house republican conference issue brief - myths about nafta
TRANSCRIPT
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 1/11
.
fle
Dick ArmeyChairman
26th District. Texas
Answers to Bumper Sticker Protectionism
The North American Free Trade .Area (NAFT A) agreement between the UnitE~dStates, Mexico and Canada will be considered by Congress later this year. When in
place, NAFT A 1Nillcreate the world's largest open market, with a population of 370
million and a GDP of $7 trillion. The unique nature of this agreement, between twodeveloped countries and a less developed partner, has raised much controversy. ~Vill
Americans lose high-wage jobs to low-wage Mexican workers or gain new export
opportunities? Will America weaken or strengthen its industrial base? Will Americci
become more or less competitive In international trade?
NAFTA, which builds on the current U.S.-Canada Free Trade Area, will phase
out all tariffs on trade in goods between the member countries. Since U.S. tariff~
a ainst Mexican oods avera e about 3 ercent while Mexican tariffs on U.S. oods.avera e about 10 ercent the U.S. has alar er burden removed from its ex orts.
Further, Mexico will remove barriers to trade in services such as insurance,
transportation and telecommunications, which will especially help American providers.Most remaining Mexican restrictions on foreign ownership will be eliminated.
The bottom line is that NAFT A will benefit all three countries. Yet there is rTluch
confusion among:private citizens and policy makers about NAFT At based not on falcts
but on economic myths that have made their way into the public dialogue. ~
and to create jobs throuah free trade. It is an opportunity especially for American
industries to grow more competitive in an increasingly competitive global economy.
'1
This Issue Brief addresses the economic myths concerning the NAFT A so thatAmericans have the facts before they make up their minds on this important issue.
1618 Longworth Building, Washington, D.C. 20515 (202)225-5107
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 2/11
LOW MEXICAN WAGES
MYTH: Low wages in Mexico will cause American firms to move operations
south-of-the-border, throwing Americans out of work.
FACT: If this were' true, Puerto Rico, an American Commonwealth with virtually
unrestricted assess to the U.S. market, would have a booming economy. TheCaribbean island, with a population of over 3.5 million, employed some 148,000
manufacturing workers in 1989 at an average annual salary of $14,700.1 The18.8 million American manufacturing workers in 1990 had an average salary of
$28,250.2 Further, businesses in Puerto Rico are exempt from many Americantaxes. Yet even with these lower wages, unemployment in Puerto Rico is over
14 percent,3 twice as high as the 7 percent rate in the U.S.4
If low waaes necessarily attract industries. the world's less develoDed c
would have attraC1ed such industries lona aao and would no lonaer be less
develoDed.
MYTH: The low 58 cent per hour Mexican minimum wage Is bound to cause
American enterprises to flee to Mexico.
FACT: Less than 20 percent of Mexican workers officially earn only this
minimum wage. Over 80 percent earn more.5 Further, many Mexicans earn
additional income through informal economic activities, income that does not
appear in official ~jtatistics.
Mexican wage rates, when non-salary benefits are taken into account, in
general are well above the minimum level. Wage controls under Mexico'sPacta economic plan have held down salaries in recent years. But Mexican
workers are usually given many non-salary benefits such as free lunches during
their work shifts, (:hild care, and transportation subsidies. Thus, workers in the
special maquiladora border factors in Mexico earn some $2 per hour in salariesbut $4.50 when o-ther benefits are included.
IFrom the Statistical Abstract ofthe United States: 1992. Economics and Statistics Adminisb"ation, Bureau of
the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, Table No.1353, most recent available numbers.
2~ Table No.1243 and 1244.
3!hi9.. Table No.1349.
."Economic Indicators, April 1993," prepared for the Joint Economic Committee by the Council of Economic
Advisors, Washington, D.C.
'Office of the U.S. Trade Nepresentative and U.S. Department of Commerce sources.
2
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 3/11
MYTH: Whatever the real average Mexican wage, it is still far below American
wages and thus will pull in firms from the U.S., throwing Americans out of work.
FACT:~~~§~ccount. on averaqe. for only about 15 percent of t
of production in M~.6 Low wages certainly are important for the production
of labor-intensive goods employing lower-skilled labor, but other factorsgenerally are even more important. Transportation costs for shipping parts and
products between the U.S. and Mexico are high. The cost of energy, utilitiesand other factors of production in Mexico can be high as well. Poorer
infrastructure hinclers businesses. Thus, while some American enterprises maybe able to lower production costs by locating in Mexico, others cannot.
