump, but dragged her feet on the USMCA, costing Americans invaluable time and prosperity. When her bogus impeachment charade gets shot down in the Senate, she should give us all a refund for the time wasted as she sat on the USMCA.
3
Why does the NYT have to frame this as a Trump victory if it is favorable to workers? Aren't we the victors? Our country is partisan enough without everything we read being framed only through partisan lenses.
8
The new Nafta will be a dysfunctional, toothless, paper tiger. With this new treaty the hourly rate for all of the workers in North America will soon be flattened: It’s eventually going to be fifteen an hour for “every” worker no matter the country, skills, education of the worker and it will be the end of a good paying jobs, the middle class and the demise of a voice for workers: unions. This is a soft-boiled, stupid, bad deal for all Americans. This new deal needs to be brought out into the light and not rushed to the floor to give the fanatical centrist, conservatives, Trump and corporations a victory.
Call your US Representative and demand a better deal. Demand they do their job and take their time getting this all important treaty right.
Once again Nancy Pelosi leads the charge to snatch
defeat from the jaws of victory. 
1
This is one of President Trump's campaign promises and it only took him a year to finally get democrats to agree. Democrats are trying to take credit but we all know all they did is delay and obstruct this positive FTA for the American people.
BTW: neither NYT or Pelosi are capable to give President Trump credit for his hard work.
5
This bill should not be cast as a victory for Trump. The USMC bill that has evolved is quite different than Trump's original notion, which typically he seems to have lost all interest in pursuing until he can claim a victory and move on. Details or deep concern for reasonable protections for American workers are not his strength. The bill appears to be a 'win' for trade for American, Canadian and Mexican workers, no mean feat of negotiation. We really don't need to protect corporations who can morph into different business entities in different nations, or, who can move capital around the world to increase short term profits. The real issue is cushioning workers from the excesses of the global economy while also upholding the flexibility of in this case, a hemispheric economy.
5
Of course, when the treaty starts increasing Mexican labour costs in real terms the auto industry will up sticks to Cambodia or Vietnam or wherever is cheaper. What do you do then ? You'll have no WTO to help you courtesy of DJT.
11
@Charles Coulthard
Ah contraire. When car prices go up, car sharing will reduce the need for and number of cars demanded. And automation will do the rest. Those auto jobs are disappearing, period.
2
@Charles Coulthard
Not necessarily. Mexico falls within the NAFTA framework and so enjoys more reduced trade barriers with the US than, say, Cambodia or Vietnam which are non-NAFTA, and thus subject to higher tariffs. Yes, shipping costs are low in today's globalised economy. But the question is: do the lower labour costs in Cambodia and Vietnam sufficiently outweigh the tariff payable for products from non-NAFTA countries?
1
Much more important than the stupid impeachment haggle. Although, it would be good to see what are the difference between 'then' and 'now' to see if this is a win at all and in what sense. I strongly doubt that the US corporations, never interested in US people but only in their profits, and with enough agents and promoters in the Congress and Senate, would agree on significantly reduced chances to fill the pockets via a cheap labor in MX.
All that aside, great job DT for at least trying to stop the hemorrhage of the US labor.
12
"It also rolls back a special system of arbitration for corporations long opposed by Democrats"
I hope this sentence means it is completely gone. With the need for serious climate change action, the last thing we need is paying damages to polluting companies.
This elimination opens up the door to a new TTIP attempt too, in which the inclusion of such system was one of the main reasons of rejection in Europe. Free trade between Europe and the US would be a huge accomplishment.
All in all this, the lift of the pharma protection and the labor protections do suggest meaningful progress of USMCA vs. NAFTA.
5
The original NAFTA was an experiment which did not have sufficient protection for labor (Mexican labor in particular) necessary for American workers could compete.. That is addressed here, as well the sweetheart treatment of big Pharma, the North American content requirements and extra=territorial arbitration procedures.
The other argument for this deal is that NAFTA got a bad rap over the export of American jobs which, in fact went to China. Jobs did go to Mexico but others were created here. By the second or third year of NAFTA Mexico was exporting jobs to China. Big business used NAFTA as cover for exporting jobs to a far away part of the world.
