53 



Mr. HiLLlARD. But do you or someone on your staff who was in- 

 volved in the negotiations have information? 



Ambassador Kantor. Let me 



Mr. HiLLlARD. There is a follow-up question I want to ask. 



Ambassador Kantor. You have asked a very serious and impor- 

 tant question. Whether or not it was raised in the negotiations 

 themselves over the North American Free-Trade Agreement as was 

 signed by President Bush, these are issues that need to be nego- 

 tiated now. We believe they can be negotiated and implemented 

 without reopening the body of the NAFTA because they go beyond, 

 and are apart from, and are complimentary to, what has already 

 been done. 



So we believe that can be done both legally and is in the best 

 interest of the North American Free-Trade Agreement and in the 

 best interest of creating a better situation in North America for 

 workers and business, especially in our country. 



I think that goes to your question. We are very careful, though, 

 not to renegotiate NAFTA itself, the four comers of the document 

 that has already been signed. 



Mr. HiLLlARD. I asked that question because it seems to me that 

 we don't have an agreement. 



Ambassador Kantor. Without the supplemental agreements, the 

 President of the United States has said that he would not send the 

 present NAFTA to the Congress. 



Mr. HiLLlARD. I understand from that standpoint that we don't 

 have an agreement. I am talking about that — even those that nego- 

 tiated that left the table shaking hands felt as if they had some- 

 thing. 



Ambassador KANTOR. They did. 



So there is a full and complete disclosure here and a 



Mr. HiLLLUlD. Let me cut it short. 



The benefits in the agreement — are they worth it to this country 

 to the extent that we will forego if we are unable to get all we want 

 in further negotiations on the side agreements? 



Ambassador Kantor. No, but the benefits to the this country are 

 substantial. And those are not contradictory answers. No, we need 

 the supplemental agreements. Yes, there are substantial benefits. 

 We lower tariff barriers substantially, which will increase U.S. 

 business and create jobs in this country. Of the 24 studies that 

 have been done, 23 have shown that employment increases under 

 NAFTA. 



Two, we eliminate nontariff barriers which have been harmful. 

 We protect intellectual property. We have a dispute resolution 

 mechanism in this that I think makes sense. We protect invest- 

 ments and financial services and the rules of origin are very tough. 



So in all those ways which I have just articulated for you, this 

 agreement makes sense, but only if we can have these supple- 

 mental agreements to go along with it. 



Mr. HiLLlARD. Thank you. 



Mr. English. Thank you very much, Mr. Hilliard. 



Mr. Pomeroy. 



Mr. Pomeroy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Ambassador, I have listened closely this morning as well and 

 I commend you. I think that the breadth of detailed knowledge you 



