| |
Congressional Research Service Reports Redistributed as a Service of the NLE*
|
|
IB10047: Mexico-U.S. Relations:
Issues for the 106th Congress
K. Larry Storrs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
April 24, 2000
CONTENTS
| SUMMARY The United States and Mexico have a special relationship under the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which removes trade and investment barriers between
the countries. The relationship has been strengthened by presidential visits, including
President Clinton's February 1999 trip to Mexico and President Zedillo's upcoming May 23
trip to Washington, and by regular contacts between cabinet-level officials. Major issues
of concern to Congress are trade, immigration, drug trafficking, and political rights.
Trade. NAFTA institutions have been
functioning, trade between the countries has doubled since 1994, and allegations of
violations of labor and environmental laws have been considered. While the Administration
argues that NAFTA has had modest positive impacts on all three member countries, public
and congressional criticism of NAFTA was a factor in postponement and defeat of fast track
legislation in 1997 and 1998, and in the failure of the WTO Ministerial in Seattle in late
1999. Recent trade disputes with Mexico have involved trucking, corn sweeteners, beef,
oil, telecommunications, tuna, and steel.
Immigration. Following major immigration
reforms in 1996, Congress has acted to enlarge the Border Patrol and to strengthen
immigration controls. Despite Mexican complaints about these efforts, Presidents Clinton
and Zedillo issued a "Joint Statement on Migration," in May 1997, and the two
countries issued a Binational Study on Migration in November 1997. Since the mid-1990s,
the countries have been consulting regularly on border safety and consular issues.
Drug Trafficking. Despite congressional
criticisms, President Clinton certified on March 1, 2000, that Mexico was fully
cooperating with the United States in drug control efforts. The statement of explanation
mentioned bilaterally negotiated performance measures of effectiveness (PMEs) to judge the
binational anti-drug strategy, enhanced maritime cooperation, and improvements in
interdiction and eradication efforts. However, it also said that Mexico's achievements
were undermined by chronic institutional weaknesses, particularly drug-related corruption
and violence. No congressional resolutions of disapproval were introduced in either house
during the 30-day review period.
Political and Human Rights. Mexico held
nationwide elections under new electoral reforms in July 1997, producing a more
pluralistic legislature and an opposition party Mayor of the Mexico City Federal District.
Following the December 22, 1997 killing of 45 peasants in the village of Acteal in the
state of Chiapas, some arrests were made and new key ministers offered to restart peace
talks with the Zapatista rebels. Despite high hopes, a meeting of EZLN leaders with the
congressional mediation commission in November 1998 ended without any settlements. In
August 1999, there were brief clashes between military and pro-Zapatista groups. Recent
political attention has focused on the selection of candidates for the July 2000
presidential elections, with the governing PRI selecting its candidate in a nationwide
primary on November 7, 1999, while the major opposition parties designated candidates
after efforts to present a single coalition candidate reached an impasse in September
1999. |
MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
On March 30, 2000, Samuel del Villar, Attorney General
for the PRD-controlled Mexico City Federal District government charged Oscar Espinoza, the
current federal Minister of Tourism and a former appointed Mayor of Mexico City
(1994-1997) and former finance secretary during President Zedillo's presidential campaign,
with misuse of $42 million of the city's funds when he was Mayor. While federal officials
defended Espinoza, the Chamber of Deputies was considering the lifting of his immunity so
that he could be prosecuted. On April 3, 2000, Samuel del Villar came under attack when a
key witness in the case of the drug-related killing of television personality
"Paco" Stanley in Mexico City last June claimed that he was pressured to give
false incriminating evidence.
On April 12, 2000, the head of Mexico's federal anti-drug
agency announced that it had been determined that three anti-drug agents found dead
between Tijuana and Mexicali had been murdered while probing the activities of the
Arellano Felix cartel. On April 16, 2000, former U.S. Customs Service agent William Gately
said on "60 Minutes" that his superiors failed to act on evidence implicating
Mexican Defense Minister Cervantes in money laundering activities, prompting renewed
rebuttals by Mexican and U.S. officials. On April 21, 2000, the Mexican Defense Ministry
announced the seizure of over 12 metric tons of marijuana in the northern border state of
Sonora, the second biggest seizure of the drug since 1995. On April 23, 2000, the Mexican
press reported the release for lack of evidence of the two men arrested following the
excavation in November to January of suspected grave sites for drug-related killings in
Ciudad Juarez. Over the Easter weekend, Mexican presidential candidates were preparing for
the television debate on April 25th.
BACKGROUND
AND ANALYSIS
U.S.-Mexico
Relationship
Major Bilateral Linkages
Mexico surpassed Japan in 1998 to became the United States'
second most important trading partner following Canada. It is also one of the leading
countries in Latin America in terms of U.S. investment, with total investment of about $27
billion. In addition, cooperation with Mexico is vital in dealing with illegal
immigration, the flow of illicit drugs to the United States, and a host of border issues.
The United States is Mexico's most important customer by far,
receiving about 88% of Mexico's exports -- including petroleum, automobiles, auto parts,
and winter vegetables -- and providing about 74% of Mexico's imports. The United States is
the source of over 60% of foreign investment in Mexico, and the primary source of
important tourism earnings.
Until the early 1980s, Mexico had a closed and statist
economy and its independent foreign policy was often at odds with the United States.
Beginning under President Miguel de la Madrid (1982-1988) and continuing more dramatically
under President Carlos Salinas de Gortari (1988-1994), Mexico adopted a series of free
market policies. It opened its economy to trade and investment, and cooperation with the
United States increased on drug control, border issues, and trade matters. Completion of
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which eliminated trade and investment
barriers among the United States, Mexico, and Canada, was the clearest indication of the
growing integration and cooperation between the countries.
Zedillo Administration
Ernesto Zedillo of the long-ruling Institutional
Revolutionary Party (PRI) was inaugurated as President on December 1, 1994, pledging to
continue the free market policies of his predecessor, to strengthen democracy, and to end
the threat of violence in the far southeastern state of Chiapas.