The restoration of the great North American market, threatened by the Trump administration, gives our region greater weight in world markets. The new NAFTA will also give Mexicans a greater incentive to stay home rather than risk the horrors of illegal migration to the U.S. Will it serve to lower the violence rending Mexico? Well, without NAFTA what chance would Mexico have to escape the violence?
I hope Bernie, whom I support, will realize this version, endorsed by American labor, is good for American workers and our relations with Latin America. I believe we can trust Speaker Pelosi to make the legislation work.
5
Speaker Pelosi tried to wrestle credit away from Trump on this, but it's the GOP that has been front and center on this trade deal and trade, in general. Meanwhile democrats have been busy with impeachment. They had to be shamed into finally getting this done.
7
Thank you for clarifying.
I am more of a Trump supporter now than ever before. He has got this country’s back. And I will vote for him again. God bless him and the good people of Ohio.
8
@AACNY To be fair, Speaker Pelosi deserves as much credit as Presidnet Trumpf. It is widely acknowledged that NAFTA did not contain adequate protections for labor; many in her caucus felt strongly about that. It took substantial skill and effort on the part of Speaker Pelosi to get her caucus on board.
3
In response to Rhonda (NY Time pick)
The USMCA is NOT a warmed up version of the old NAFTA
The new NAFTA, passed with the support of labour unions contains significant worker protection that were left out in the old Nafta that was passed over the objections of labour unions
From VOX, a left of center new site
"Trump’s new trade deal is better for workers than NAFTA was"
"But the most striking difference from NAFTA involves protections for workers in all three countries. Mexico has agreed to pass laws giving workers the right to real union representation, to extend labor protections to migrant workers (who are often from Central America), and to protect women from discrimination.
American auto companies that assemble their cars in Mexico would also have to use more US-made car parts to avoid tariffs, which would help US factory workers. And about 40 percent of those cars would have to be made by workers earning at least $16 an hour — three times more than Mexico’s minimum wage for an entire work day.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/2/17925424/trump-mexico-trade-deal-nafta-workers-labor
Not all that Trump does is bad. I write this as Sanders supporter.
American workers can simply not compete with workers abroad who work can be paid $ 5.33 for an ENTIRE day
To see the damage the old NAFTA did drive around in Syracuse. GM's Fisher Plant, Carrier AC, Lenox Heating, New Venture Gear, - all departed where workers earn less.
7
@Woof
When Canada passed the legislation tying trade to respect for human rights China was the first nation to voice its disapproval, I remember Duterte condemning Trudeau and Canada and praising Trump to the Heavens because the USA didn't think how Filipinos were treated by their government was their concern.
This NAFTA has the seeds of creating a far better world for all its citizens. If we survive these trying times Trump signing this treaty may be the turning point to a world perceived to be in decline.
3
They should attached to it gun control legislation and not sign it over to the senate unless the gun legislations is also passed.
4
Ten to one it goes through both houses and Trump vetoes.
Just for spite.
And to show everyone what a great negotiator he is.
5
Given Trump's history of blowing up his deals, why is everyone celebrating?
21
I got five bucks that says our petty leader won’t sign it because he doesn’t want to give Pelosi a feather for her cap. Or if he does, it will only be after throwing numerous, childish fits on Twitter while the few remaining grownups in the executive branch twist his arm to sign.
19
@Pierson Snodgras
Trump has to be careful if he wants to give his State of the Nation polemic from the dais of the House.
Thank you, Mr. Trump. You seem to succeed even when everyone is hating you.
14
“Welcome to new NAFTA, same as old NAFTA.” - American proverb
10
Here's a deal for 'ya...Democrats will pass the bill if Trump resigns.
5
Since when is doing your job, no matter how incompetently or divisively "a win"?
10
Neoliberalism wins again.
6
Trump caved to the democrats' demands to get a deal and try to boost his support while he's being impeached on only two articles instead of about ten. He's a disgusting crook, albeit a predictable one, but what of the democrats? The only thing Pelosi has proved is that she's willing to negotiate with our future dictator. It's cold comfort for those of us who believe we see where we're heading as a nation and shudder at the thought.
