
<DOC>
<DOCNO>FT934-10911</DOCNO>
<PROFILE>_AN-DKCDEADZFT</PROFILE>
<DATE>931103
</DATE>
<HEADLINE>
FT  03 NOV 93 / Party loyalties do not apply: The stakes are high in the
battle to guide Nafta through the US Congress
</HEADLINE>
<BYLINE>
   By JUREK MARTIN and NANCY DUNNE
</BYLINE>
<TEXT>
'They'd sell off bits of the White House lawn for a vote if they could'
 - Jim Jontz, head of the Fair Trade Campaign against Nafta 'It's one
president, all the living former presidents, 41 governors, 14 Nobel
Laureates and 284 economists versus Perot, Buchanan and Brown; it's your
choice'
 - Mickey Kantor, US trade representative
Barring the unforeseen, the latest addition to the matriarchy of all
political battles will be finally decided on November 17 when 258 Democrats,
175 Republicans, and one independent in the 435-member House of
Representatives (there is one vacant seat) vote on whether to approve the
North American Free Trade Agreement linking the US, Mexico and Canada on
January 1. A simple majority of 218 is all that is needed. If it passes, the
Senate will almost certainly follow suit; if it fails, the upper chamber
does not have to act.
The stakes are enormous - for the political credibility of President Bill
Clinton early in his term and for the legacy of President Carlos Salinas as
he nears the end of his, for the evolution of the Mexican and US economies,
and for a global trading structure in which a Uruguay Round agreement
scheduled to be reached by December 15 may be unattainable if Nafta goes
down.
Conventional party lines are irrelevant in the intense retail political war
now going on in pursuit of the 218-vote nirvana. More Republicans, perhaps
as many as 120 according to congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona, far fewer
according to Mr Jim Jontz, a former congressman from Indiana, will vote for
than against, not least because the original Nafta was negotiated by the
Bush administration. This leaves Mr Clinton needing at most 40 per cent of
his own party to triumph - and therein lies the problem.
For the Democratic coalition that just - by one vote - sustained the
president in the great budget battle against unanimous Republican
opposition, is in tatters. In July it was the 'new' Democrats, especially
moderates from the south, who deserted Mr Clinton while the old liners -
labour, liberals, blacks - held their noses and held fast. On Nafta, the
positions are in good measure reversed.
According to Ms Lori Wallach, a leading co-ordinator of the 'anti-'
campaign, the 'no' camp already numbers 208-210 'including some leaners'.
Bill Daley, drafted from his Chicago domain to direct the 'yes' campaign,
disputes this estimate, counts about 195 in favour and says that some 55
Democrats are still undecided. Mr Jontz disagrees, reckoning there are now
more Republicans than Democrats on the fence. He thinks the freshman class -
66 Democrats and 48 Republicans - is particularly resistant to Nafta.
Both sides hail and blast each new convert. Democrat John Dingell of
Michigan came out for the 'noes' this week, but Mr Daley counters that he
could never understand why anybody thought he would do anything different.
Ms Wallach is equally dismissive of the impact of the 'yes' declarations of
Democrats Joe Kennedy from Massachusetts and Esteban Torres from California.
The latter, she insists, probably could not carry the 18-member Hispanic
caucus.
The politics of Nafta have produced uneasy dalliances among political
heavyweights. In one bed lie the president, the Republican leadership,
including Newt Gingrich, a fervent conservative, the Senate majority leader,
the Speaker of the House, most leaders of big business, and some prominent
environmental groups: in the other can be found the House majority leader
(Richard Gephardt) and most of the Democratic House whips, including David
Bonior of Michigan, the chief anti-Nafta strategist, plus Ralph Nader, the
consumer advocate, most of the labour unions, Pat Buchanan, the right-wing
ideologue, and Ross Perot, last year's independent presidential candidate.