MYTH: With free trade, Mexican manufacturing wages, which average a little
over $2 per hour, will rise. American manufacturing wages, averaging around$15.50 per hour, will drop. This will establish a wage equilibrium somewhere in
the middle, around $7.50 per hour in both countries.
FACT: There are no actual examples of such an equilibrium occurring, nor are
there theoretical reasons to expect this would occur. As noted above, otherfactors besides wages help determine the best locations for production. There
is not a one-to-orle corollation between a wage increase in one country and a
wage decrease irl another .
For example, after World War II European wage levels were far below those in
the U.S; America kept its market more open to European exports than Europe
did to American ~Joods; and for two decades after the War, Europe wasAmerica's principal trading partner after Canada. Yet American wages did not
fall to meet rising European wages somewhere in the middle. Real wages, that
is, real purchasing power, rose both in Europe and the U.S.
MYTH: Whatever the actual numerical relationship, free trade with low-wage
Mexico must necessarily pull down America's high wages.
FACT: American wages, that is, the real purchasing power that a worker's labor
will earn, are determined most importantly by the productivity and quality of the
labor. American firms have much more capital investment per worker than in
Mexico. America's infrastructure --such as roads, transportation systems,telecornmunications, energy generation and distribution facilities and waterfacilities --is more efficient than Mexico's. This means that for each hour of
labor. American workers aenerallv Droduce more aoods and
Mexican counteroarts. and thus earn hiaher waaes.
~ited by Senator Robert Bennett (R. Utah) in an April 22. 1993 hearing of the U.S. Senate Banking, Housing
and Urban Affairs Committee.
3
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 4/11
LOSING JOBS AND INDUSTRIES TO MEXICO
MYTH: NAFTA will remove barriers to American firms wishing to relocate in
Mexico, causing many of them to flee south-of-the-border .
FACT: There is little to stop them from doing so right now. Americanbusinesses already can relocate in Mexico if they wish with few Mexican
impediments in the way. In fact, many have. American firms wishing to
produce in Mexico and re-export products do so through the maquiladorasystem. Mexico has liberalized its investment restrictions over the past few
years. NAFT A will remove remaining Mexican investment barriers, thus addinga small incentive for some American firms to locate operations there. But since
easier to sell in Mexico without movina their operations.
MYTH: Studies show that many Americans will lose jobs under NAFTA.
FACT: Most studies of the effects of NAFTA show job gains for the U.S. The
bi-partisan International Trade Commission (ITC) reviewed a number of studies
that use standard economic models to determine economic and job growthunder a NAFT A. Based on these studies the ITC found that net job creation in
the U.S. under NAFTA would range between around 35,000 to over 93,000.7
Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Jeffrey J. Schott of the non-partisan Institute forInternational Economics predict that over five years NAFT A will result in a net
job gain of 171,000.8 Among other things, these researchers compare Mexico
to South Korea dlJring its period of economic growth. They find that if similar
development patterns of the countries continue, as is likely under NAFT A, thatMexico will continue to purchase substantial quantities of American products,
producing even more American jobs.
Free trade is one of the few issues that economists across th~ id
s~ectrum can aaree on. Scholars at the liberal Brookinas !n§titu
moderate American Enterprise Institute. the conservative Hed
~nd the liDertarian Cato Institute all see NAFT A oroducina job
Mexico and Cana~.
7"potential Impact on the U .S. Economy and Selected Industries of the North American Free-Trade Agreement, "
usrrc Publication 2596, January, 1993, pp. 2.1-2.3.
IHufbauer and Schott. NAFTA: An Assessment. (Washington: Institute for International Economics, 1993).
4
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 5/11
MYTH: Other studies refute the studies showing job creation through NAFTA.
FACT: The few studies showing job losses under NAFTA are either partisan
studies sponsored by particular businesses, unions and other special interest
groups that feel threatened by free trade, or are ill-conceived and not defensible
on empirical or theoretical economic grounds.9
Example: The Cuomo Commission on Competitiveness report contends thatNAFTA will cost America jobs.1° Yet the report mistakenly assumes that Japan
will be able to flood America's market with goods by going through Mexico. But
as with the U.S.-Canada FTA, NAFTA has strict provisions against
transshipments.