5
Wait, according to Trump & his followers the Democrats are all left-wing crazy liberals who hate him & the country. How’s this agreement even possible?
8
@John L remember lindblom the market as a prison
I do think Nancy Pelosi should take this opportunity to list the USMCA as legislation passed by the House and to also list on a large screen/billboard all of the other bills the House has passed, what they would accomplish and why they haven't been enacted (Republican Senate and Trump are blocking them).
The Democrats need to trumpet their work; it's not enough to mention it is passing or to generalize it. Nancy Pelosi and Schumer need to broadcast what's going on.
10
@ Bernard. Excellent point. Nancy did it at least once, but needs to say it over and over again for it to get any traction, just like the Republicans do. And this point has the added benefit of being actually true.
“[T]he closed door negotiations [secured] multiple policy changes related to prescription drug pricing, the environment, labor protections and dispute settlement.”
So what are the changes related to “dispute settlement?” The lack of detail tells me it’s probably the same private kangaroo court arbitration system permitting corporations to sue governments which pass laws they don’t like. Regardless of how much this new version nibbles around the edges of inequity for average Americans, the simple arithmetic remains the same as in Ross Perot’s time. It’s so much cheaper to pay someone in another country a quarter an hour with no benefits and no rights than a fellow American a decent union wage with at least some benefits that the exodus of jobs out of our country will continue apace. Giving Trump the opportunity to claim a major victory is the worst possible timing, but the rich donor class must be fed. The Empire Strikes Back!
4
Maybe the Republicans in the Senate can follow the Democrats’ lead in the House by actually approving some of the many bills passed to it by the House. Wouldn’t it be good for the American people to see the Senate actually doing things on their behalf?
11
@Eileen. Good point. Why isn’t Pelosi and every other Democrat pounding the words “Do-nothing Senate” into every interview?
This very modest modification of NAFTA is much less than it is made out to be by Trump and Pelosi.
Why deliver this ' political' victory to Trump?
1
Another promise made by Trump kept. May we continue to win under President Trump's leadership. God Bless America!
5
@Hank
I'm really happy that you think that replacing Nafta with, well, Nafta light, was what trump promised. I bet that you also think that the Mexicans paid for the invisible wall.
2
@Hank
If only democrats could be shamed into similar deals on immigration.
4
@Hank
To add to his other promises like Mexico paying for his wall, bringing in better and cheaper healthcare, releasing his tax returns, his tax cuts being bad for him personally, knowing more than his generals, trade wars being easy to win...,,,,
2
“Free Trade" Agreements never, ever benefit workers.
We ought to thank our lucky stars that Obama wasn't able to ram the TPP down our throats.
It sounds like many of our corporations moved their manufacturing operations to Mexico and not only profited off of the cheap labor and lax environmental laws there but were also able to force the Mexican government to strictly enforce patent and copyright laws that restricted competition and padded their profits even more.
The Democrats have spent forty years betraying nonwealthy US Citizens, while the Republicans openly took them for fools.
The Democrats had control of the House, the Senate, and the presidency, when NAFTA was passed.
So, how was it possible when the Democrats did not have control of the Federal Government, they were able to stop NAFTA twice during the HW Bush administration, but when in complete control of the Federal Government, the Democrats were unable to stop NAFTA?
Trump and Democrats; two words that go together well. Democrats approved Trump's right wing Cabinet and humongous "defense" budget increases and now this. Democrats are funding his wall. Expect the Democrats and Trump to increasingly work together for the benefit of the banks and corporations. And this shouldn't be looked at as a cave-in to Trump; Democrats largely agree with what's he's doing. The internecine bickering is just for public consumption. More and more, the Democratic Party functions as a caucus within the Republican Party.
6
This is the Democrats in a nutshell. Handing Trump a big optical win that will have little to no impact on common folks, but will allow Trump to boast about his successes on the campaign trail. Meanwhile, Democrats get to claim that the mantle of "unity," which has been rendered less than useless by Republicans who always utilize scorched earth tactics when Democrats hold any power.
