WASHINGTON — With only a few legislative days left before Congress adjourns for the year, U.S. House Democrats are eager to show that they can legislate while also pursuing an impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.
A massive trade deal represents their best shot at showing they can do so — but passing it would hand Trump a major political victory as he heads into the election year.
Blocking the deal, on the other hand, would also exact a heavy political toll. If Congress doesn’t ratify the “new NAFTA,” Democrats may not have a major legislative achievement to point to on the campaign trail next year — which could open them up to GOP charges of inaction and an “obsession” with impeachment.
Especially vulnerable are Democrats in conservative districts with large manufacturing and agricultural sectors, said Bob Salera, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee. He pointed to freshmen U.S. Reps. Haley Stevens (D-Rochester Hills), Elissa Slotkin (D-Holly), Abby Finkenauer (D-Iowa), Cynthia Axne (D-Iowa), as well as to four-term U.S. Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.).
“That’s the interesting push and pull of the USMCA [United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement],” said Kyle Kondik, managing editor of a nonpartisan political newsletter at the University of Virginia.
On Wednesday, Vice President Mike Pence is hitting Michigan to push the USMCA. He and former Trump spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders are slated to do an event in Holland, as the Advance first reported. The vice president previously touted the USMCA in Southeast Michigan before auto executives in April and in a speech for the Detroit Economic Club in August.
Before Thanksgiving, U.S. Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia joined U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Tipton) in Jackson to ramp up the pressure for the USMCA.
Walberg wrote on Twitter that “the Trump Administration’s pro-growth policies are benefiting workers and manufacturers. It’s time to pass the USMCA to bolster Michigan’s economy.”
The Michigan Republican Party chimed in that day, tweeting, “It is time for @SpeakerPelosi to put the #USMCA up for a vote!”
Many Michigan Democrats continue to advocate for changes to the USMCA.
U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Flint), a member of House Democrats’ leadership team, initially supported Trump’s idea to renegotiate NAFTA, as he believes many older, industrial communities across Michigan haven’t benefitted. Kildee also serves on the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee and Trade Subcommittee.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer submitted a draft plan of action to the House in May. In June, Slotkin, U.S. Rep. Andy Levin (D-Bloomfield Twp.) and U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Detroit) joined more than two dozen of their freshmen colleagues in a letter pushing Lighthizer to reopen USMCA negotiations.
“If Mr. Trump is unwilling to tackle the major flaws of what he has called ‘the worst trade deal in history,’ his trade deal won’t be any better,” Levin said in a statement. “To end the steady flow of U.S. jobs to Mexico, to prevent corporations from outsourcing pollution and to keep the price of prescription drugs from skyrocketing even higher, Ambassador Lighthizer must reopen the agreement.”
In September, U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Dearborn) voiced similar concerns in an op-ed in the Washington Post.
“There is no question that the North American Free Trade Agreement and the United States’ failed China trade policies require a complete rewrite,” Dingell wrote. “As I have said publicly in the past, I believe that Donald Trump was elected president because he gave voice to the legitimate rage many Americans feel about decades of trade policies that have devastated communities nationwide.”
Yet Dingell referred to the USMCA as “NAFTA 2.0” and said Trump “must add enforcement of improved labor and environmental standards to counter job outsourcing, and the Mexican government must implement and fund these improvements. And the new monopoly protection for pharmaceutical firms must come out.”
Lighthizer has been meeting with lawmakers to address their concerns, particularly about protecting labor, something Kildee backs. The congressman also was part of a small group of Democrats who traveled this fall to Mexico to meet with President Lopez Obrador.
In addition to the substance of the agreement, Democratic leaders must consider “competing political incentives” as they weigh how — and whether — to proceed.
The U.S. House has passed a number of major bills this year, but most are bottled up in the GOP-controlled U.S. Senate. But unlike many other bills, the USMCA has strong bipartisan support and the potential to pass both chambers of Congress and win the president’s signature.
Trump and congressional Republicans are actively pushing for it — and marked the one-year anniversary of the agreement on Saturday with a series of tweets pressuring Democrats to ratify it.
But political forces may not be on their side, Kondik said. “The incentive over the past few decades has been toward less bipartisan action, particularly if the party [in control] of the House is different than the party [in control of] the White House.”
That has certainly been the case this year. Almost halfway through the 116th Congress, about 70 bills have been signed into law. That’s far fewer than recent Congresses, which have seen between 300 and 500 bills passed over two-year sessions (and 700-800 during congressional sessions in the 1970s and 1980s), according to a Vox.com analysis.
Trump and leaders of Canada and Mexico signed the trade agreement on Nov. 30, 2018, but it won’t take effect until it is approved by the legislative bodies of all three governments.
Proponents argue the agreement would strengthen trade, create jobs and grow the economy. But critics say the draft deal would allow violations of labor and environmental standards to go unchecked and object to protections for the pharmaceutical industry.
Farmers also want provisions that would ensure that products that are grown, raised and slaughtered in the United States can be identified as such and that would prevent the United States from dumping excess products into foreign countries at below-market prices.
In a September letter to his north-central Michigan constituents, U.S. Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Midland) said the deal will “benefit Michigan by opening access to new markets for Michigan farmers. … Mexico has already passed it and Speaker Pelosi should put it up for a vote in the House before elections in Canada this fall threaten the progress that has been made.”
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said last week that a deal is “within range,” but she said last month that she doubted Congress would be able to ratify it before the end of the year — prompting Trump to respond by tweet that the deal was “dead in the water.”
Moderate House Democrats, meanwhile, are getting “antsy” about the issue, and more than a dozen tried to rally support for a vote on it at a caucus meeting last month, Politico reported.
But labor leaders aren’t satisfied yet.
“As I’ve said for months, if the new NAFTA benefits workers, we’d support it,” Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO, a federation of unions, tweeted on Nov. 22, as Congress adjourned for the weeklong recess. “It’s simply not there yet.”
House Republicans are seizing on the delay.
“The fact that Democrats have focused on impeachment rather than getting the USMCA passed is going to be a political death sentence for some members of Congress,” Salera said. “Farmers and manufacturers in these districts need this deal in place.”
Even if Democrats do move forward, GOP candidates are going to remind voters that they had to “wait for Democrats to get their house in order,” Salera said.
But moving forward, at least on the deal in its current form, may not be worth it to Democrats, according to Tamara Kay, a trade expert at the University of Notre Dame and author of “Trade Battles: Activism and the Politicization of International Trade Policy.”
“I don’t [think] the Democrats have a lot to gain if they sign off on an agreement with inadequate labor and environmental enforcement and that will raise the price of medicine for all,” Kay said. If Congress ratifies the USMCA, Trump will claim “total and complete credit” for it. “He’s going to [say], ‘Democrats couldn’t do this for 25 years, and I did it. Look what I did for workers.”
And, because Democrats will have signed off on it, he will be able to claim he replaced NAFTA, a major campaign promise, she said. Along with building a wall on the southern border, Trump won in part by promising to bring back jobs lost by bad trade deals in the past.
“If it doesn’t get passed, House Democrats will be able to say it wasn’t for lack of trying to get real protections for workers,” Kay said. “They and Democratic presidential candidates will be able to attack Trump for failing to add real teeth to NAFTA — an issue with widespread bipartisan support. They’d say he couldn’t even make improvements when he had all of this leverage — when he had a willing counterpart in Nancy Pelosi, and [when] Democrats have wanted to replace NAFTA for 25 years.”