NAFTA and Immigration

Over a decade ago, NAFTA proponents claimed that the trade accord, which did noit include any major migration provisions, would solve the problem of undocumented migration from Mexico.  But despite NAFTA and the dramatic — indeed unprecedented — increase in border enforcement over the last ten years, the undocumented immigant population has doubled from 5-6 million to 10-12 million, with the majority of the migrants from Mexico. In a N.Y. Times article (here) entitled “Nafta Should Have Stopped Illegal Immigration, Right?,” LOUIS UCHITELLE analyzes the complex reasons why NAFTA has failed not descreased migration pressures in Mexio.  The story begins:

THE North American Free Trade Agreement, enacted by Congress 14 years ago, held out an alluring promise: the agreement would reduce illegal immigration from Mexico. Mexicans, the argument went, would enjoy the prosperity and employment that the trade agreement would undoubtedly generate — and not feel the need to cross the border into the United States. But today the number of illegal migrants has only continued to rise. Why didn’t Nafta curb this immigration? The answer is complicated, of course. But a major factor lies in the assumptions made in drafting the trade agreement, assumptions about the way governments would behave (that is, rationally) and the way markets would respond (rationally, as well). Neither happened, yet Nafta remains the model for trade agreements with developing Latin countries, including the Central American Free Trade Agreement, passed by Congress in 2005. Three more Nafta-like agreements are now pending in Congress — with Panama, Columbia and Peru.

KJ