Zedillo was elected with 50% of the valid vote in the August
21, 1994 elections, and had comfortable majorities in both legislative chambers. Diego
Fernandez de Cevallos of the conservative National Action Party (PAN) came in second with
27% of the vote, and Cuauhtemoc Cardenas of the center-left Party of the Democratic
Revolution (PRD) came in third with 17% of the 1994 vote. In the watershed midterm
legislative election of July 6, 1997, the PRI lost its majority in the Chamber and its
two-thirds majority in the Senate. Following that election, the PRI has 77 senators in the
128 member Senate, the PAN has 33 and the PRD has 16, while the Labor Party (PT) and the
Green Ecological Party (PVEM) each have 1 member. The PRI has 239 seats in the 500-seat
Chamber of Deputies, the PRD has 125, the PAN has 121, the PVEM has 8 seats and the PT has
7. In 1997, the opposition parties remained united to insist upon opposition control of
some of the major committees in the Chamber of Deputies, and they succeeded in increasing
social and local government funding in the budget debate. In 1998, the opposition parties
insisted on an audit of the bank protection agency responsible for rescuing the banks in
the financial crisis, but the PAN sided with the PRI in creating an entirely new bank
protection agency. In 1999, opposition parties again won increases in social and local
government funding in the budget debate, but largely failed in efforts to explore
irregularities in the loans covered by the bank protection agency.
The major issues facing Zedillo are the economic situation,
the probes of assassinations in 1993-1994, the continuing uncertainties in Chiapas,
concerns about crime in urban areas, and the July 2000 presidential and legislative
elections.
Economic Situation. Mexico's
economic crisis began in late December 1994, when the currency, stock, and bond markets
fell more than 40%, and Mexico was forced to allow the peso to float freely. The
government announced austerity budgets and obtained backup financing from international
sources, especially the United States and the International Monetary Fund, including a
package of up to $20 billion in financial support from the United States. The economy
declined 6.2% in 1995, with concomitant unemployment and firm failures, but Mexico
maintained the austere policies, remained current on debt obligations, and eventually
gained access to ordinary lines of credit. In early August 1996, the government prepaid $7
billion to the United States under the financial support program, and in January 1997,
Mexico repaid 3 years early its remaining outstanding debt of $3.5 billion, thereby paying
off the full amount of $13.5 billion provided by the United States.
By early 2000, Mexico had experienced four years of economic
recovery, with GDP growth averaging about 5% per year (5.1% in 1996, 7% in 1997, 4.8% in
1998, and 3.7% in 1999), but the government admitted that it would take some time to
restore pre-crisis living standards. In 1998, the government cut the budget several times
and announced lower growth estimates in the face of falling oil prices and the effects of
the Asian crisis. Non-OPEC member Mexico also joined forces with Saudi Arabia and
Venezuela in announcing that it would cut oil production to stem the rapid decline in
petroleum prices. In late 1998, after debating the bank rescue program and alleged
irregularities, the Mexican Congress established an audit of the previous rescue agency
(FOBAPROA) and established a new agency (Institute for the Protection of Bank
Savings-IPAB) under congressional scrutiny. In the first half of 1999, Mexico had positive
rates of exports and investment and met established fiscal targets with world oil prices
rising. In a new effort to expand privatization of government entities, President Zedillo
submitted proposals to Congress in February 1999 to open the electricity industry to
privatization. In late June 1999, Mexico arranged international financing, including a
$4.2 billion line of credit from the International Monetary Fund, to safeguard the country
against any currency crisis in the period leading up to the July 2000 elections. In 1999
and into 2000, opposition parties were claiming that an independent audit of the bank
protection fund showed that some banks had made illegal contributions to the PRI, and they
were demanding the release of additional information. In October 1999, Mexico experienced
torrential rains, flooding, and mudslides in the southeastern Gulf states, with more than
476 deaths and more than 500,000 people affected. In early 2000, Mexican officials
estimated economic growth in 1999 at 3.7%, with inflation of 12.3%, and they predicted
growth in 2000 of 4.5%, with inflation under 10%. On March 24, 2000, President Zedillo
signed in Portugal a comprehensive free trade agreement with the European Union that will
enter into force on July 1, 2000. On April 1, 2000, as previously announced, Mexico
increased oil exports by 150,000 barrels per day to lower the cost of gasoline, in keeping
with the recent decision in Vienna of OPEC Ministers.
Assassination and Corruption Probes.
In an effort to deal with corruption and unsolved assassination cases, President Zedillo
appointed Antonio Lozano of the opposition PAN as Attorney General and ordered him to
reopen the investigations of the May 1993 killing of Cardinal Posadas, the March 1994
assassination of PRI presidential candidate Donaldo Colosio, and the September 1994 murder
of PRI official Jose Francisco Ruiz Massieu. Attorney General Lozano appointed special
prosecutors in the cases and dismissed over 1,250 federal law enforcement officials in
anti-corruption shakeups. In early December 1996, President Zedillo removed Lozano as
Attorney General, reportedly for inadequate action on drug trafficking and assassination
probes, and named as his replacement Jorge Madrazo Cuellar, a political independent who
previously headed the government's Human Rights Commission. General Jesus Gutierrez
Rebollo was also named to head the National Drug Control Institute, but he was removed in
mid-February 1997, and charged with accepting bribes from drug lord Amado Carillo Fuentes.
Lawyer Mariano Herran Salvatti was then named to head a completely new anti-drug agency
called the Office of the Special Prosecutor for Attention to Crimes Against Health
(FEADS).
With regard to the May 1993 killing of Cardinal Posadas, the
Attorney General's office announced in September 1995, that it was ending the active
investigation of the case, with available evidence pointing to the original hypothesis
that he was mistakenly killed by rival drug gangs. In May 1999, on the sixth anniversary
of the killing, the Catholic Church expressed doubts about the official version, and
blamed former Attorney General Jorge Carpizo for losing some of the videos of the
shooting.
Regarding the March 1994 assassination of PRI presidential
candidate Donaldo Colosio, one gunman, Mario Aburto, was convicted and sent to jail in
1994. Special prosecutor Chapa said in early 1995 that a second gunman, Othon Cortes
Vasquez, was involved, even though two previous special prosecutors had concluded that
only one gunman was responsible. In early August 1996, the judge found Othon Cortes
Vasquez not guilty. The Attorney General appealed the decision, but the appellate judge
confirmed the decision in early November 1996. Special prosecutor Gonzalez Perez said at
the time that the investigation was continuing. On the sixth anniversary of the killing,
numerous politicians called for resolution of the case.