And by the way, remember all those moderate swing state Dems who won in 2018? You think they won because their voters were clamoring for unity? No, they won because their districts were full of moderate voters sick of Trump. What do they think is going to happen when Trump campaigns in their district boasting big wins? Watch those blue seats turn red again in 2020.
3
While I don’t like giving wins to a party that obstructs anything and everything Democrats do, the concessions that Democrats succeeded in getting do seem to make this a MUCH better deal.
1
Bravo! Bravo! Great job by both the President and House Democrats. If we come together on many such issues, we can help heal some of the division in this country. It's nice to see both parties working together. Consensus is not dead. Great day for America!
7
This would have never happened had Trump not been elected. Clinton lived NAFTA. Her husband was the architect. Trump cancelled and then worked to develop a new accord that was much more favorable to American workers and Taxpayers. You hear Nancy saying all these good things about it but can’t bring herself to give credit to Trump. She is so small.
9
If the roles were reversed do you think the Republicans would have signed off on the deal and given the Democrats an election year win...not likely the GOP now how to play hardball, take no prisoners politics.
2
If Democrats were as ruthlessly shrewd as republicans, they would have conditioned their agreement on Bolton's and others' testimony and documents. That's what Republicans would have done.
4
Not a real surprise that Democrats are working with the Trump administration on reaching a deal on a North American trade pact and on other legislative matters. Democrats need to show the public that they are not putting aside other important matters while they pursue impeachment. In fact they want to be able to claim that seeking Trump's impeachment, like reaching a trade deal, itself is addressing a national need. Put another way, Trump's impeachment isn't personal - it's just attending to the business of the country.
51
Great that Dems and Trump worked together to come to an agreement. This is the way government is supposed to work. Good that the Trump Admin abandoned it initial , "take it or scrap it" objective resulting in Mexico and Canada eagerly signing up for the new NAFTA. The details will amount to little more than rebalancing your 401K fund which should be an ongoing process, equitable to the three signatories.
3
@bshea Canada hasn't ratafied the deal and won't until is passed by the HOUSE.
Congratulations President Trump.
You do know it is possible to do the same thing without abusing and threatening our neighbors? You can negotiate even tough agreements from the basis of willing partners tackling a difficult problem. Doing so will probably encourage those partners to work on other issues which concern them because we have demonstrated our willingness to work together.
20
Democrrats, lead by the pat herself on the back Pelosi, have stonewalled the Trump administration for over a year on this trade deal, which the Trump team artfully renegotiated with Canada and Mexico, achieving much better terms than the previous deal. Why are they signing off on it now? It's simple. Pelosi is providing cover for the Democrat congress men and women who represent districts that Trump won in 2016, and which they fear losing in 2020. The Democrats have no record of accomplishment since they took over the House last year. They have been fixated on impeachment. Now they are touting the new trade deal as their deal. What bunk.
27
@paul .. Did you read the article at all? Trumps "better terms" weren't all that and Pelosi was right to get the agreement to "secure multiple policy changes related to prescription drug pricing, the environment, labor protections and dispute settlement."
The Democratics have sent many good and bipartisan bills to the Senate, including for infrastructure, but they sit there languishing because the Senate Republican leader refuses to do his job.
The new trade deal is now truly bipartisan.
90
@paul You couldn't be more wrong. The bill as presented by Trump didn't change much of anything. The crux of it was that workers in Mexico would be paid higher wages. Which would create some jobs in the US, but would also make the cost go up for a lot of goods, affecting the American consumer. The Democrats added some real changes to the bill, and Trump negotiated with them to get some of what he wanted, too. This is how it is supposed to work. So now I suppose that we are supposed to congratulate both sides for finally doing their jobs?
6
@Paul - Of course nothing that the Democrat led House of Representatives pass makes it past the GOP led Senate. We have a legislative system that can be abused to produce gridlock. When one party prevents the other party from accomplishing anything, it's not realistic to blame the other party for not doing anything. Mitch McConnell is on record as saying that nothing will get past the Senate. The only way anything can get done is if there's some horse trading - but Mitch rarely negotiates. Props to the Democrats for not reciprocating and, instead, making some small improvements to NAFTA which was George HW Bush's baby. Both parties had a stake in this.
