Page "Labor unions in the United States" Paragraph 47

However, Mayer has written that it was precisely unions ’ opposition to NAFTA overall that jeopardized organized labor ’ s ability to influence the debate on labor standards in a significant way .< ref name =" MayerFrederick "> Mayer, Frederick.

Interpreting NAFTA: The Science and Art of Political Analysis.

Columbia International Affairs Online ( 2006 ) < http :// www. ciaonet. org. libproxy. lib. unc. edu / book / mayer / mayer06. html > ( 3 Apr 2009 )</ ref > During Clinton ’ s presidential campaign, labor unions wanted NAFTA to include a side deal to provide for a kind of international social charter, a set of standards that would be enforceable both in domestic courts and through international institutions.

Mickey Kantor, then U. S. trade representative, had strong ties to organized labor and believed that he could get unions to come along with the agreement, particularly if they were given a strong voice in the negotiation process.

However, when it became clear that Mexico would not stand for this kind of an agreement, some critics from the labor movement would not settle for any viable alternatives.

In response, part of the labor movement wanted to declare their open opposition to the agreement, and to push for NAFTA ’ s rejection in Congress.

Ultimately, the ambivalence of labor groups led those within the Administration who supported NAFTA to believe that strengthening NAFTA ’ s labor side agreement too much would cost more votes among Republicans than it would garner among Democrats, and would make it harder for the United States to elicit support from Mexico.