In connection with the September 1994 killing of PRI official
Ruiz Massieu, Raul Salinas, the former President's brother, was arrested for involvement
in this case in late February 1995, after the discovery of a corpse, subsequently found to
have been planted, at his ranch. Raul Salinas is also being held for illicit enrichment
from drug traffickers or influence-peddling and money laundering, although the money
laundering charges were dismissed by an appeals court in May 1998. In November 1995, his
wife was arrested when she attempted to withdraw funds from a Swiss bank account under
another name. Since then, news accounts have suggested the discovery of up to $300 million
in these accounts. Some wealthy Mexicans, many linked to privatization investments during
the Salinas period, have said they contributed funds for investment purposes. Some of
these have been arrested and charged with illicit enrichment. In late October 1998, Swiss
authorities concluded that Raul Salinas obtained the funds from Mexican and Colombian
cartels, and they seized $114 million in Swiss banks, prompting Mexican authorities to
renew their investigations in those areas. Final arguments were heard in early December
1998 in the murder case against Salinas, and in January 1999, the judge found Raul Salinas
guilty of murder and sentenced him to 50 years in prison. In mid-July 1999, a Mexican
appeals court cut the sentence in half, and a Swiss court ruled that the Swiss national
government lacked the authority to seize Salinas' assets.
Former Deputy Attorney General Mario Ruiz Massieu, who had
headed the investigation of his brother's assassination, was arrested in Newark, New
Jersey, in early March 1995, for failure to declare his currency holdings to Custom's
officials, and Mexican officials sought his extradition on grounds that he covered up Raul
Salinas' involvement in the crime. In January 1996, a U.S. judge for the fourth time
refused to extradite Mario Ruiz Massieu, finding the evidence against him lacking. In
mid-March 1997, a jury in Houston, Texas, found that $7.9 million of $9 million in his
U.S. bank accounts was from drug traffickers and subject to seizure by the U.S.
government. After an appeals court in June 1999 reversed a lower court's stay of U.S.
efforts to deport him in May 1997, Ruiz Massieu appealed for political asylum. In late
August 1999, a grand jury in Houston, Texas, indicted Ruiz Massieu on narcotics and
money-laundering charges. On September 15, 1999, on the eve of his trial, Ruiz Massieu
apparently took his own life with an overdose of anti-depression pills, leaving behind
various notes critical of the Zedillo government.
Guerrillas in Chiapas and Guerrero.
President Zedillo has promised to peacefully end the dispute with Zapatista National
Liberation Front (EZLN) guerrillas in Chiapas that remains unresolved since the
short-lived fighting and cease-fire in early January 1994. Despite some early efforts at
accommodation, the Zapatista military mobilization in mid-December 1994 was one of the
factors that led to the run on the peso and the financial crisis. On February 9, 1995,
President Zedillo ordered the arrest of Zapatista leaders in Chiapas, but on February 14,
he called off the offensive and later proposed to the Mexican Congress a Law for Dialogue,
Conciliation and Dignified Peace. Congress modified and approved the law in early March
1995, and in early April the Zapatistas agreed to begin peace talks with an agreed agenda.
Representatives of both sides met in San Andres Larrainzar,
in the state of Chiapas, throughout 1995 and reached an agreement on indigenous rights in
January 1996 which was signed in February 1996. After on again, off again talks over new
issues during 1996, in mid-January 1997, the Zapatistas rejected what they claim are
changes by the government to the government-Zapatista agreement on indigenous rights,
although they were making plans be become a political rather than a military movement. In
early September 1997, thousands of Zapatista followers and sympathizers made a five-day
march to Mexico City to demand respect for the agreement on indigenous rights, and they
created the Zapatista Front political movement. In the fall of 1997, President Zedillo
called upon the Zapatistas to reenter peace talks, but human rights groups were denouncing
government attacks against Bishop Samuel Ruiz Garcia in Chiapas. The December 22, 1997
killing of 45 indigenous peasants in Acteal, Chiapas, prompted criticism of government
officials and calls for vigorous measures to achieve peace, with the result that new
people were named to head the Government Ministry, to be the Negotiator for Chiapas, and
to be Governor of the state of Chiapas.
In 1998, President Zedillo visited Chiapas many times and
called for a renewal of peace talks, and in March 1998, he submitted proposed legislation
to promote indigenous rights in Chiapas, but the guerrillas rejected the initiative, and
the legislature is divided on the issue. Numerous human rights observers visited Chiapas
throughout the year, and some foreigners were expelled for engaging in political
activities. In June 1998, the situation deteriorated when the mediation commission
dissolved after Bishop Ruiz resigned, claiming that the government was not interested in
dialogue, and eight people were killed in a clash between Zapatista and government forces
in El Bosque. In July 1998, the government offered a new proposal that would involve the
legalization of municipalities in Zapatista strongholds, but the Zapatistas called for a
nation-wide plebiscite on the indigenous rights legislation. In mid-October 1998, the
Zapatistas indicated a willingness to reinitiate peace talks with the congressional peace
commission (Cocopa), but the meetings in late November 1998 failed to produce any
agreements.
In August 1999, there were several clashes in Amador
Hernandez between the military and Zapatista supporters who were seeking to block
construction of a road into Zapatista strongholds, and various groups denounced the
military and called for renewed negotiations. On September 7, 1999, President Zedillo
launched a new initiative relating to the conflict, and in October and November government
spokesmen called for reinitiation of the dialogue. In December 1999, President Zedillo
visited Chiapas twice and urged resolution by dialogue..
Another guerrilla group, known as the Popular Revolutionary
Army (EPR), appeared in the state of Guerrero on June 28, 1996, at the commemoration of
the killing of 17 peasants in Aguas Blancas. After calling for the overthrow of the
government, the group disappeared. The Mexican army searched for the group and arrested
some suspects, but some commentators doubted the seriousness of the group. EPR spokesmen
alleged in early August 1996 that they had opened a new front in the Sierra Madre Oriental
mountains. EPR guerrillas launched coordinated attacks in three states (Guerrero, Oaxaca,
Mexico) on August 28, but then disappeared again, prompting President Zedillo to
characterize the group as a terrorist organization. The EPR made similar attacks in the
three states in late October 1996, although it declared month-long cease-fires in the
states of Guerrero and Mexico while elections were being held. At least 22 EPR members
were arrested in Oaxaca in early November 1996. In early March 1997, the EPR warned that
it would be unwise for the government to attack any of the guerrilla groups. In late May
1997, several persons were killed in anti-guerrilla skirmishes in Guerrero. In early June
1998, 11 EPR members were killed in a confrontation with the military, although some
critics charged that it was a massacre. Government Minister Labastida announced in late
July 1998 that the EPR was seriously weakened, but isolated attacks took place in the next
few days. In March 1999, EPR elements denounced the election in Guerrero of the PRI
candidate. Mexican authorities further weakened the organization when they captured the
head of an EPR offshoot (the EPRI) in October 1999, but EPR elements attacked army troops
in Guerrero in February 2000.
Public Security Concerns.
