Meanwhile, some U.S. Southeast agricultural groups representing specialty fruit and vegetable producers want changes in NAFTA 2.0 that would allow them to pursue anti-subsidy and anti-dumping cases or seek temporary import quotas. They accuse Mexico of “dumping” product such as seasonal tomatoes and other fresh produce into the U.S. market.
“It would give seasonal producers a standing to file anti-dumping claims in the United States, which they usually don’t get to do,” said Inu Manak, a visiting scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington.
Added Manak: “You could have a lot of retaliation from Mexico. You also open the floodgates to a lot of various claims that could be quite dangerous.”
Former USDA chief economist Joseph Glauber agrees, suggesting that U.S. could be vulnerable for shipping apples to Mexico or seasonal trade done with Canada.
“We compete with a lot of their industries at various points in time,” said Glauber, now a senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute, an agriculture think-tank based in Washington.
Retiring Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., whose state is a key entry point for fresh produce from Mexico to the U.S., has pushed the Trump administration to remove seasonal protection of perishable products from the NAFTA talks.
Yet there are others, including Florida Sens. Marco Rubio, a Republican, and Bill Nelson, a Democrat up for re-election this year, who have pushed to include perishable and seasonal protection policies in the NAFTA renegotiations. The two lawmakers wrote a letter earlier this month to urge Senate Finance Committee leaders to support Florida farmers on the matter.
“NAFTA has undoubtedly expanded U.S. agricultural exports, and that is a great result for American farmers,” Rubio and Nelson wrote. “But our exports have succeeded at the expense of Florida farmers who have been systematically undercut at home by Mexican agricultural subsidies, poor labor standards, and seasonal dumping.”
Be the first to comment