US Trade Act Proposed

Excerpt from North American Free Trade & Investment Report
published by WorldTrade Executive, Inc.

By Kenneth G. Weigel, Thomas E. Crocker and Eric Shimp
(Alston & Bird LLP)

The Trade Reform, Accountability, Development and Employment Act (TRADE Act) would seek to fundamentally change core tenets of U.S. trade agreements, mandate the renegotiation of several existing agreements, strengthen the role of Congress in trade policy, restrict fast track votes, and dilute the power of the federal government over the states in the area of trade and investment.
Fostered by core Democratic constituencies including ten major unions and NGOs, including Public Citizen and Friends of the Earth, the TRADE Act was launched on June 4. Democratic Representative Mike Michaud (ME) and Senator Sherrod Brown (OH) offered joint legislation aimed at a wholesale reform of the way the nation conducts trade policy. This bill will shape the debate over trade policy in Congress, on the campaign trail, and during the first year of the new presidential administration in 2009.

Key Provisions
The sprawling scope of the TRADE Act would compel key changes in U.S. trade policy, including:
• New objectives: Lays out new negotiating objectives, focusing specifically on trade and environment matters, and reducing the scope of provisions on investment and services disciplines.
• Trade agreement review: Mandates that GAO perform regular reviews of all existing trade agreements, examining data on job creation, wage levels, exports and imports, outsourcing and labor and environment issues. Criteria are clearly slanted to portray agreements as detrimental to the economy.
• Renegotiation: Compels the government to renegotiate all existing U.S. trade agreements, including NAFTA, to a) comply with new objectives and b) address faults found in review process.
• State opt outs: Would grant states the ability to reject all nontariff-related provisions of negotiated agreements (e.g., services, investment, government procurement, IPR). This particular provision is likely to cause significant problems for foreign trading partners who look to market access within the 50 states as a major benefit of FTAs with the United States.
• Services: Would move the U.S. to a positive list approach, thereby reducing potential market access gains for U.S. services providers in foreign markets.

To find out more about North American Free Trade & Investment Report

To receive your free International Corporate Counsel electronic briefing