USMCA (NAFTA 2.0): Tightening the Constraints on the Right to Regulate for Public Health
Ah yes, "NAFTA on Steroids". In an inexplicable happy accident, the USMCA is being held up in a battle of egos between two corporatists. For the moment. It's a sovereignty giveaway as well.
__________________________________________________________________
Globalization and Health Article on NCBI
Abstract
Background
In late 2018 the United States, Canada, and Mexico signed a new trade agreement (most commonly referred to by its US-centric acronym, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA) to replace the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The new agreement is the first major trade treaty negotiated under the shadow of the Trump Administration’s unilateral imposition of tariffs to pressure other countries to accept provisions more favourable to protectionist US economic interests. Although not yet ratified, the agreement is widely seen as indicative of how the US will engage in future international trade negotiations.
Methods
Drawing from methods used in earlier health impact assessments of the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, we undertook a detailed analysis of USMCA chapters that have direct or indirect implications for health. We began with an initial reading of the entire agreement, followed by multiple line-by-line readings of key chapters. Secondary sources and inter-rater (comparative) analyses by the four authors were used to ensure rigour in our assessments.
Results
The USMCA expands intellectual property rights and regulatory constraints that will lead to increased drug costs, particularly in Canada and Mexico. It opens up markets in both Canada and Mexico for US food exports without reducing the subsidies the US provides to its own producers, and introduces a number of new regulatory reforms that weaken public health oversight of food safety. It reduces regulatory policy space through new provisions on ‘technical barriers to trade’ and requirements for greater regulatory coherence and harmonization across the three countries. It puts some limitations on contentious investor-state dispute provisions between the US and Mexico, provisions often used to challenge or chill health and environmental measures, and eliminates them completely in disputes between the US and Canada; but it allows for new ‘legacy claims’ for 3 years after the agreement enters into force. Its labour and environmental chapters contain a few improvements but overall do little to ensure either workers’ rights or environmental protection.
Conclusion
Rather than enhancing public health protection the USMCA places new, extended, and enforceable obligations on public regulators that increase the power (voice) of corporate (investor) interests during the development of new regulations. It is not a health-enhancing template for future trade agreements that governments should emulate.
Comment
"Destroying the New World Order"
THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
Mystery illness strikes Russia with fever, blood symptoms, and no cure in sight.
I guess releasing this bio-weapon upon Israeli neighbors would be hitting too close to home. I…See More
main-qimg-357a10f7111dcf87a3cc6e2afad83855
"Islam is only a phase preceding a total Talmudic rule and a new world religion."
Lost History
"The Tartar wall - aka The Great Wall of China is hundreds of years old and was up and running in…"
No Place to Hide
Stumbling through this confusing lifeLike a blunt and rusty knifeSo why is there all this…See More
"https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/jenny-mccarthy-shares-chilling-encounter ~!~ A parent speaks…"
Jewish Journalist EXPOSES Israel’s DARK SECRET History
Katie Halper is host of The Katie Halper Show ► https://www.youtube.com/c/TheKatieHalperShowJoin the Future of Journalism ► https://www.patreon.com/DoubleDow...
© 2025 Created by truth.
Powered by
You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!
Join 12160 Social Network