Why is it so easy to pass bad Big Ideas, and so hard to enact the good ones? Is it because no one's talking about them?
We need to control the banks, the oil, the environment... So hard to get consensus! But we hear very little about one law that has played a key role in exacerbating illegal immigration, and the controversies surrounding it. The North American Free Trade Act of 1994 -- NAFTA -- pushed Mexicans straight out of their own fields and factories and into the U.S., contributing to declining standards of living and income inequality on both sides of the border. Cheap corn from U.S. agribusiness drove domestic Mexican farmers out of a livelihood, and into cities where there were also no jobs. Foreign factories clustered at the U.S. border, but overall manufacturing in Mexico plummeted.
Among many, many sources explaining exactly this, a NY Times article on February 18, 2007, by Louis Uchitelle cites Gary Hufbauer, "a senior fellow at the Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington who campaigned for NAFTA in the early 1990s." Commenting on its failures to create one job in either Mexico or the U.S., Hufbauer expounded: "It just did not happen."
Learning our lesson, the U.S. went on to promulgate similar "neutron bomb" agreements in Central America and elsewhere (the foreign corporations were left standing but the human standards of living were annihilated).
The U.S. can claim greatness in many respects, but it is hard to make a credible case that the virtual refugees fleeing across the border are motivated by admiration for our culture. Or even our stuff. To say nothing of their desire, trumpeted by the nativists who seem to be blooming in these hard times, to "replace our culture and our language with that from which they fled."
Years later, all the misguided policy gurus at the Peterson Institute can say is "oops." (And let's dismantle Social Security while we're at it). It's too bad the nation's governors, worrying that the President's leadership in challenging the Arizona law will hurt their chances in the upcoming election, can't find the wherewithal and the common sense to follow the President's example. Concerned about creating jobs and stemming the deficit? Reverse NAFTA and CAFTA, and invest in education and social programs. Isn't it time for leaders who will lead?
Follow Ellen R. Shaffer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ershaffer
Here in the US it has contributed to almost the elimination of the middle class and the rise of the new "robber barons".
Other nations have risen, most notably India and China and many of the jobs, skilled ad unskilled went there.
When Mexico builds factory here, they don't use Americans for labor. They import their people. When an American company builds a factory in Mexico, they use Mexican labor. But at far cheaper wages. I have not examined the treatys, but that would seem to be strange if there is no regulation of such practices.
The article brings up another issue: If we are short 10 million jobs here, why do we have 11 million foriegn citizens here without permisson to get those jobs we don't have either?
"The availability of resources to address health inequities and the social determinants of health is
a matter of political priorities, not inadequate funds: A. between 1948 and 1973, the income gains in the USA of the bottom 90% were nearly twice as large as those of the top 1%, whereas in the current ‘Gilded Age,’ from 1982 to 2007, the gains of the top 1% were 16 times, and those of the top 0.1% 31 times, those of the bottom 90%.. the cost of the past 10 years of tax cuts to the
richest 1% of Americans is estimated to exceed $1.7 trillion; and C. during the past 7 years the USA has spent over $712 billion on one war alone. " http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2010/06/27/jech.2009.106906.extract
How is he going to stop this exponential growth of illegal USA egress by Mexico's people?
Path to legalization did not work in 1986 = 12 million in the shadows today
"If newly legalized workers exit the farm work force at the same rate as Special Agricultural Workers (SAWs) did after being legalized in 1987-88, about 125,000 new workers would be needed each year. Taking into account exits of all types of farm workers, it is likely that at least 250,000 new workers would be needed each year if farm labor conditions remain unchanged."
Pg 3
http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/7.pdf
Those 250,000 workers per year will be a new batch of illegal aliens unless the USA stops Large Commercial Agriculture from exploiting people.
New guest worker program?
We have had Agriculture Temporary Guest worker visas for more than 50 years. Because 'Big Ag' enjoys aspects of exploitation, they choose illegal aliens instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen - Obama and Congress need to do what was promised in 1986
+ Employers would be stopped from hiring the equivalent of a modern-day slavery pool of labor
+ Borders would be controlled in an orderly non-blackmarket manner
+ Visas will be controlled through all necessary measures
“NAFTA has produced disappointing results for job growth in Mexico. Data and the difficulty of isolating NAFTA effects from other causes preclude an exact tally, but it is clear that overall, the jobs created in manufacturing have not kept pace with jobs lost in the agricultural sector.” http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/naftaoraltestimony.pdf
US leaders should shift policy focus to address the economic causes of migration, and oppose the Arizona law, which is racist and counterproductive.