Particularly since the economic crisis of 1994-1995, Mexico has experienced a serious
problem with carjackings, robberies, and other crimes in Mexico City and other urban
areas, and Mexicans have indicated in a number of polls that this issue is a major cause
of concern. In the face of popular distrust of Mexico's police forces, in 1997 President
Zedillo placed military officers in major public security and law enforcement positions in
Mexico City, but the military was withdrawn from these positions in December 1997. In his
State of the Nation address in September 1997, President Zedillo called for a National
Crusade Against Crime, with better laws to fight crime, better law enforcement agencies,
and better training and coordination. As one part of this program, Zedillo has established
the National System of Public Safety to coordinate the efforts of the different actors,
including the Ministries of Government, Defense, Navy, Communications, the 31 state
governors, and the Mayor of Mexico City. Another part of the effort is the creation of the
new Preventive Federal Police (PFP) force, from three previous police forces, with new
screening and training procedures. In 1999, the Minister of Government pledged that state
and federal governments will devote $900 million in resources for the training and
screening of 55,000 new public safety officers, and for the creation of a National
Communication System.
Presidential and Legislative Elections
in July 2000. In 1999, the parties picked candidates for the July 2000 presidential
and legislative elections in a new context. President Zedillo indicated before and after
his election in 1994 that in an effort to advance democracy in Mexico he intended to
remain somewhat apart from the party and to forego the traditional presidential
prerogative to name the PRI's presidential candidate for the next election, a procedure
that had been tantamount to naming the future president in the past. Particularly since
the mid-1990s, the opposition parties have scored numerous victories in mayoral,
gubernatorial, and legislative races, including the PRD's election of Cuauhtemoc Cardenas
as Mayor of the Mexico City Federal District, and the opposition's election of a majority
in the Chamber of Deputies in the July 1997 elections. With the July 2000 elections
approaching, the PRI announced in mid-May 1999 that it would select its party's candidate
by a direct and open primary on November 7, 1999, while the PAN and the PRD engaged in
discussions about the possibility of a coalition presidential candidate for the
opposition, despite major ideological differences. In late August 1999, the opposition
parties agreed to ask a group of notable citizens to help determine a method for selecting
a joint opposition candidate. In late September 1999, the PAN rejected the suggestion of
the group of notables that the candidate be selected by two methods, a limited primary
election and public opinion polling, and the notion of a common opposition candidate
reached an impasse. During the month, Mexico City Mayor Cuauhtemoc Cardenas was designated
as the presidential candidate for the PRD, and Guanajuato Governor Vicente Fox was
designated as the presidential candidate for the PAN. On November 7, 1999, former
Government Minister Francisco Labastida won the PRI primary decisively, winning 273 of 300
voting districts. By the end of March 2000, pollsters were suggesting a fairly close race
between Francisco Labastida of the PRI and Vicente Fox of the Alliance for Change (PAN and
PVEM), with Cuauhtemoc Cardenas of the Alliance for Mexico (PRD, PT, CD, PSN, PAS) lagging
behind significantly. Candidates are preparing for a television debate on April 25th.
Bilateral
Issues for Congress
Trade Issues
Trade between Mexico and the United States has grown
dramatically in recent years, encouraged by the adoption of the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) between Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Total U.S. trade with
Mexico has increased from $100 billion in 1994 (exports of $50.8 billion; imports of $49.5
billion) to $197 billion in 1999 (exports of $86.9 billion; imports of $109.7 billion).
However, the U.S. trade balance with Mexico has shifted from a surplus of $1.3 billion in
1994 to a generally growing deficit of $22.8 billion in 1999, in part because of the late
1994 devaluation of the peso which made Mexican products cheaper. This change in the trade
balance has caused some Members of Congress to question the benefits of NAFTA. Despite the
deficit, Mexico is one of the fastest growing export markets for the United States in
recent years, and it became the second largest U.S. export market after Canada in 1998.
The NAFTA agreement was negotiated in 1991 and 1992; side
agreements on labor and environmental matters were completed in 1993; the agreements were
approved by the respective legislatures in late 1993; and the agreements went into force
on Jan. 1, 1994. Under the agreements, trade and investment restrictions are being
eliminated over a 15 year period, with most restrictions eliminated in the early years of
the agreement. At the Miami Summit of the Americas, in December 1994, the NAFTA partners
announced that they would begin negotiations with Chile on accession to NAFTA, and the
hemispheric presidents pledged to create a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) by the
year 2005. Final negotiations on Chile's accession to NAFTA and on the FTAA await
congressional approval of fast track negotiating authority. On July 11, 1997, the
Administration released a required report on the first 3 years of operations under NAFTA
that argued that NAFTA had had a modest positive impact on U.S. jobs and income, and had
facilitated Mexico's economic recovery following the peso crisis of 1994-1995.
In mid-November 1997, congressional opposition to granting
the President fast track authority for negotiating new free trade agreements, often
interpreted as a referendum on NAFTA, forced the Administration to postpone action on this
legislation. Hemispheric leaders agreed in mid-April 1998 at the Santiago Summit of the
Americas to launch negotiations to establish a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)
despite the Clinton Administration's lack of fast track authority. When the House
leadership, without Administration support, pressed for fast track legislation under the
Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act (H.R. 2621) on September
25, 1998, it was defeated 243-180. Administration witnesses testified in 1999, after 5
years of NAFTA experience, that NAFTA had been successful in increasing U.S. exports to
Mexico, particularly heavily protected areas such as agricultural products, and in
creating jobs and strengthening the economy. The failure in December 1999 of WTO ministers
meeting in Seattle to agree upon an agenda for future multilateral trade liberalization,
following criticism by labor, environmental, and agricultural groups, has raised doubts
about the prospects in the near future for fast track authority and trade liberalization
efforts.
Functioning of NAFTA Institutions.
Since 1994, the NAFTA institutions mandated by the agreements have been functioning. The
tripartite Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC) was established in Montreal,
Canada; and the Commission for Labor Cooperation (CLC) was established in Dallas, Texas.
In addition, the bilateral Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC), located in
Ciudad Juarez, Mexico; and the North American Development Bank (NADBank), headquartered in
San Antonio, Texas, were created to promote and finance border environment projects along
the U.S.-Mexico border.
