North America Free Trade Agreement
Sharon Treat exposes another backdoor to deregulation, the Regulatory Cooperation Council, that exists through NAFTA and is being used by corporate livestock lobbyists to undermine food safety and consumers right to know.
Unless the Trump administration lifts the punishing tariffs it has imposed on Mexican steel and aluminum imports, Mexico is prepared to keep the status quo with the 25-year-old trade deal.
Faced with real 21st century problems — climate change and global inequality exacerbated by globalization and trade agreements — we cannot accept this unambitious agreement which fails to live up to major existential challenges.
Long-running case began after New Jersey company’s bid to open a quarry in Nova Scotia rejected in 2007
Mexico has signed 12 free trade agreements with 44 nations and 28 bilateral investment treaties. The grim consequences of globalization in Mexico are by now familiar and yet, throughout Mexico, there is a florescence of inspiring resistance and alternatives.
Democrats in Congress contend that the new pact would force Americans to pay more for prescription drugs, and their argument has dimmed the outlook for one of Trump’s signature causes.
Little-known council linked to NAFTA subverts public safety to free trade.
Some Democrats in the US, like Canada’s generic drug industry, warn that the new biologics rule would keep drug prices high by requiring citizens to wait longer before they can get their hands on lower-cost similar drugs known as biosimilars.
In her new book, Alyshia Gálvez exposes how changes in policy following implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have fundamentally altered one of the most basic elements of life in Mexico—food.
In a letter to Congress, the groups demand that the pact’s giveaways to Big Pharma that would keep medicines unaffordable be removed before the pact is sent to Congress.
A failure to seriously resist NAFTA 2.0’s passage into law in Canada, the US and Mexico will amount to capitulation and the acceptance of an agreement that by design, like the original NAFTA, intrinsically serves the interests of Capital.
Mexican farmers are on the verge of bold, new plans to completely transform their food and farm system. Will NAFTA 2.0 challenge them?
How do new technologies and renegotiated supply management rules affect our food system? And, how do we move past the black/white, good/bad binaries that so often frame debates about trade-related issues?
NAFTA 2.0 would effectively tie the US Congress’ hands in the struggle against rising drug prices.
The USMCA most closely reflects US IP laws, subjecting the US to almost no revisions of its current domestic intellectual property laws.
We can stop NAFTA II and replace corporate trade with a new model that raises working conditions and protects the environment.
With the US as the centerpiece, the TPP would have given the country a more significant stake in Asia and the Pacific in much the same way as NAFTA did in America.
The outcome of the “Trump moment” is likely, for all its protectionist rhetoric, to end up further legitimating free trade.
Investment treaties with ISDS provisions make it hard to tax foreign firms and worsen human rights and labor practices.
Westmoreland Coal is suing Canada because it did not receive a transition payment following Alberta’s coal phaseout plan. For the province, coal mining companies have no role to play in the energy transition.