Ms Wallach, who portrays the Nafta divide as one between 'populists and the
elites', says there is little top-level contact with Mr Perot, who first
spoke of the 'giant sucking sound' of US jobs going south to Mexico, but
that his troops offer access to conservatives and small businesses. Mr Daley
says that 'Perot's credibility is diminishing because he has become a
politician', an assessment borne out by several recent opinion polls.
Both sides agree that the role played by President Clinton himself is
crucial. 'He is my number one worry - never underestimate the power of the
presidency,' says Ms Wallach. He got off to a slow start. In the summer he
was consumed by the budget, and more recently distracted by healthcare,
Haiti and Somalia. Meanwhile the opposition was off and running early.
The administration pinned a lot of its midsummer hopes on Nafta's 'side
agreements', covering Mexican environmental and labour laws and guarding
against import 'surges', meeting most objections. But these were only
completed in mid-August, later than planned, and were only partly
successful. Six prominent US environmental groups came out in favour, but
union opposition became entrenched. Most important, Congressman Gephardt,
whose backing could probably have ensured passage, declared he was not
satisfied.
Mr Daley insists it does not matter that the president started late because
'in politics, decisions are only taken in the last few days'. Whatever the
merits of this argument, there is no questioning that the pro-Nafta campaign
is now in full swing, with plans that Mr Clinton himself do little other
than argue for the agreement in the next two weeks.
Every day brings a new media show. Last week saw Products Day on the White
House lawn, a display of 175 goods that would benefit from Nafta. Last
weekend the president went to Boston to maintain that JFK would have been
pro-Nafta. On Monday he appeared at an electronic 'town meeting' with
members of the American Chamber of Commerce. Later this week he is in
Louisville, Kentucky. On Sunday an hour-long TV interview is scheduled.
About twice a week he has 15-20 congressmen in his office for a Nafta
exhortation. He works the phones constantly, and all members of his cabinet
are fully engaged, sometimes inventively. Mr Kantor's latest pitch is that
Japan is against Nafta and would, along with Europe, seek to profit from its
defeat. The Nafta 'war room', operating out of the Old Executive Office
building next to the White House, co-ordinates it all and makes sure that
businessmen keep up the pressure on individual members.
Certain actions, both substantive and personal, get taken with Nafta in
view. Last week's creation of the North American Development Bank, with its
funds available for border clean-up, obviously helped Congressman Torres
come off the fence. At the other extreme, Congressman E Clay Shaw, a Florida
Republican, is demanding that the administration put pressure on Mexico for
the extradition of an accused rapist. Mr Daley says: 'We have made our views
known to the Mexican government on this, though they knew about it already.'
All this activity is matched with fervour and skill by the other side. Ms
Wallach claims to have kept a lid on vote switching. She points out that
Congressman Kweisi Mfume from Maryland, leader of the 38-strong black
Democratic caucus previously so loyal to Mr Clinton, is helping Mr Bonior
garner votes against Nafta, and that only one black congressman has come out
in favour. On broader policy issues, both camps were bombarding the media
with their respective spins after last week's Canadian election result.
'They've thrown everything at us, but it hasn't made a difference so far,'
she insists.
With two weeks to go, neither side will publicly admit the possibility of
defeat. Mr Daley says he will not sell the White House lawn, but seen
crossing it yesterday was a gaggle of living Nobel Laureates, including
Henry Kissinger, last seen being nice to Mr Clinton on Martha's Vineyard in
August. The grass seemed in place.
</TEXT>
<XX>
Countries:-
</XX>
<CN>USZ  United States of America.
    MXZ  Mexico.
    CAZ  Canada.
</CN>
<XX>
Industries:-
</XX>
<IN>P9721 International Affairs.
    P8651 Political Organizations.
    P9199 General Government, NEC.
</IN>
<XX>
Types:-
</XX>
<TP>CMMT  Comment &amp; Analysis.
</TP>
<PUB>The Financial Times
</PUB>
<PAGE>
London Page 19
</PAGE>
</DOC>