These NAFTA institutions have operated to encourage
cooperation on trade, environmental and labor issues, and to consider non- governmental
petitions under the labor and environmental side agreements. Under the labor
side agreement, 21 petitions have been submitted alleging non-compliance by one of the
NAFTA countries with existing labor legislation, and 12 of these have been against Mexico:
five submissions were advanced to the next stage of ministerial consultations, although
negotiations are ongoing in two cases; two submissions were essentially dropped on grounds
that the workers who were fired in Mexico accepted severance pay; two submissions were
withdrawn, in one case when Mexico recognized a union just before a scheduled hearing; one
submission was rejected on procedural grounds, although a study on reconciliation of the
right to strike and national interests was initiated; and one submission is pending.
In one of the cases advanced to ministerial consultation,
involving the dismissal of workers for union organizing activities at a SONY electronics
plant in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, the labor ministers agreed to a plan of action including
meetings with the affected workers, public seminars, and studies of union registration
procedures. In the case of alleged discrimination against pregnant Mexican workers in
border assembly (maquiladora) plants, ministerial consultations led to an implementation
agreement and a conference on the rights of working women. With regard to the union
association and health and safety issues in the Han Young maquiladora plant in Tijuana and
the Itapsa maquiladora plant in the state of Mexico, ministerial consultations were held
and negotiations are continuing. In a case against the United States, involving the
closure of a Sprint subsidiary in San Francisco, shortly before a union representation
election, the labor ministers agreed to a public forum on the issues, and an exchange of
information and a hearing to determine whether the closing was for anti-unionization or
for financial reasons. Under the trilateral CLC the countries are cooperating in many
areas, especially occupational safety, and rights of working women and children.
Under the environmental side agreement, 26
petitions have been submitted alleging non-compliance with environmental legislation, but
only 9 of these have involved Mexico: in the major case involving the environmental impact
of the construction of a cruise boat port in Cozumel, Mexico, the Council requested a
response from the Mexican government and after evaluation directed the CEC Secretariat to
prepare a full factual record on the case to highlight deficiencies; in two cases
involving pollution of the Magdalena River and Lake Chapala the Council is reviewing the
response from the Mexican government; in three recent cases the Council has requested
responses from the Mexican government; in another case the complaint is still being
reviewed; and another case was rejected on grounds that it did not allege a violation of
environmental law. The CEC is cooperating on many environmental projects, including the
North American Bird Conservation Initiative to protect birds and conserve bird habitats,
the Upper San Pedro River Initiative to protect this Sonora-Arizona eco-system that is an
important corridor for millions of migratory birds, and the Sound Management of Chemicals
Project to dramatically reduce the use of PCBs, DDT, chlordane, mercury, and other
pollutants.
Recent Trade Disputes. The major
disputes involve trucking access to border areas in both countries, opening the Mexican
telecommunications sector to international long distance competition, allegations of
dumping or misuse of sanitary standards, and violations by Mexico of intellectual property
rights. In early April 2000, USTR Barshefsky threatened to file a complaint with the WTO
if progress is not made in reducing Telmex's continuing dominant position in the
telecommunications industry. The Mexican government has criticized U.S. postponement on
safety grounds of implementation of NAFTA provisions that would give Mexican trucks access
to U.S. highways, and Mexico is seeking settlement through NAFTA dispute settlement
procedures, while the United States has criticized Mexico's failure to grant national
treatment for express mail delivery services in Mexico. In late 1999, Congress passed and
the President signed into law (P.L. 106-159)
the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999, which establishes a new agency to
promote and regulate carrier safety; provides greater resources for inspection of foreign
carriers; and establishes penalties and disqualifications for non-complying foreign
carriers.
With regard to imports of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS)
sweeteners from the United States, Mexico has alleged that the United States has engaged
in dumping practices and has imposed anti-dumping duties, while the United States has
invoked WTO and NAFTA dispute resolution mechanisms, claiming that the Mexican government
has colluded with the Mexican sugar and sweetener industries to restrict HFCS imports from
the United States. In February 2000, the WTO upheld the U.S. claim, and Mexico decided not
to appeal the ruling. With regard to dumping allegations, both countries have alleged
dumping of beef and cattle; Mexico has alleged U.S. dumping of apples, cotton, and
sorghum; and the United States has alleged Mexican dumping of tomatoes and steel, although
many of these complaints have been resolved to some extent.
The United States has also claimed that Mexican sanitary
standards have posed barriers to U.S. exports, and that Mexico's lax enforcement has
permitted widespread piracy of recording and software products. Mexico has objected to
U.S. sanctions against third countries with investments in Cuba under the Cuban Liberty
and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 , commonly called the Helms-Burton legislation. In
mid-August 1999, the United States rejected an anti-dumping complaint against Mexico and
other major oil producers brought by a group of small U.S. producers called Save Domestic
Oil, and Mexico implemented the planned phase-out of a 4% tariff on imported natural gas.
While the United States lifted the embargo on Mexican tuna in April 2000, after procedures
were worked out to avoid harm to dolphins, a federal judge in San Francisco blocked the
Administration's plan to loosen the standards of a 1990 law for a dolphin-safe label,
saying that the standards of the law had not been met.
Immigration Issues
Nature of the Immigration Problem.
Estimates reported in the press of the number of Mexicans living illegally in the United
States range from 1.1 million to 2.7 million. An April 1994 Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS) study estimated that there were about 1.3 million unauthorized Mexicans
residing in the United States, accounting for 39% of the total estimated illegal alien
population. Mexico regularly expresses concern about alleged abuses suffered by Mexican
workers in the United States, and takes the view that the migrants are "undocumented
workers," not illegal immigrants, making the point that since the U.S. market
attracts and provides employment for the migrants, it bears some responsibility. Mexico
benefits from illegal migration in at least two ways: (1) it is a "safety valve"
that dissipates the political discontent that could arise from higher unemployment in
Mexico; and (2) it is a source of remittances by workers in the United States to families
in Mexico, ranging, according to widely varying estimates, from $1 billion to $10 billion.
The main U.S. mechanism for controlling illegal immigration
in the past was the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-603),
which was passed by Congress in late 1986. Main provisions of the Act include civil and
criminal penalties for U.S. employers who knowingly hire undocumented workers; increased
border control and enforcement measures; antidiscrimination safeguards; provision for
amnesty or legalization for illegal aliens who resided continuously in the United States
before 1982; and a special legalization for farm workers previously employed on American
farms.
In the face of mounting criticism of illegal aliens,
especially that they deprive American citizens of jobs, and that they are a growing burden
on the educational, health, and welfare resources of certain states, recent
Administrations have sought to control illegal immigration to protect U.S. borders and to
preserve the program of legal immigration. Suits by the most affected states (California,
Florida, Texas, and Arizona) against the federal government, and the passage in California
in late 1994 of Proposition 187, which sought to deny health and educational benefits to
illegal aliens, stimulated additional state and federal legislative proposals. Mexican
authorities strongly criticized passage of Proposition 187, even though it was blocked by
court action, and other restrictive immigration legislation as racist and discriminatory.