4
Confused by why the Democrats are echoing Trump's talking points and pretending this deal is "historic" or significant in any way. It's a continuation of a NAFTA that never expired, with modest updates that could have been easily achieved without the years of acrimony and damage done to continental relationships courtesy of Trump's insults and rants.
At best USMCA is Trump again solving a problem he created.
107
@North Modest results? Canada's chicken and dairy industry has been hit hard by the new deal and the USA also won in negotiations regarding "softwood lumber." The lumber business has been a grand and divisive issue on the west coast for decades. And Great Lakes states had been arguing with the Canadian dairy industry for a very long time. The Canadian industry is centred primarily in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. USA won big-time on that front.
Canadian
14
@Luke Fisher Debatable. The new setup is what the US would have gotten under TPP regardless for chicken and dairy. Softwood lumber dispute has been going on decades and is not related to NAFTA other than the dispute panels, which remain. Expats hidden in the US keep close tabs on this stuff, believe me, and the deal has been carefully structured to give the Americans the appearance of what they wanted in order to steer Trumpian chaos away from US-Canada trade.
2
Nancy waited until today for a reason.
She thinks this may Stop Trump from saying the
" Do Nothing Democrats".
It will not.
29
@Joe Paper. I agree. Nancy is trying to demonstrate that although the House is impeaching the Donald, they ARE getting work done. It is important to do this an make a big deal of it because the scores of other meaningul legislation the House has passed since the 2016 election are sitting on Moscow Mictch's desk waiting to die.
5
Only by Trump supporters. The majority of the country knows that Mitch McConnell has stonewalled more than 100 bills passed by the House.
8
@Joe Paper She got Trump to eliminate a giveaway to the Drug lobby, strengthened the rules for autos to require more components to be produced in North America, i.e. not in China, and rolled back the special arbitration rules that big corporations are so fond of.
If the Republicans had held the House none of that would have happened.
8
how about a link to the original and now re-written trade pact so readers can compare them without the reporters' heavy overlay of politics.
It's a report on a trade pact but it is overshadowed by politics for the bulk of the report. Kind of stating the obvious here...
25
@Stephen George The texts of the agreements are available at USTR.gov
1
How dare Democrats agree to this and give Trump a win? Trump has complained about trade issues with Mexico since before he was elected.
7
Dems had Trump the victory he needed!
Good work Nancy—
11
@Happy Selznick Don't be so silly. Like it or not (I hate it) Trump is president, he has power. But so does Speaker Pelosi. She did what she was supposed to do, negotiate to get a better pact.
3
And Democrats, who show that when Trump doesn’t act like a corrupt madman, progress is possible.
1
Bravo for Speaker Pelosi.
This victory for American workers shows how very smart and effective Nancy Pelosi is. Would that she, instead of Trump, were President of the United States.
122
@SA Agreed. A much bigger victory for her than Trump. The crazy stuff he wanted is nowhere to be seen. Thank goodness she became the adult in the room for these final tweaks. I cannot believe that NYT still calls this “Trump’s trade deal.” Ask him to detail just one provision of NAFTA2. The crickets you will hear are NOT part of it!!
55
@SA
Yes, it’s so gratifying to see her finally get her due.
I remember in the last presidential election how those on both the alt right and alt left, talked about her as if she were an old has been sellout who should be defeated.
When I would defend her to supporters of some so called “very progressive” candidates, their supporters would mock and insult my support of her.
Grateful she is still here.
4
" It also contains provisions designed to strengthen Mexican labor unions "
Why is it that the democrats fought for unions in the countries that are taking jobs away from the US? They don't do anything to protect workers in this country, yet they are concerned about things like labor agreements and minimum wage for other countries. It seems once again that they are more concerned about people from other countries then the citizens of the USA.
18
@David - Having strong labor unions in Mexico does protect US workers. Why is it that so many factories moved out of the US and into Mexico after NAFTA was signed? Because there was dirt cheap labor and workers could be exploited without repercussions. Why would a factory remain in the US where there is a minimum wage and worker protections when you can go across the border and take advantage of a system that doesn't care about its workers?
