A double standard in U.S.-Mexico trade, which
the Clinton Administration allowed to stand, could become much
worse if President Bush does not veto a bill making its way to his
desk. Currently, U.S. truckers have complete access to Mexican
highways, but Mexican trucks are confined to a 20-mile zone north
of the border. For deliveries beyond that zone, the goods they
carry must be transferred to U.S. trucks. Not only is this a double
standard, but it violates both the letter and the spirit of the
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which opened U.S.
borders for motor carrier access.
The
House voted in June to retain the current limits on Mexican trucks,
which the Clinton Administration, bowing to union pressure, had
allowed to stand after signing NAFTA in 1993. Last week, the Senate
approved an amendment to the transportation bill (H.R. 2299) to
impose harsh restrictions on Mexican trucks under the guise of
safety concerns. Some of these unwarranted restrictions are tougher
than the standards imposed on U.S. and Canadian trucks. If enacted
into law, these unfair restrictions would violate NAFTA. A NAFTA
arbitration panel already has ruled unanimously that the United
States has violated its NAFTA commitments. This sends the wrong
message to America's current and potential trade partners.
In
order to assure the world that America honors its trade agreements,
the President should not sign a non-NAFTA-compliant H.R. 2299 when
it reaches his desk. Doing so would enshrine a double standard in
law, ignore evidence on the safety of Mexican trucks that does not
justify these restrictions, and violate America's commitment to
NAFTA.
The Double Standard
In testimony before the House Subcommittee on Highways and
Transit, Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta said, "we will
not accept enforcement requirements that create a de facto
system that unfairly discriminates against Mexican drivers and
carriers." Yet, according to an article in The Washington
Post on August 2, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) "acknowledged
that some of the restrictions are more stringent for Mexico than
for U.S. or Canadian trucks." Perhaps Canadian trucks have not been
given the same intense scrutiny to which Mexican trucks have been
subjected because over 1 million members of the Teamsters Union
reside in Canada.
Safety
Concerns
Despite the claims of those who want the tougher
restrictions on Mexican truckers, the failure rate for Mexican
trucks is not significantly higher than that of U.S. trucks. The
Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Transportation reports,
for example, that the failure rate for Mexican trucks in California
during 2000 was 27 percent, which is close to the national failure
rate for U.S. trucks of 24 percent. Additionally, the Inspector
General reports that the failure rate for Mexican trucks decreased
overall last year.
Congress appears to be hiding behind
safety concerns to promote protectionism. Indeed, Teamsters
President James Hoffa has declared, "We cannot close our eyes, let
unsafe Mexican trucks cross the border and hope everything turns
out all right." However, his concerns are not justified. Everything
would "turn out all right" if Mr. Hoffa would step aside so that
the Mexican trucks could enter the United States in accordance with
the NAFTA agreement. As U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick
points out, not doing so "violates the spirit of NAFTA by holding
Mexico to a different standard than it holds to Canada or the
United States."
Undermining
Trade Agreements
Thanks to NAFTA, the amount of U.S.-Mexico trade is
gargantuan. According to Time, the daily volume of
U.S.-Mexican trade includes 1 million barrels of oil; 432 tons of
bell peppers; 238,000 light bulbs; 166 Volkswagen Beetles; 16,250
toasters; and $51 million worth of auto parts. The U.S. Department
of Commerce reports that, "During NAFTA's first five years, U.S.
merchandise exports to Mexico increased 90 percent." And in a
speech to the National Foreign Trade Council, USTR Zoellick
stated:
In the seven
years since NAFTA's implementation, U.S. exports to Mexico and
Canada now support 2.9 million American jobs--900,000 more than in
1993. Such jobs pay wages that are 13 to 18 percent higher than the
average American wage.
The
benefits of trade with Mexico include higher-paying jobs and more
exports for both Americans and Mexicans. Opening U.S. highways
further to Mexican trucks can only increase prosperity.
Trade with Mexico is not something to be
taken for granted. Actions reap consequences; and according to
Mexico, what goes around will come around. During an August 2 news
conference, Mexican President Vicente Fox stated that, "If there
continues to be resistance and there is no agreement, it will
simply mean Mexican trucks will not go over there because they are
not permitted or wanted. But neither will there be American trucks
here."
This
would be a political embarrassment for the United States. Worse, it
would mean economic deprivation for those U.S. and Mexican citizens
whose jobs rely on exports. Duane Acklie, chairman of the American
Trucking Association (ATA), emphasized this point in his testimony
before the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit in July. "ATA
supports the North American Free Trade Agreement," he said,
"because it represents increasing trade flows, which translates
into more business for trucking companies, and the creation of more
jobs and opportunities for our industry."
Conclusion
To be taken seriously in the global marketplace, the United
States must avoid saying one thing while doing another. Congress's
recent and unfortunate decision forces other countries to question
whether America can be trusted in its trade agreements. Treating
Mexico and Canada differently, in addition to being unfair, sets a
precedent that will cause potential trading partners to hesitate
before signing an agreement with a country that could discriminate
against them later.
The
United States has no business treating its second largest trading
partner and neighbor with such disrespect. In July, the White House
sent a letter to Senate leaders stating that, "if legislation
preventing NAFTA motor carriers access were presented to the
president, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the
bill." The President should veto the transportation bill when it
reaches his desk, both to keep America's promises to Mexico and to
ensure economic prosperity.
Sara J.
Fitzgeraldis a Trade Policy Analyst in the Center
for International Trade and Economics at The Heritage
Foundation.