Administration and Congressional
Initiatives to Curb Immigration. The Clinton Administration has announced initiatives
each year to curb illegal immigration. These initiatives have sought (1) to prevent
illegal entry into the United States with additional Border Patrol agents and INS
inspectors, using improved technology and procedures; (2) to remove and deport illegal and
criminal aliens expeditiously; (3) to enhance enforcement of employer sanctions and labor
and wage standards, including the testing of pilot programs to develop computerized
verification systems to determine a person's eligibility for employment, as recommended by
the Commission on Immigration Reform, headed by the late Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. The
Border Patrol has been increased substantially, and a strategy to deter illegal entry has
been employed, known as "prevention through deterrence," modeled upon two border
initiatives, Operation Hold the Line in the El Paso area and Operation Gatekeeper in the
San Diego area.
Congress passed two major immigration reform measures in 1996
to control illegal immigration and to limit the eligibility of aliens for federal
programs. One was the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996,
Division C of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY1997 (H.R. 3610/P.L. 104-208) .
The other was the 1996 welfare law entitled the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (H.R. 3734/P.L. 104-193).
The first measure seeks to control illegal immigration by adding 1,000 Border Patrol
agents per year for the next 5 years (FY1997-FY2001), along with additional personnel,
equipment, and procedures, to improve border and interior enforcement, verification of
employment eligibility, and control of alien smuggling and document fraud. Both measures
seek to reduce the attractiveness of immigration by restricting the eligibility of aliens
for federal programs. (For more information, see CRS Report 95-881, Immigration
Legislation in the 104th Congress, by Joyce Vialet, et al.)
Congress has also increased funding for the Border Patrol
through the regular Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary Appropriations Acts, nearly
tripling the Border Patrol's budget from $1.5 billion in FY1993 to nearly $4.1 billion in
FY1999. (For more details, see CRS Report RS20183, Immigration
and Naturalization Service's FY2000 Budget.) With various groups, including the
AFL-CIO in February 2000, calling for amnesty for illegal immigrants in the United States
and a more lenient immigration policy, in 2000 Congress is considering measures to
increase the number of temporary H-1B professional or H-2A agricultural workers and to
restructure the INS by separating the enforcement and service functions. (For more
information, see CRS Issue Brief IB10044, Immigration Legislation
and Issues in the 106th Congress.)
With regard to bilateral cooperation, during President
Zedillo's visit to Washington in October 1995, the two Presidents announced a pilot
project in the San Diego area under which habitual illegal border crossers would be
returned to their home towns in the interior of Mexico, rather than to the border. In May
1996 and May 1997, during the Binational Commission meetings, the countries agreed to
strengthen the protections for aliens, to formalize consultations through the Border
Liaison Mechanisms, and to undertake joint studies of the migration phenomenon. Since
August 1997 when the United States launched a buildup of the Border Patrol along the
Texas-New Mexico border under Operation Rio Grande, Mexico has complained that the
initiative is contrary to the spirit of the joint migration efforts. In November 1997, the
countries issued a Binational Study on Migration that found that unauthorized migration
carries costs for both countries and makes migrants vulnerable to exploitation. In
1998-2000, the countries have pursued a Border Safety Campaign to reduce violence on the
border through public information campaigns, search and rescue programs, and cooperation
between U.S. and Mexican officials at the border.
Drug Trafficking Issues
Nature of the Problem. Mexico is a
major source of production of heroin and marijuana for the U.S. market and has become the
major transit point in the flow of cocaine from South America. According to the State
Department, it was the source of about 20-30% of the heroin, up to 70% of the foreign
grown marijuana, and the transit point for 55-60% of the cocaine shipped to the United
States. While U.S.-Mexico efforts in this area have been marked by distrust at various
times, particularly because of the killing of U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)
agents in the mid-1980s and the kidnaping of Mexican officials in 1990, relations have
been improving in recent years. In response to U.S. criticisms of widespread corruption,
Mexican officials point to the numerous Mexican policemen and soldiers killed in
confrontations with narcotics traffickers as evidence of their commitment to controlling
the problem. They also criticize U.S. officials for failing to do more to control the
demand for drugs in the United States, noting that the problem is one of supply and
demand.
Presidential Certifications and
Congressional Reactions. In general, the Clinton Administration's drug control policy
in the domestic area stresses drug treatment and prevention, and in the international area
it has devoted more attention to eradication and source country institution building,
particularly law enforcement and judicial institutions. Under recent pressure from
Congress, through mechanisms like the Western Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act and the
Supplemental FY1998 Appropriations Act, which were included in the Omnibus Consolidated
and Emergency Supplemental Appropriation Act of 1998 (H.R. 4328/P.L. 105-277),
additional funding was provided to strengthen the Border Patrol and other international
interdiction efforts, including $90 million in Southwest Border enhancements. Moreover, in
other actions to encourage greater counter-narcotics efforts in Mexico, in 1997, 1998, and
1999, congressional resolutions to disapprove President Clinton's certification of Mexico
as fully cooperative in drug control efforts were introduced in both houses but never
fully enacted. (For details, see CRS Report 98-174 (pdf), Mexican Drug Certification
Issues: U.S. Congressional Action, 1986-2000.)
The Administration's 2000 policy, essentially a continuation
of the 1999 five-year policy plan, was announced in April 2000 by President Clinton and
General Barry McCaffrey, head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. It calls for
a strengthened anti-drug program, including continuation of the publicity campaign
targeting children, and measures to enhance interdiction along the southwest border and to
strengthen source countries capabilities.
President Clinton certified on March 1, 2000, as he has in
previous years, that Mexico was a fully cooperative country in efforts to control drug
trafficking as required by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended. He cited the
broad array of cooperation between the countries, the unprecedented agreement on
performance measures of effectiveness to gauge the success of the joint anti-drug
strategy, enhanced maritime cooperation, significant increases in seizures and eradication
of illicit drugs, and the extradition of two Mexican national drug fugitives to the United
States. "Although there were some successes in drug law enforcement cooperation with
the U.S.," the State Department's International Narcotics Control Strategy Report on
1999, accompanying the certification, noted that "the year saw limited development in
building corruption-resistant law enforcement institutions, including specialized 'vetted
units.'" (For additional information on Mexico's efforts, see CRS Report RL30475, Mexico's
Counter-Narcotics Efforts Under Zedillo, December 1994 to March 2000.)
