I
105TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 978
To assess the impact of NAFTA, to require the renegotiation of certain
provisions of NAFTA, and to provide for the withdrawal from NAFTA
unless certain conditions are met.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 6, 1997
Ms. KAPTUR (for herself, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Ms. DANNER, Mr. MILLER of
California, Mrs. MEEK of Florida, Ms. MCKINNEY, Mr. CONYERS, Mr.
SANDERS, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. EVANS, Mrs. CARSON, Mr. PALLONE, Mr.
BONIOR, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. KLINK, Mr. TRAFICANT, Mr. PASCRELL,
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. STUPAK, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mr.
DOYLE, Mr. DELLUMS, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. KUCINICH, Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr.
LANTOS, Mr. SABO, Ms. WATERS, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. OBEY, Mr.
VENTO, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. RUSH, Mr. CLAY, Mr. KLECZKA, Mr.
HILLIARD, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. QUINN, Mr. WATTS of Oklahoma, Mr.
STEARNS, Mr. WAMP, Mr. BONO, Mr. METCALF, Mr. SOUDER, and Mr.
TIAHRT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Commit-
tee on Ways and Means
A BILL
To assess the impact of NAFTA, to require the renegotiation
of certain provisions of NAFTA, and to provide for the
withdrawal from NAFTA unless certain conditions are
met.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘NAFTA Accountability
Act’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress makes the following findings:
(1) EXPANDED MARKETS.—One of the purposes
of NAFTA, as stated in its preamble, is to ‘‘create
an expanded and secure market’’ for United States
goods and services. Instead, NAFTA has resulted in
an enormous increase in imports to the United
States from Mexico and Canada and a spiraling
trade deficit with Mexico and Canada that has ex-
ceeded $30,000,000,000 in both 1995 and 1996. Be-
fore 
NAFTA, 
the 
United 
States 
had 
a
$1,700,000,000 trade surplus with Mexico. Rather
than harmonious development and expansion in all 3
NAFTA countries as envisioned, NAFTA has re-
sulted in United States trade deficits which are
draining $2,500,000,000 a month from the United
States economy and causing greater economic insta-
bility in Mexico.
(2) CURRENCY
STABILITY.—One of the pur-
poses of NAFTA, as stated in its preamble, is to
‘‘ensure a predictable commercial framework for
business 
planning 
and 
investment’’. 
However,
NAFTA contains no safeguards to minimize the
negative economic impacts of severe shifts in cur-
rency exchange rates among the NAFTA Parties.
Mexico’s sudden devaluation of its peso in December
1994 has more than offset tariff reductions and
other trade benefits the United States expected to
achieve from the agreement. The dollar-peso ex-
change rate when NAFTA passed was 1:3.5. It is
now approximately 1:8 and is not expected to return
to its previous value. Indeed, economic experts are
stating that conditions are building for another se-
vere Mexican currency crisis.
(3) JOBS, WAGES, AND LIVING STANDARDS.—
One of the purposes of NAFTA, as stated in its pre-
amble, is to ‘‘create new employment opportunities
and improve working conditions and living stand-
ards’’ in the respective territories of the NAFTA
Parties. Instead, there has been a substantial loss of
a half million high paying jobs in the United States.
A survey of United States companies conducted 3
years after the implementation of NAFTA found
that 90 percent of the companies that had antici-
pated creating United States jobs through NAFTA
have, in fact, not created jobs because of NAFTA.
In the first 3 years of NAFTA’s implementation,
United States workers have seen steady drops in
real hourly wages. In Mexico employment in the bor-
der Maquiladora zone has increased by more than
46 percent under NAFTA. However, Mexico has
seen much greater job losses in the agricultural,
small retail, and small industrial sectors. Thus, more
than 2,000,000 workers have become unemployed in
Mexico since the implementation of NAFTA, and
real wages of Mexican workers have been slashed 50
percent.
(4) MANUFACTURING BASE.—One of the pur-
poses of NAFTA is to enhance the competitiveness
of firms in the global market. However, rather than
increase the ability of the manufacturing sector in
the United States to compete in the world market,
NAFTA has facilitated the movement of United
States manufacturing facilities and jobs to Mexico.
NAFTA has contributed to a net loss of approxi-
mately 400,000 manufacturing jobs in the United
States and an unprecedented flood of imports of
manufactured goods into the United States.
(5) HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT.—Other pur-
poses of NAFTA, as stated in its preamble, are ‘‘to
safeguard the public welfare’’ and ‘‘to strengthen the
development and enforcement of environmental laws
and regulations’’. Yet, since the implementation of
(7) PROTECT RIGHTS.—The promotion of sus-
tainable development as well as the protection and
enhancement of basic rights are stated objectives of
NAFTA. As envisioned, NAFTA was to increase
economic opportunity together with expansion of po-
litical freedoms and human rights. Yet these objec-
tives are not being fulfilled, especially in Mexico,
where many citizens continue to experience infringe-
ments of such rights and freedoms.