Example: A study by Timothy Koechlin and Mehrene Larudee 11assumes that
under NAFTA, Mexico's capital stock will grow by between $31 billion and $53
billion, with a corresponding drop in American capital investment. But there isno empirical or theoretical basis on which to assume such a one-to-one
transfer. To begin with, if American firms planning to invest in Mexico decide
not to, many likely would invest in other foreign countries. Further, capital, like
goods, is created, not simply transferred or redistributed. Free trade and
economic reforms will allow Mexico to create capital as well as import it.
MYTH: By rejecting NAFTA, the U.S. would be able to hold on to those jobs that
would otherwise have gone to Mexico ~ keep the jobs In the U.S. that would
have supported those Mexican jobs.
FACT: That's not how businesses work. A firm with Mexican and American
operations would see its costs of production go up if it were forced to return
operations to the U.S. due to rising U.S. trade barriers. The higher prices it
would have to charge for its goods would mean lower demand. The firm wouldhave to cut production and workers. In many cases, such costly production
simply would not be profitable. The firm would have to close its operations or
move the entire operation out of the country , to Asia, for example.
9See Hufbauer and Schott. ~ for a more detailed analysis of the problems with these studies.
loAmerica's AJZenda: Buildin2 Economic Stren2th, (New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1992).
I'Koechlin, et. at., "Effects of the North American Free Trade Agreement on Investment. Employment. and
Wages in Mexico and the U.S.," unpublished paper, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. cited in n'C NAFTA
report, OD.cit.; and Koechlin and Larudee, "The High Cost of NAFTA," Challen2e. September/0ctober, 1992.
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 6/11
NAFTA will primarily open America's market to Mexican goods.
FACT: Mexico's tariffs on average are 10 percent, 7 percent higher than
America's 3 percent average. Thus. most of the trade aains will be for the
Mexico also will remove barriers to the sales of such services as insurance,
transportation and telecommunications, as well as to agriculture products w
normally are not covered by international trade liberalization agreements.
A will not help American manufacturers.
FACT: Many American manufacturers are waiting for Mexican tariffs to be
eliminated under NAFT A in order to export more goods to Mexico.12
Example: 3M of Minnesota plans to increase its exports of production mate
to Mexico once NAFT A is passed. This American firm recently added 300
manufacturing jobs in the U.S. to service growing demand in Mexico.
Example: Gilford Textiles Mills of Alabama is waiting for the 12 percent
Mexican tariff on textiles to be eliminated in order to sell more to Mexico.
Example: Apple Computer's James Johnson welcomes NAFT At maintaininthat .With 20 percent lower prices, we can reach deeper into the consumer
education markets. That represents major new business..
Example: Campbell Soup Company's Sacramento, California and Paris, T
plants, according to company official Ronald Warass, are .well positioned tsignificantly expand. exports to Mexico under the NAFT A.
Only American big business can benefit from NAFTA.
FACT: While large enterprises naturally are in the best position to look ahe
the Mexican market, smaller enterprises will also find opportunities south-oborder. Many large American firms already operate in Mexico. NAFT A wi
open the door for small businesses to sell their products in Mexico as well.
Examplr; Trino Gonzalez, President of the seven person Chula Lumber
Corporation of National City I California, hopes to see his $2 million annual
to Mexico increase by 25 percent next year. Says Gonzalez, .1 believe 10
percent in a North American Free Trade Agreement. It will help open the
market and unlock tremendous opportunities there..
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 7/11
Example: The eighteen person North American Trade Corporation, which
specializes in transportation, construction and electronics industries, and had
$500,000 in sales to Mexico last year, stands to benefit from NAFTA. Its
President, Jorge Guiloff says "The potential to increase exports to Mexico is
excellent."
MYTH: Mexican goods will surge into the U.S. under NAFTA, throwingAmericans out of work.
FACT: Low American tariffs currently pose only a minimal barrier to Mexican
exports to the U.S.
It is much more likelv that the surae will be in the other direction. In fact, it hasalready begun. American sales to Mexicl:> have jumped from 11.9 billion in 1985to $40.6 billion in 1992. Mexico will need to import many goods and services to
modernize its economy and production f,acilities as well as to satisfy the needs
of consumers growing more prosperous through free trade and economicreforms. For the next decade America should run trade suroluses with Mexico.
