YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsNafta


June 10, 2012 | By Dalina Castellanos, Los Angeles Times
Worn wood floors groan under the weight of customers as Milo Rendon serves up another frozen treat. A steady stream of Nogalians seeking refuge from the scorching Sonoran desert sun duck into the old, dusty building that houses Finitos, the Rendon family business. As Rendon prepares a lemon-flavored shaved ice, he asks, "Do you want a saladito ?" A customer accepts the offer and a dried, salted plum is tucked into her snack and topped with another scoop. Finitos served as a house before it was converted into a business, and a faint air of neglect mixes with a whiff of success at the 21-year-old bustling hole in the wall less than two miles from the Mexican border.
October 9, 1992
I read with interest the article of Richard Haney "A Stable Mexico, a Secure U.S." (Commentary, Sept. 29), which analyzes some of the political implications of the North American Free Trade Agreement. I fully agree with him: NAFTA is not simply a matter of economics. It is indeed ironic how things have changed in such a short time. In 1986, analysts in this country, alarmed by the apparent growth of domestic political unrest, the triple-digit inflation rate and a staggering $90-billion external debt, argued that Mexico could be "the next Iran."
March 6, 2005
It's not surprising that American farmers are suffering from garlic dumping by Chinese companies ("Influx of Chinese Garlic Wrinkles Noses in U.S.," Feb. 28). The U.S. government has done a poor job of protecting American business from the unfair trading practices of other nations under the guise of free trade. Washington has allowed NAFTA, Airbus, Japanese car companies and many other man-made disasters to damage U.S. business. These injustices have gone on for decades. The politicians in our nation's capital have shown little interest in protecting U.S. workers and businesses.
April 7, 1992
It was with great interest that I read Jorge Castaneda's article about free trade and immigration ("Again, People Are Mexico's No. 1 Export," Column Left, March 24). He has always been vocal about his opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement. It is interesting to see, however, how he rejects the fallacy so often used by NAFTA opponents in this country: the notion that free trade will create the loss of thousands of U.S. jobs because companies will feel encouraged to move to Mexico seeking lower wages.
April 21, 2014 | By George Miller, Rosa DeLauro and Louise Slaughter
Many supporters of the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, trade agreement are arguing that its fate rests on President Obama's bilateral talks with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Japan this week. If Japan and the United States can sort out market access issues for agriculture and automobiles, the wisdom goes, this huge deal - in effect, a North American Free Trade Agreement on steroids - can at last be concluded. But this view obscures the many seemingly intractable problems TPP negotiators are grappling with.
August 4, 2001
John O. McGinnis has it backward when he says that we do not need to extend fast-track provisions of trade promotion authority to cover environmental and labor standards (" . . . No, Free Trade Needs a Free Rein," Commentary, July 30). He claims that the cumbersome procedures of our regular legislative process "protect liberty" and "restrain special interests from getting benefits for themselves at the expense of the public." On the contrary, the more cumbersome the process, the more the special interests can get their way. Well-heeled interests can afford to hire lobbyists and analysts to pay attention to every step of a complicated process, while the general public only notices the final vote in Congress.
January 10, 1995
Re "Zedillo Firms Up Details of Mexico Economic Plan," Jan. 3: If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different outcome each time, then our policy of helping the Mexican government is, at least by this definition, insane. Their quasi-democracy is nothing but a facade for the oligarchy of the 30 or so families that control 70% of their nation's wealth and their hired henchmen known as the PRI. Our continued financial support of their government and our de facto open border policy are enabling the continuation of one of this hemisphere's most oppressive, corrupt and least democratic regimes.
October 25, 1993
Current negotiations between the U.S. and Japan indicate that Japan is unwilling to take major steps toward reducing its trade surplus with the U.S. Fortunately, a large reduction of this surplus can nevertheless be accomplished by shifting U.S. imports from Japan to Mexico. With the aid of NAFTA plus the other favorable economic factors that now prevail, much of what is now purchased from Japan can gradually be obtained from Mexico. Since Mexico buys $110 from the U.S. for every $100 we buy from Mexico, and since Japan buys only $45 for each $100 of its exports to the U.S., such a shift in sources of imports would add greatly to the total number of U.S. manufacturing jobs.
Los Angeles Times Articles