(8) FAIR AGRICULTURAL TRADE.—One of the
purposes of NAFTA, as stated in its preamble, is to
‘‘reduce distortions to trade’’. In addition, NAFTA
is supposed to promote conditions of fair competition
and to establish mutually advantageous rules govern-
ing trade. However, since NAFTA, there have been
sharp drops and escalations of one-way agricultural
trade. One-way trade of Canadian grain exports of
wheat, durum wheat, and barley to the United
States has disrupted markets and marketing chan-
nels. Surges in the importation of certain Mexican
fruits and vegetables have damaged United States
domestic production. The importation of livestock
and meat products from the NAFTA Parties raises
serious health concerns and has exacerbated the se-
vere problems facing United States livestock produc-
ers. NAFTA’s destabilization of the Mexican small
agricultural sector has undermined the country’s
ability to ensure a stable supply of food, which has
led to an unprecedented migration of landless peas-
ants and an increase in emigration to Mexican cities
and to the United States.
(9) HIGHWAY SAFETY.—NAFTA is intended to
preserve the flexibility of each nation to safeguard
its public welfare. Mexican motor carriers and driv-
ers do not have to meet the more stringent United
States safety standards when operating in Mexico.
Canadian law allows significantly longer and heavier
trucks than permitted by United States law. These
fundamental differences in safety standards make it
practically impossible to develop effective enforce-
ment programs in the United States to bring all
Mexican or Canadian motor carriers and drivers into
compliance with United States laws. Yet, NAFTA
would allow Mexican and Canadian trucks to operate
in United States border States and eventually all
States, posing a serious threat to highway safety in
the United States.
(10) NAFTA SHOULD NOT BE EXPANDED.—
The Congress approved NAFTA in order to achieve
economic, social, and environmental benefits for the
people of the United States. Based on currently
available information, the goals and objectives of
NAFTA are not being achieved. Therefore, until the
certifications of NAFTA’s effect, required in section
3, are made, NAFTA should not be expanded to in-
clude any other country. It is also inappropriate,
prior to the certification of NAFTA’s effects, to con-
sider any request for ‘‘fast track’’ negotiating au-
thority to expand NAFTA.
SEC. 3. CONDITIONS FOR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN
NAFTA.
(a) IN GENERAL.—
(1) WITHDRAWAL
OF
APPROVAL.—Notwith-
standing any other provision of law, unless each of
the conditions described in paragraph (2) is met—
(A) the approval of NAFTA by the Con-
gress provided for in section 101(a) of the
North American Free Trade Agreement Imple-
mentation Act shall cease to be effective on
January 1, 1999; and
(B) not later than July 1, 1998, the Presi-
dent shall provide 6 months written notice of
withdrawal to the Governments of Canada and
Mexico in accordance with Article 2205 of
NAFTA.
(2) CONDITIONS FOR CONTINUING PARTICIPA-
TION IN NAFTA.—The conditions described in this
paragraph are that before March 31, 1998—
(A) the President—
(i) provide the certification to the
Congress described in subsection (b)(6);
and
(ii) renegotiate the terms of NAFTA
in accordance with section 4;
(B) the Secretary of Commerce provide the
certification described in subsection (b)(1);
(C) the Secretary of the Treasury provide
the certification described in subsection (b)(2);
(D) the Secretary of Labor provide the cer-
tification described in subsection (b)(3);
(E) the Secretary of Agriculture and the
Administrator of the Food and Drug Adminis-
tration provide the certification described in
subsection (b)(4)(A);
(F) the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency submit the certifi-
cation and report described in subsection
(b)(4)(B);
(G) the Attorney General of the United
States provide the certification described in
subsection (b)(5);
(H) the Secretary of Agriculture provide
the certification described in subsection (b)(7);
and
(I) the Secretary of Transportation provide
the certification described in subsection (b)(8).
(b) AREAS OF CERTIFICATION.—The areas of certifi-
cation described in this subsection are as follows:
(1) CERTIFICATION OF THE NAFTA BALANCE
OF
TRADE.—If the Secretary of Commerce, after
consulting with appropriate government agencies
and citizen organizations, determines that the cumu-
lative trade balance between the United States and
Mexico and the United States and Canada during
the first 3 years that NAFTA was in effect is at
least as positive as in the 3 years before NAFTA
took effect, so that the net trade balance does not
show a greater overall deficit, the Secretary shall so
certify.
(4) CERTIFICATION RELATING TO HEALTH AND
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary of Ag-
riculture and the Administrator of the Food
and Drug Administration, after consultation
with appropriate government agencies and citi-
zen organizations, determine, with respect to
imports from NAFTA Parties, that since Janu-
ary 1, 1994, there has been a reduced incidence
of contaminated and adulterated food, food con-
taining additives or pesticide residues exceeding
United States standards, or food containing ad-
ditives or pesticide residues which cannot be le-
gally used in the United States, the Secretary
and Administrator shall so certify to the Con-
gress. In making this determination, all foods
and food products, including fruits, vegetables,
grains, oilseeds, and meats, both fresh and
processed, shall be reviewed. Special attention
shall be given to foods which have had a history
of violations of United States standards or laws
described in this subparagraph.
