Posted on 06/02/2009 4:38:43 AM PDT by radar101
MEXICO CITY -- A Mexican trade association representing more than 4,500 trucking companies is seeking $6 billion in damages from the U.S. government because of Washington's refusal to allow Mexican trucks to carry cargo over U.S. roads.
The group, Canacar, filed a demand for arbitration under the North American Free Trade Agreement with the U.S. State Department in April, but didn't publicize the move until Monday.
"We want reciprocity," said Pedro Ojeda, a lawyer for Canacar. "The U.S. has notoriously not kept its commitments." Mr. Ojeda said the complaint is the largest such demand made under Nafta, as the 1993 pact is known.
Deborah Mesloh, a spokeswoman for U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk, said Monday that, "We take our trade obligations very seriously and this is an issue we've been working on for a couple months." A State Department spokesman said the claim is "being studied."
The arbitration demand is the latest fallout from legislation signed earlier this year by President Barack Obama canceling a pilot program that had allowed Mexican trucks to carry cargo on U.S. roads. In March, the Mexican government retaliated by slapping tariffs on $2.4 billion of U.S. goods.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Those US investors, as well as far fewer Mexican investors who invested north of the border, have had their investment stranded.
The Mexican govt won their case against the US pursuant to NAFTA Chapter 20 while the investors' claim will be pursuant to Chapter 11. Chapter 11 contains the investor protections against creeping or changing regulations.
Reagan insisted that the investor protections be included.
Let me ask you a question. If a truck is domiciled in Mexico, but is owned by a US company, is that a US truck or a Mexican truck?
Don’t know don’t care. I just enjoy seeing you free traitors getting bent over a stump.
In the coming years there will be more reforms opening the door further for private unions and the dems certainly want the teamsters and United Farm Workers to get their shot at representing Mexican workers.
If the investors can globalize, why not the unions?
“NAFTA Chapter 11 is the portion of the North American Free Trade Agreement that allows investors from one NAFTA country to sue the government of another NAFTA country for actions which hurt them or their investments. Its protections include: a promise to pay full, fair and effective compensation when governments expropriate investments made in their territories; as well as a promise by NAFTA governments to provide investors from the other countries “treatment no less favourable” than that which they have given to their own investors in the North American Free Trade Area.”
Wouldn’t US investor be sueing their own country in this case?
Go ask your boy Zero for a bailout and leave Americans alone.
Invasion-as-usual. Nothing to see here, move along.
The establishment of NAFTA tribunals (International courts) is an affront to the sovereignty of this country and the others for that matter.
Congress was duped again (or complicit)
Yes, and that is the rub. The original justification for the investor protections was that when US investors went into Latin America under an Investor-State trade agreement aka Free Trade Agreement, the investor could protect himself against taxes, but he would not be able to protect his investment from taxes masquerading as enviro or labor regulations.
In this sense, Chapter 11 was a shield. But after NAFTA was signed the lawyers converted the shield into a sword and began using it to attack US regulations.
This is what started the democrats' conspiracy theory that the GOP and the Federalist Society were using NAFTA, CAFTA, and FTAA to roll back the New Deal
Guess *comspiracies* work both ways.
The left wing populists in latin America and the rightwing populists in the US have stopped FTAA so we will never know if the conspiracy theory was true.
If our sovereignty is determined by our regulatory law.
Like all democrats, you love regulatory law.
You don’t believe in sovereignty?
In this case you say our sovereignty is measured on our regulatory law, I say it isn't.
We need to eliminate regulatory law whenever, wherever, and however.
But remittances are only down about 19%. Go figure.
Trade between Mexico, Canada and the US isn't exactly correlated with remittances from the US to Mexico. Go figure.
Fulfill your agreements or we'll sue.
Right and allow companies and individuals to trample environmental and local laws at will? That's the biggest problem with globalization. It doesn't have a soul.
Do you?
KMTA
Does your wife know how you swing?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.