You are absolutly right about NAFTA and CAFTA. But it is among mirid problems that need to be addressed with most CA and SA nations, but in particular our southern neighbor. The border security desired by many in America can not be obtained without the cooperation of Mexico and they have no interest in changing the status quo.
But I must disagree with your calling a law that mimicks US federal regulations "racist".
It places an air of propanganda to an otherwise well thought out and eloquent piece.
5. "It's too bad the nation's governors, worrying that the President's leadership in challenging the Arizona law will hurt their chances in the upcoming election, can't find the wherewithal and the common sense to follow the President's example."
a) 1.5 million Mexican Corn farmers impacted by 1994 NAFTA
b) 4.64 million Mexican illegal aliens in USA by 2000 (58% of 2000 USA Unauthorized)
http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/6.pdf
Maquillas surged in growth until 2001 recession.
Many of the 1.5 million Mexican Corn farmers impacted by NAFTA direcly, found jobs at the maquillas.
"Common sense" would indicate that more than 3 times as many Mexicans impacted by NAFTA are illegally making egress into the USA. It is not NAFTA.
c) "Mexico is the source of by far the largest number of unauthorized immigrants, accounting for 7 million of the 11.9 million unauthorized immigrants in 2008."
Pg31
http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/107.pdf
Now the number in 2008 is almost 5 times as many Mexicans impacted by NAFTA are illegally making egress into the USA. It is not NAFTA
(continued on next post)
3. "Commenting on its failures to create one job in either Mexico or the U.S., Hufbauer expounded: "It just did not happen."
Much growth occurred with maquillas in Mexico post-NAFTA, but it MAY HAVE had nothing to do with NAFTA. I believe NAFTA should be stopped or changed, but maquilla growth occurred.
Regarding Mexico, Richard H.K. Vietor, Alexander Veytsman, William C. Gruben, & Sherry L. Kiser do not agree with Hufbauer on maquilla growth, just that NAFTA may not have been why.
http://www.worldscibooks.com/etextbook/6549/6549_chap01.pdf
http://www.dallasfed.org/research/border/tbe_gruben.html
4. "To say nothing of their desire, trumpeted by the nativists who seem to be blooming in these hard times, to "replace our culture and our language with that from which they fled"
a) Ellen, do not call Americans "nativists." We have 3 groups in the USA:
+ Americans (Those here legally),
+ Legally visiting Foreign Nationals, and
+ Unauthorized Foreign Nationals.
We have economic refugees in the USA that are Americans.
False dichotomy to call UFAs economic refugees and all struggling Americans nativists.
b) In terms of the culture import dynamic objections, these objections were not about wonderful Mexican things that Rick Bayless illustrates on his PBS shows.
The enumerated culture import dynamic objections were voiced in 2005, 2006, & 2007 when the economy was believed to be good, in contrast to you claming "hard times" arrival.
1. "Cheap corn from U.S. agribusiness drove domestic Mexican farmers out of a livelihood, and into cities where there were also no jobs."
Part 6/10 "Food Inc." documentary
5:04minutes
"Its put more than a milllion and a half Mexican farmers out of work. They couldn't compete with this cheap corn coming from America... So, what happens to those million and a half Mexican farmers?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne1m_bWo_3w&NR=1
It drove 1.5 million out of corn farming, but there were most definitely jobs at the maquilladoras.
Right here:
"During the five years before NAFTA, maquila employment grew 47%. But in the first five years after NAFTA, employment growth soared 86%. The number of maquila plants grew in tandem, from about 2,700 in 1997 to a peak of about 3,700 in 2001."
Pg 4
http://www.worldscibooks.com/etextbook/6549/6549_chap01.pdf
2. "Foreign factories clustered at the U.S. border, but overall manufacturing in Mexico plummeted."
"In the 1970s most maquiladoras clustered around Mexico’s Northern border with the U.S.;
however, by 1994 over 50% of new plants were opening within Mexico’s interior regions. Although border plants still outnumbered interior plants by a factor of approximately 3 to 1, maquila plants nonetheless spread throughout the country."
Pg 4
http://www.worldscibooks.com/etextbook/6549/6549_chap01.pdf
Maquillas are national Mexico manufacturing, and they surged until the 2001 worldwide recession.
(continued next post)