If Mexico is able to have strong unions that enforce labor rights and worker protections, US companies will have less incentive to move production to Mexico. The cost of labor would start to equalize across the border and that can only be a good thing for American workers.
147
@David Obviously the point is to drive up the cost of Mexican labor to deter US companies from going there in the first place.
Incidentally, Canada gave up on this long ago, having already lost most of its manufacturing to Upper Mexico (aka the USA) under the original Canada-US FTA.
13
@David Strengthening Mexican unions is good for American workers. Higher wages in Mexico means less financial incentive for corporations to off-shore American jobs there.
20
Why give trump a political win by agreeing to "fix" what he clearly broke in a childish fit of pique?
15
@ReciprocalHokie
Because sometimes it's not about Trump.. it's about what is best achievable for the people of the United States.
Politics works via compromise between differing interests.
Stonewalling indefinitely without objective reason is not something I ever want to see Democrats do. We have enough of that nonsense from Republicans.
Democrats in the House objected to very specific holes or gaps in the new trade agreement and held back support until those were negotiated and addressed by the administration.. and that is exactly how the legislative process is meant to work in a multi-party democracy.
8
@ReciprocalHokie Because the new agreement is better for the US people than the old one was? There was a time, and this is a vestige of it, when the good of the country was more important than who gets to claim a win.
3
@ReciprocalHokie Sore Loser...Don't be that way snowflake
2
I don't like the House Democrats giving Trump a trade win -- or any legislative win for that matter -- while his buddies in the Senate block action on every piece of legislation that the House sends there. What are they getting in return? He laughs at them, obstructs House investigations by refusing to allow aides to testify or turn over documents, and he refuses to protect the Dreamers.
13
@RRM
Remember that just because the US ratifies the agreement, there are changes from the "original" documents agreed to already by Canada & Mexico, and their respective legislatures have to approve the amended documents, and there may be disagreements by those Nations to those changes, sending it back for negotiations.
There may yet be a chance this won't get through.
8
@RRM Did you bother to rear the article? I guess I'm just hopelessly old-fashioned, I wouldn't comment on an article I hadn't read.
To help you out I'll mention that the article alluded to various changes which the House Democrats had insisted on. Changes that would not have happened if the House was still held by the Republicans.
7
The Democrats could have demanded that the White House honor the House subpoenas before they signed this trade pact. I guess they didn’t think of that?
Yes, the house can walk and chew gum at the same time. This will confound the GOP. What narrative will they chose? I know, the one where Trump proved he is the real 'art of the deal.' Sad
8
Why did Pelosi wait for over a year to get here with USMCA?
It appears impeachment was more important to her and the Democrats than the USA Economy.
The Democrats could very easily lose their majority in the House.
Can you imagine the Republicans ruling the House, the Senate, and the White House?
8
@P&L
To answer your question.
Democrat legislators have met with the White House trade representative dozens of times over the last year. People familiar with those meetings have described them as the Democrats talking, enumerating the changes they wished in the agreement, but the trade representative politely listened, said little and agreed to little or nothing.
While I have little direct information about it, I'd imagine House members of have also at the same time been meeting with representatives of labor and other interest groups to make sure everyone is on board with what they were doing.
In short, the only way this complex--think of all the issues and interested parties involved-- negotiation could have taken place is over time.
Another guess: The White House obviously made significant concessions and only recently. Maybe that's not coincidence.
Could the impeachment have made it squirm just a little, more eager than it had been to have something it too could call a win?
25
If Republicans rule all three, it will be a lot like the first two years of the Obama administration. Apparently you believe that was bad.
@P&L I can not only imagine such a situation, but let's remember we had such a situation when T came to office. It won't happen in 2020. And we did survive.
Impeachment wasn't more important to Pelosi, just what she had to do. This trade agreement shows good faith by the Dems that they wish to get things done.
10
Nancy is placing a bet on the fact that Donald will be unable to resist snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. His wounded ego over impeachment will no doubt get the better of him in the next few weeks and he’ll manage to upend the whole shebang. As usual, he’ll gum up the works in his narcissistic craziness.