Table 1 --U.S.-Mexico Bilateral Trade
(in $-billions)
1991 1992989 1990986 1987 1988
u.s. Exportsto Mexico 40.68.4 33.34.6 20.6 24.91.9
u.s. Imports
from Mexico 35.21.23.2 27.2 30.27.5 20.2
+2.1 +5.42.3 -1.85.1 -5.6 -2.6alance
Source: u.s. Department of Commerce.
MYTH: The relocations of firms that occur will all be from the U.S. to Mexico.
FACT: A number of America fi~s will move Mexican operations ~ack to the
~.S. under NAFTA. This is because with Mexic~n tar!ffs r_e_m~¥American fi~s will be able to produce in the U.S. and sell in Mexico at
competitive price.
Some American firms have already returned from Mexico to takeadvantage of higher quality labor or other production advantages. For
example, Lionel Trains was moved in 1 383 from Mt. Clemens, Michiganto Tijuana, Mexico. In 1985, Lionel moved back to the U.S. While the
company cut costs in Mexico, it also cU't quality; the result was a decline
"7
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 8/11
in sales. Under a NAFT A, without Mexican tariffs to contend with, other
American firms no doubt will move operations back to the U.S. and
export to Mexico.
MYTH: Under the NAFTA, Mexicans will buy up many U.S. firms and move them
to Mexico.
FACT: Mexicans can do this already. In fact, a consortium of Mexicans
recently' was formed to purchase American enterprises. But since Mexicans
have far less capital than Americans, such purchases under NAFT At as they
are now, will be limited.
MYTH: A job gained In Mexico Is a job lost In the U.S.
FACT: This myth assumes that there are a set number of jobs in the world. The
only way one country can gain a job is if another country loses one.
In fact, as even Labor Secretary Robert Reich has conceded, MWorld trade is
not a zt~ro-sum game in which a finite number of jobs are to be parceled outamong the workers of the world. Trade is a positive-sum game in which there is
no natural limit to the number of jobs that can be created.M14 The fact that
~Jrchasina cower and world trade have all arown since World Wa
refutes this myth.
AMERICA'S COMPETITIVENESS
MYTH: Trade protectionism in the past generally has been good for the United
States.
FACT: American trade protectionism in the 1920s and early 1930s helpedprecipitate and prolong the Great Depression. American exports dropped from$7 billion in 1929 to $2.4 billion in 1933 while imports during that period fellfrom ~1).9-billion to $2 billion. Unemployment went from 3.3 percent in 1929 to
25 perc:ent in 1933. GDP was cut in half during that period, from $103.4 billionto $55.8 billion. Per capita income fell from $850 per year to $445 per year .
14RobertB. Reich, "Trade With Me~ico Is a Boon for U.S. Workers," The Wall Street Journal, Friday, April 30,
1993, p. A13.
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 9/11
MYTH: Free trade is not good for America.
FACT: After World War II, primarily through the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade the average tariff level for industrialized countries dropped from 40
percent to 5 percent. Since 1960, when Europe recovered from the War,
worldwide exports have skyrocketed from $100 billion to over $3 trillion today,and American exports of goods and services grew as well, from $25.3 billion to
$636.3 billion. Using the U.S. Department of Commerce estimate that every $1billion in exports supports 22,800 jobs, 14.5 million Americans work to satisfy
overseas. demands for American products.
MYTH: The only way American firms can stay competitive is to shield
themselves from competition with Mexican firms.
FACT: The only way to remain competitive is to compete. H. Ross Perot,
revealin~1 the secret of his business success, observed that after leaving IBM,for which he worked for five years, .Then I had to compete with them, and it
was like competing with Sherman tanks. I give all credit to my business
success to the fact that you had to be tough to survive in that environment andthey forced us to be pretty good..15 Industries that have hidden behind
protectionist walls have become less productive and in the end have been
forced to layoff w~.
MYTH: NAFTA. will seriously damage America's manufacturing base.
FACT: Manufacturing still accounts for around 20 percent of America's GOP .the same as it was 30 years ago. The percentage of American workers in thissector is, down, from 22 percent in 1960 to 16 percent now. The number of
workers in manu;acturing is down from 19.1 in 1982 to 18.8 in 1990. This is in
part due to efficiency gains in the 19805 --that is to say, American businessesare producing the same value of GOP with a smaller share of the labor force
and wittll slightly felwer workers.