In anticipation of the Administration's certification of
Mexico, the Chairmen of the House International Relations Committee and the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee wrote to Secretary of State Albright to urge non-certification. Some
Members of Congress were critical of Mexico's counter-narcotics performance in two
hearings about the time of the President's certification: the hearing on February 29,
2000, by the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources of the
House Committee on Governmental Reform; and the hearing on March 21, 2000, by the Senate
Caucus on International Narcotics Control. However, no resolutions of disapproval were
introduced in either house to overturn the President's certification during the 30-day
congressional review period. (For details on this and previous years' actions, see CRS
Report 98-174 (pdf), Mexican Drug Certification Issues: U.S. Congressional Action,
1986-2000.)
Political and Human Rights
Issues
Concerns over Elections and Political
Rights. Over the years, major attention has focused on the fairness of elections in
Mexico since the Institutional Revolutionary Party or PRI has controlled all presidential
and nearly all gubernatorial posts since the 1930s, and has had solid control of the two
chambers of the Mexican Congress as well. Following the controversial July 1988
presidential election, President Salinas proposed and the Congress enacted three electoral
reforms. In subsequent years, opposition governors were elected in several states, and
nationwide mid-term legislative elections in August 1991 were considered to be generally
fair. Presidential and legislative elections were held under peaceful conditions on August
21, 1994, with Ernesto Zedillo of the long ruling PRI winning the presidency with 50.18%
of the valid votes. In subsequent local elections, the opposition PAN won governorships in
many states, particularly in the period following the early 1995 period of financial
crisis and austerity. In elections in November 1996 the PRI won the largest number of
municipalities in the important state of Mexico, but lost several major cities to
opposition parties. In elections in the state of Morelos in mid-March 1997, the PRI lost
the majority in the state legislature, and lost control of the capital city of Cuernavaca,
but won the largest number of municipalities. In mid-October 1997 elections, the PRI won
all mayoralties and a majority in the state legislature in Tabasco amid charges of
electoral irregularities, but the opposition parties won most of the major cities in
Veracruz.
In late July 1996, the parties agreed, after on and off
negotiations, on major electoral reforms for the July 1997 legislative and local
elections. These included the direct election of the mayor of the Mexico City Federal
District, access to the media, and controls on campaign spending. The required
constitutional reforms were unanimously approved by the Congress in late July and early
August 1996, but in mid-November 1996, the PRI majority modified the legislation to make
running in coalitions more difficult and to provide $250 million of public funding for
elections, with about half of this amount going to the PRI based on electoral returns in
the last election.
On July 6, 1997, Mexico held nationwide midterm legislative
elections along with gubernatorial contests in 6 states and the first direct election of
the Mayor of the Mexico City Federal District. Although the Zedillo-supported PRI captured
39% of the valid votes to remain the single largest party, it lost its long-held majority
in the Chamber of Deputies, it lost the two-thirds majority in the Senate, it lost two of
the six governorships, and it lost the all-important race for Mayor of Mexico City. This
prompted observers to suggest that the system was becoming more pluralistic and that
passage of legislation would require more negotiation among the parties. The PAN won 27%
of the vote and two governorships, reinforcing its image of strength in urban and northern
areas. The PRD won 26% of the vote, and performed particularly well in central Mexico,
including victory by two time Presidential candidate Cuauhtemoc Cardenas in the race for
mayor of the Mexico City Federal District.
Opposition parties in the Chamber stayed together to press
for modifications in President Zedillo's budget, but the PAN eventually voted with the PRI
after it obtained increased support for local government. Cuauhtemoc Cardenas was
installed as Mayor on December 5, 1997.
The gubernatorial elections on July 5, 1998, were generally
considered fair by all parties, with the PRI retaining control in Durango, regaining
control from the PAN in Chihuahua, and losing control to the PRD in Zacatecas. In
gubernatorial elections on August 2, 1998, the PRI won in Veracruz and Oaxaca, but the PAN
won in Aguascalientes. In gubernatorial elections on October 25, 1998, the PRI was
declared the winner in Tamaulipas, but opposition parties complained of irregularities. In
gubernatorial elections on November 8, 1998, the PRI won in Puebla and Sinaloa, although
the PRD won in Tlaxcala. In February 1999 elections, the PRI won gubernatorial elections
in Hidalgo and Quintana Roo. In early July 1999, in elections viewed as a preview of the
coming presidential elections, the PRI won the governorship in a disputed election in
populous Mexico state against a divided opposition, but a PAN-PRD coalition won the
governorship in the small state of Nayarit.
In late September 1999, the PRI won the governorship in
Coahuila against an opposition coalition, but in early September 1999, the PRI lost the
race for mayor in Acapulco to an opposition coalition in the state of Guerrero. During
late 1999, the parties picked candidates for the July 2000 presidential election. The PRI
announced in mid-May 1999 that it would select the candidate of the party by a direct and
open primary in November 1999, and former Government Minister Francisco Labastida was
elected decisively over three other candidates in the November 7, 1999 nationwide primary.
Efforts by the PAN and the PRD to agree on a common candidate for the opposition came to
an impasse in late September 1999, and Vicente Fox was designated as the presidential
candidate for the PAN, and Cuauhtemoc Cardenas was designated as the presidential
candidate for the PRD.
Allegations of Human Rights Abuses.
Charges of human rights abuse in Mexico, cited by human rights groups and the State
Department's annual reports, include allegations of torture and harassment by law
enforcement and narcotics control agents; threats against journalists, academics, and
human rights monitors; and killings or "disappearances" of prominent critics and
opposition politicians. Other abuses include prison deficiencies, discrimination against
women and indigenous peoples, and extensive child labor in the informal sector.
President Zedillo has taken a number of steps to deal with
these abuses, including continuing support for the National Human Rights Commission. He
named Antonio Lozano of the opposition PAN as Attorney General in 1994 and ordered him to
carry out a major reform of the judicial and law enforcement system to eliminate
corruption and human rights abuse. Judicial reform was approved in December 1994,
increasing the independence and autonomy of the Supreme Court and of the Attorney
General's Office. After trying several approaches on Chiapas, including an attempt to
arrest Zapatista leaders, President Zedillo sought a negotiated settlement of the conflict
but it has remained stalled, despite agreement on indigenous issues in 1996. In July 1996,
the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights visited Mexico for the first time, at the
invitation of the Mexican government, and issued a report in September 1998, that
indicated awareness of the difficulties, given the struggles against insurgencies and drug
trafficking, and the various advances, but noted continuing failure to prosecute those
guilty of human rights abuses.
