NAFTA's Impact on American States (Rutgers-Camden Expert)

NAFTA has become a major topic on the presidential campaign trail, largely due to its economic impact on American workers and businesses.  Can the treaty also be accused of diminishing the rights of American states?

According to Dr. ALAN TARR, a professor of political science at Rutgers University—Camden, the treaty has some legal ramifications that largely go overlooked in the economic debate.  In his new research article, “NAFTA and Federalism: Are They Compatible?,” which appears in the current edition of the academic journal NorteAmerica, Tarr suggests that NAFTA’s passage was flawed, but that its impact on the legal rights of American states is minimal.

“President Clinton submitted NAFTA as an executive agreement, rather than a treaty.  A treaty would have required a two-thirds vote in the Senate, and Clinton believed (rightly) that it would not be adopted, so he submitted it as an executive agreement which required only a majority vote in the House and Senate, which it received.  Since the idea of Senate ratification of treaties was meant to protect states, the process of agreeing to NAFTA evaded this safeguard,” says Tarr.

“The question is whether NAFTA nationalized or internationalized decisions that were previously made by state governments.  Generally, the answer is no.  NAFTA ‘grandfathered in’ pre-existing state laws, including all laws not in conformance with the provisions of the treaty.  Yet it also meant that future laws adopted by the states would have to conform to the provisions of NAFTA.  The side agreements on labor and on the environment that were a part of NAFTA also did not impose new requirements on the states, merely calling for the enforcement of existing regulations.”

Tarr, who directs the Center for State Constitutional Studies at Rutgers—Camden, notes that existing data suggests that “During the 1990s, largely as a result of NAFTA, U.S. exports to Mexico more than quadrupled and its exports to Canada more than doubled.  U.S. direct investment in Mexico increased from $1.3 billion in 1992 to $15 billion in 2001. From 1994-2000, U.S. investment in Canada increased from $2 billion to $16 billion.  Despite concerns that NAFTA would mean a substantial loss of jobs to Mexico, during the 1990s the U.S. experienced its largest job expansion in its history.”

Tarr may be reached at (856) 225-2970 (office) or via email.

-30-