MYTH: The Northeast and North central states will be especially adversely
effected by NAFT A.
FACT: These states currently are big beneficiaries of Mexico's market openingefforts BInd economic reforms. Of the twelve states with the largest value sales
to Mexk:o, six are Northeastern and North central states. They likely will benefit
even more under NAFT A, which opens Mexico's market to American
manufac~ured products.
l'Testimony before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, April 22, 1993,
9
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 10/11
Table 2 --Value of Exports to Mexico -Top 12 States
(in $-millions, 1991 dollars)
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade
Administration.
THE ASIAN CHALLENGE
MYTH: NAFTA will give Japan a base from which to flood the American market,thus gaining the benefits of free trade without having to open its market to
American goods.
FACT: Domestic content requirements in the NAFT A guard against this. For
example, to be considered a North American product enjoying free movement
in NAFT A, an automobile must have 62.5 percent North American content once
NAFT A is fully implemented. This means that the JaDanese cannot shiD Darts
to Mexico to be assembled into cars for shiDment to the U.S.
As with the current Free Trade Agreement with Canada, the NAFT A prohibits
transshipments. 'This means that a country cannot ship goods into Mexico for
immediate shipmf~nt into the U.S. Further, non-NAFTA members will be subjectto Mexican tariffs that are generally higher than those in the U.S. Thus a third
country would gain little or nothing by trying to bring goods into Mexico first,
due to hi~ Mexi<:an tariffs.
MYTH: Greater Integration with any other economy, such as Mexico, will weaken
America's posItion In the global economy.
FACT: Economic integration will allow American firms to become moreproductive and competitive, as well as increasing the purchasing power of
American consumers. In any case, America is already too integrated in the
global economy to pull out. In 1960 trade in goods and services equaled onlyabout 9.5 percent of GDP. Today it is valued at nearly 22 percent of GDP .
Total exports last year were valued at $636.3 billion or 10.7 percent of GDP.
10
8/3/2019 House Republican Conference Issue Brief - Myths About NAFTA
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/house-republican-conference-issue-brief-myths-about-nafta 11/11
MYTH: NAFTj~, by encouraging American firms to integrate their production with
Mexlco'a weaker economy, will play into the hands of Japanese competitors.
FACT: U.S. firms with operations in Mexico will be better able to beat Japanese
competitors at their own game. A business strategy of many Japanese
enterprises centers on the policy of .co-production.. This means that Japanesefirms contract out part of their production to factories in other, usually lower
wage countries. Japanese firms generally keep the better jobs, such as
planning, design and final assembly, in Japan. This allows them to keep thecosts of their pro<jucts down and the quality high, thus remaining competitive inthe home market and overseas.
American firms also engage in this practice --most notably the auto companies.Cars and computers with the label .Made in U.S.A.. usually contain some if nota substantial amount of foreign components. This does not mean that
Americans have lost jobs to foreign suppliers. In many cases it means that
rather than moving the entire operation offshore. or shuttina factories down
com~letely. factories in America remain open and the aoods they product are
sold at a competitive price.
MYTH: Co-production under NAFTA will drive all American enterprises overseas.
FACT: Co-produ(:tion has allowed many American companies to .§.YQiQmoving
their entire operations overseas.
Example: Samsonite's manufacturing facilities in Denver, Colorado and Tucson,
Arizona, with a total of 1 ,200 workers, stay open in part because some of their
operations are In Nogales, Mexico.
Example: Warnaco, an American apparel manufacturer, has operations inMexico employing 1 600 workers. These workers in turn make possible 1,000
jobs in the U.S., one-fifth of the company's 5,000 employees.
CONCLUSION
There are still mciny important issues to be considered in the NAFT A debate.The details of the side agreements on the environment and labor, for example, still
must be studied closely to determine their effects on American productivity and job
creation. Those citizens and policy makers who still have not decided whether they
will support or oppose the NAFT A should make their decisions based on reasoned
considerations and not bumper sticker slogans. Facts, not myths, should guide the
NAFT A debate.
This Issue Brief was prepared by economist Edward Hudgins, Ph.D.
11