28
@NJLatelifemom - That would be some real 3D chess by Ms. Pelosi. I think it's highly plausible.
But I still don't think it's worth the risk of handing trump a political win of any kind. His base doesn't care about his childish tantrums and he'll simply declare victory in any case.
Yes Mr. Trump the Democrats are actually working hard to do the right thing by the American public and are able to walk and chew gum. They are not only focused on your impeachment. It is pathetic that YOU are forcing Congress to go through the impeachment process instead of them being able to spend even more time on important legislation.
39
@mark They were forced to do the right thing. Amazing at how naive some are. Pelosi was forced by the crazy base to push impeachment. The numbers do not lie. If the 2020 election were today, Trump would win and the Republican's would retake Congress. She has a lot of work to do.
This proves the Democrats can walk and chew gum. Now for Trump to grow up.
34
Good, progress.
5
Finally some real policy besides impeachment is being enacted. However as much as I endorse this move by Democrats I can't help but feel that this will strengthen the odds of another Trump term in in 2020.
8
Only the Democrats! The day they unveil charges of impeachment against Trump, they turn around an hour later and hand him the biggest legislative, diplomatic, and deal-making victory of his presidency. You literally can’t make this stuff up.
Remember the Republican mantra from 2009-2012: don’t give Obama ANYTHING!!! Nothing that he can use as an achievement or an accomplishment. They were all-in on victory in 2012 and taking back the White House.
Republicans play for keeps. That’s the difference between them and the Democrats. What a joke!
15
@Mike And yet, Obama got re-elected. I would lose my faith in the Dems if they pulled such a stunt.
6
@Mike Trump Wins Again....MAGA2020
1
@Kathy Shields and guess what? So will Trump. Oh well!
1
NAFTA amendment, not replacement. Just like HITECH act amended HIPAA. everyone stills call the law of the land HIPAA as they will NAFTA.
10
@Irish
Agreed.
This is really an amended NAFTA agreement.. and after a couple of decades in.. amending an agreement where it makes sense is sound politics and governance.
IF Trump had his way.. it would have simply been rubber stamped by Congress as presented by the White House. Instead... Democrats in control of the House stood their ground and actually negotiated for important changes and concessions.
THIS is exactly why the 2018 election was so important for the nation.. and also why 2020 will be equally important.
12
Very interesting timing. The IG report comes out yesterday, which is very damning for many Democrats, and for the FBI. The Democrats, alone, push forward an unfounded, unwarranted impeachment process. And today the Democrats finally, make a move like they are doing anything other than impeachment, since before President Trump took office.
This trade deal is a big accomplishment for President Trump and will do us all good.
Congratulations to the USA!
23
@Reg Grant Actually this is far from an unusual move. Since your buddy took office, the Democrats in the House have sent over 275 bills to the Republican Senate, where the Republican leader refuses to bring them up for a debate. Nothing is getting done in the Senate, thanks to the Republicans, except confirmation of judicial nominees.
14
@Reg Grant unless specific facts are accepted as given by both sides, conclusions like yours are always suspect.
4
@Reg Grant The IG report isn't damning for Democrats. It does however completely refute Trump's claim of "the Deep State" out to get him.
7
In a hint of irony, the reduction in pharmaceutical protections and strengthened enforcement provisions were part of Canada's negotiating position, that were originally rejected by the United States.
Must of been an interesting meeting when Neal went to Ottawa to request that Canada adopt its original position!
51
@Andrew Howarth Democrats outnumber Canadians about 5 to 1, so there's your leverage for you...
2
@Andrew Howarth You're creating irony where there is none. That's just how deals are made when the participants have differing requirements. Canada had negotiating provisions that Trump's team rejected. Democrats won the House and chimed in for those provisions, which they agreed with before, no doubt, from a position of strength. There may be other elements of the deal Canada is eating with a sour taste in its mouth, but acceptable for the sake of the finished agreement, and similarly for Mexico and the USA, perhaps. That's how compromise works.
Deals fall through, or never even start to be negotiated, when one or more sides abhor having that sour taste to the extent that compromise is impossible.
8
@Andrew Howarth
LOL.. indeed!
2