
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, August 8, 1993                   TAG: 9309090301
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: D3   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: SARAH ANDERSON and SANDRAS GROSS
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

CORPORATE INTERESTS

BUSINESS and political leaders from Bill Clinton on down are portraying the North American Free Trade Agreement as the savior of our recession-ridden economy. But NAFTA would do more to advance narrow corporate interests than the broad interests of the citizens of this continent.

Just take a look at who's behind NAFTA. The leading lobby for the agreement - USANAFTA - was formed by corporate executives from Eastman Kodak and American Express to build local support. Its membership consists of some 2,300 U.S. corporations and trade groups, including 35 ``captains'' charged with marshalling support state by state.

All but one of these captains belong to the Fortune 500, including four of the top six. So much for USANAFTA's claim to be a ``grassroots'' organization. Worse, these captains have shown little concern for the American public.

The majority of USANAFTA's captains have been eliminating U.S. jobs for the past three years - many of them shifting the work to Mexico or other low-wage countries. At least nine of these firms shipped jobs to Mexico, led by General Motors - which will ultimately move 10,000 jobs, and United Technologies, which has shifted 2,000.

What's more, 29 of USANAFTA's captains have operations in Mexico, led again by General Motors with 50 plants and United Technologies with 26 plants. NAFTA proponents say the pact will increase U.S. exports to Mexico, but it is more likely to work the other way around; GM, United Technologies, and others will be able to expand their exports from Mexico to the United States.

The USANAFTA captains are also among the nation's worst polluters. Ten are among the Environmental Protection Agencies top 30 U.S. toxic releasers. DuPont is number one, Monsanto number three. Many of these firms are already taking advantage of Mexico's lax enforcement of environmental regulations. Eastman Kodak was found dumping arsenic into the Tijuana sewer at double the U.S. standard, and their Dichlorobenzene discharges ran seven times the U.S. permissible standard.

USANAFTA leaders show a similar lack of respect for the rights and health of workers. General Electric has been involved in two documented cases of blacklisting Mexican workers for union activities - a practice illegal in both the United States and Mexico. And after Mexico's environmental authority shut down several AT&T assembly lines because of poor ventilation, AT&T simply broke the seals and continued to use the equipment.

The most severe irony of USANAFTA is that many of its captains are notorious job destroyers and polluters in the very communities they seek to influence.

GM, for example, is supposed to rally Michigan to the NAFTA flag. But massive GM layoffs have already destroyed many Michigan communities. 3M is in charge of boosting NAFTA in Minnesota, and yet 3M has the distinction of receiving Minnesota's largest fine to date for emissions violations: $1.5 million.

This kind of corporate behavior will only be encouraged by NAFTA, which pushes economic integration without addressing social and environmental needs. It is not in the best interest of the United States, Mexico, or Canada.

A framework for economic cooperation in North America is necessary, but NAFTA is the wrong idea at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. We must instead work to develop a North American trade and development initiative that addresses the inequalities between our nations, upholds worker rights, and protects the environment.

\ Sarah Anderson and Sandra Gross are authors of a recent report, ``NAFTA's Corporate Cadre,'' published by the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C.

Knight-Ridder/Tribune

by CNB