(B) BORDER AREA POLLUTION.—(i) If the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency determines, taking into account the
matters required to be included in the report
under clause (ii), that conditions affecting pub-
lic health and the environment in the United
States-Mexico border zone have not worsened
since January 1, 1994, the Administrator shall
so certify to the Congress.
(ii) In addition, the Administrator, in con-
sultation with the Secretariat for the NAFTA
Commission on Environmental Cooperation,
shall report to the Congress on the outcomes of
the investigations by the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency on pollution and health hazards in
and around the United States-Mexico border
zone since NAFTA went into effect. The report
shall include—
(I) a description and status report of
all industrial site cleanup and environ-
mental improvement projects begun in the
border zone since January 1, 1994;
(II) information available from local,
State, and Federal health agencies reflect-
ing the incidence since January 1, 1990, in
and around the border zone of hepatitis,
neural stem birth defects, lupus, chronic
diarrhea, tuberculosis, nonneural birth de-
fects, cholera, botulism, and other dis-
orders commonly related to industrial pol-
lution, inadequate infrastructures, and
hazardous waste; and
(III) information on the incidence of
air and water pollution since January 1,
1990, and the causes, levels, and types of
pollution which have occurred.
(5) CERTIFICATION
RELATING
TO
ILLEGAL
DRUGS.—If the Attorney General of the United
States determines, after a review by the Drug En-
forcement Administration and consultation with ap-
propriate government agencies and citizen organiza-
tions, that the importation into the United States of
illegal drugs or other controlled substances from
Mexico or Canada has not increased since NAFTA
went into effect, the Attorney General shall so cer-
tify to the Congress. The Attorney General, through
the Drug Enforcement Administration, shall conduct
a thorough review and report to the Congress re-
garding the flow of illegal drugs from Mexico and
Canada and the relationship of such flow to trade of
other commodities and services with the NAFTA
Parties.
(6) CERTIFICATION RELATING TO DEMOCRACY
AND
HUMAN
FREEDOMS.—If the President, after
consultation with appropriate government agencies,
international organizations, and citizen organiza-
tions, determines that each NAFTA Party—
(A) elects its government in free and fair
elections;
(B) protects the rights of its citizens to or-
ganize into political parties;
(C) protects the rights of its citizens to
free speech and the right of the news media to
operate without fear of government control or
reprisal; and
(D) protects the rights of its citizens to as-
semble and to organize associations to advance
human rights and economic opportunities,
the President shall so certify to the Congress.
(7) CERTIFICATION RELATING TO NAFTA’S EF-
FECT
ON
UNITED
STATES
AGRICULTURE.—If the
Secretary of Agriculture, after consultation with ap-
propriate government agencies and citizen organiza-
tions, determines that United States agricultural in-
terests have been left in at least as good a position
as before NAFTA, the Secretary shall so certify to
the Congress.
(8) CERTIFICATION
RELATING
TO
HIGHWAY
SAFETY.—If the Secretary of Transportation, after
consultation with attorneys general of the States,
law enforcement officials, State highway safety agen-
cies, other appropriate government agencies, and cit-
izen organizations, determines that a comprehensive
enforcement system is in place to ensure that every
Mexican commercial truck or bus is properly in-
spected so that the vehicle and its driver are in com-
pliance with United States transportation safety
standards before crossing the border into the United
States, the Secretary shall so certify to the Con-
gress. In making such determination, the Secretary
shall review and take into account the results of bor-
der inspections of Mexican vehicles coming into the
United States since January 1, 1994.
SEC. 4. RENEGOTIATIONS.
(a) RENEGOTIATE NAFTA TO CORRECT TRADE
DEFICITS.—The President is authorized and directed to
confer with the Governments of Canada and Mexico and
to renegotiate the terms of NAFTA to provide for imple-
mentation of adjustments of tariffs, quotas, and other
measures to stabilize the flow of trade among the NAFTA
Parties when the dollar value of United States imports
of goods and services from another NAFTA Party exceeds
10 percent of the dollar value of United States exports
to that Party.
(b) RENEGOTIATE NAFTA TO CORRECT CURRENCY
DISTORTIONS.—The President is authorized and directed
to confer with the Governments of Canada and Mexico and
to renegotiate the terms of NAFTA to provide for the im-
plementation of adjustments of tariffs, quotas, and other
measures to mitigate the adverse effects of rapid or sub-
stantial changes in exchange rates between the United
States dollar and the currency of another NAFTA Party.
(c) RENEGOTIATE
NAFTA TO
CORRECT
JOB
LOSS.—The President is authorized and directed to confer
with the Governments of Canada and Mexico and to re-
negotiate the terms of NAFTA to ensure that under
NAFTA trade with Mexico and Canada creates at least
as many United States jobs as it costs United States jobs
as measured by specific jobs created since January 1,
1994, compared to specific jobs lost since January 1,
1994, in United States trade with Mexico and Canada.
(d) RENEGOTIATE NAFTA TO PROTECT PUBLIC
HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT.—The President is au-
thorized and directed to confer with the Governments of
Canada and Mexico and to renegotiate the terms of
NAFTA to ensure that—
(1) under NAFTA—