Major attention has focused on the Dec. 22, 1997 killing of
45 indigenous peasants in the village of Acteal in the state of Chiapas by armed men said
to be linked to the PRI. President Zedillo quickly asked federal authorities to take over
the case, vowed to prosecute those responsible, and appointed a new Minister of Government
and a new peace negotiator for Chiapas. In subsequent action, the Governor of Chiapas
resigned and federal authorities arrested more than 40 people, including the mayor of
nearby Chenalho. Mexican and international human rights groups alleged that para-military
groups linked to the PRI were responsible, and they called for independent investigations,
for removal of the military from the region, and for renewed efforts to negotiate peace in
Chiapas. Although some critics have charged that U.S. military assistance to Mexico may be
involved, the Attorney General's Office concluded that the military was not involved and
that revenge for a previous killing was the most likely cause for the incident. In July
and September 1999, a Mexican court sentenced 44 members of an armed group to 35-year
sentences for their involvement in the Acteal massacres, U.N. Special Reporter on
extrajudicial killings Asthma Jahangir has made critical comments about continuing
impunity after her investigations of the cases.
LEGISLATION
P.L. 106-65/S. 1059 (Warner)
Department of Defense Authorization for FY2000. Introduced and reported (S.Rept. 106-50)
by the Senate Committee on Armed Services on May 17, 1999, and approved by the Senate on
May 27, 1999, with no provision dealing with Mexico. The House version (H.R. 1401) was
introduced on April 14, 1999 by Mr. Spence and was reported by the Committee on Armed
Services (H.Rept.
106-162) on May 24, 1999. During floor consideration, on June 10, 1999, the House
approved 242-181 the Traficant amendment, similar to a measure in previous House versions
of the DoD authorization (H.R.
1119 in 1997, H.R.
3616 in 1998), that would authorize the assignment, if requested by the Attorney
General or the Secretary of the Treasury, of DoD personnel to assist INS or Customs in
border control activities. The amendment provides that local officials would be notified
of any such assignment, and that the personnel would be trained and be accompanied by
civilian law enforcement officials. Proponents argue that the measure is necessary to stem
the flow of drugs and weapons across the border, while critics say that the President has
inherent powers to act in an emergency, and that the National Guard is already involved in
defending the border. H.R.
1401 passed the House, amended, on June 10, 1999. S. 1059 passed the House
on June 14, 1999, after inserting the text of H.R. 1401 after the
enacting clause. The conference report (H.Rept. 106-301),
filed Aug. 5, 1999, calls in Section 1027 for the Department of Defense to plan for and
prepare a report on the benefits and risks of using the military in the designated
circumstances, and the number of military personnel already performing such assistance.
The conference report passed the House and Senate on Sept. 15 and Sept. 22, 1999,
respectively. Signed into law on Oct. 5, 1999.
P.L. 106-120\H.R. 1555
Intelligence Authorization Act for FY2000. Introduced by Mr. Goss on April 26, 1999, and
approved by the House on May 13, 1999. During Senate floor debate on July 20, 1999, the
Senate approved an amendment by Senator Coverdell to strengthen the President's authority
under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to block assets in the
United States of designated international drug traffickers. The Senate approved the bill
on July 21, 1999. In related action, the House passed H.R. 3164, the Foreign
Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act, by a vote of 385-26 under suspension of rules on Nov.
2, 1999. The conference report on H.R. 1555 (H.Rept. 105-457)
was filed on Nov. 5, 1999, with Title VIII essentially containing the text of H.R. 3164, with the
addition of a Judicial Review Commission to examine judicial review and due process issues
raised in the previous debate. The House passed the conference report on H.R. 1555 by voice vote
on Nov. 9, 1999, and the Senate passed it by voice vote on Nov. 19, 1999. Signed into law
on Dec. 3, 1999.
FOR ADDITIONAL READING
CRS Issue Briefs
CRS Issue Brief IB88093. Drug Control: International
Policy and Options, by Raphael Perl.
CRS Issue Brief IB10044. Immigration
Legislation and Issues in the 106th Congress, by Andorra Bruno,
Coordinator.
CRS Reports
CRS Report RS20127. Drug Certification of Mexico in 1999:
Arguments For and Against
Congressional Resolutions of Disapproval, by K.
Larry Storrs.
CRS Report RS20183. Immigration
and Naturalization Service's FY2000 Budget, by William J. Krouse.
CRS Report 98-174 (pdf). Mexican Drug Certification
Issues: U.S. Congressional Action, 1986-2000, by K. Larry Storrs.
CRS Report RL30080 (pdf). Mexico and Narcotics
Certification: Consequences of Decertification, by K. Larry Storrs.
CRS Report 97-282. Mexico: Chronology of Major Events,
1993-1997, by K. Larry Storrs and Patricia Nugent.
CRS Report 97-361. Mexico's Anti-Drug Efforts: Effects of
Past U.S. Pressures and Sanctions, by K. Larry Storrs.
CRS Report RL30098. Mexico's Counter-Narcotics Efforts
Under Zedillo, December 1994 to March 1999, by K. Larry Storrs.
CRS Report RL30475. Mexico's Counter-Narcotics Efforts
Under Zedillo, December 1994 to March 2000, by K. Larry Storrs.
CRS Report 97-291 (pdf). NAFTA: Related Environmental
Issues and Initiatives, by Mary E. Tiemann.
CRS Report RS20229 (pdf). NAFTA: Economic Effects on the
United States After Five Years, by Arlene Wilson.
CRS Report 98-782 (pdf). NAFTA: Estimated U.S. Job
"Gains" and "Losses" by State Over 5 Years, by Mary Jane Bolle.
CRS Report 97-811 (pdf). NAFTA, Mexican Trade Policy, and
U.S.-Mexico Trade: A Longer Term Perspective, by J.F. Hornbeck.
Return to CONTENTS section of this Issue
Brief.
|
*
These CRS reports were produced by the Congressional Research Service, a branch of the Library of Congress providing nonpartisan research reports to members of the House and Senate. The National Council for Science and the Environment (NCSE) has made these reports available to the public at large, but the Congressional Research Service is not affiliated with the NCSE or the National Library for the Environment (NLE). This web site is not endorsed by or associated with the Congressional Research Service. The material contained in the CRS reports does not necessarily express the views of NCSE, its supporters, or sponsors. The information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. NCSE disclaims all warranties, either express or implied, including the warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. In no event shall NCSE be liable for any damages.
|
|
|