163 



National Corn Growers 



Fully supports the agreement. It eliminates Mexico's restrictive import licensing 

 and replaces it with a tariff rate quota at a level that is a substantial improvement 

 over the recent trend. The agreement will also improve sales of value-added agricul- 

 tural products to Mexico that will increase demand for corn. Through the increased 

 demand for pork, the agreement will create opportunities for jobs in the livestock 

 breeding, feed milling, veterinary services, and meat packing sectors. NAFTA will 

 create wealth in Mexico that will lessen the incentive for Mexican citizens to leave 

 their nation. 



National Cotton Council of America and Cottongrowers Warehouse Asso- 

 ciation 



No official position on the agreement at this time. Its preliminary report focuses 

 primarily on raw cotton. The final agreement does not meet two of its most impor- 

 tant goals: a fiber-forward rule and maintaining Section 22 cotton quotas. Without 

 a fiber-forward rule, Mexican and Canadian producers will be able to purchase non- 

 NAFTA raw cotton, primarily from Pakistan and the former Soviet Union, below 

 world market prices. The Council's summary provides more detailed information on 

 its other concerns. 



National Cottonseed Products Association 



Generally supports the agreement and its eventual elimination on cottonseed oil 

 tariffs. The one criticism it has is that "PBSY" cottonseed oil is not considered a 

 crude vegetable oil and will be subject to a tariff double that of other crude vegeta- 

 ble oils. This should be corrected by including PBSY cottonseed oil in the Mexican 

 definition of crude cottonseed oil. 



National Farmers Organization 



Opposes the agreement. Mexican agriculture is not a threat to the United States, 

 but the agreement will not result in any net gains. The agreement should be renego- 

 tiated and provide for adequate enforcement of rules of origin, S&P measures, and 

 environmental standards. Section 22 and the Meat Import Act, environmental and 

 S&P measures tied to the opening of our borders, and the establishment of an ade- 

 quate infrastructure along the border should be part of a renegotiated agreement. 



National Farmers Union 



Opposes the agreement, it should be renegotiated. Any new agreement should 

 maintain Section 22 and meat import law; count Mexican imports against meat im- 

 port law triggers; protect livestock producers from the risk of disease; count imports 

 of Mexican Tbeef toward trigger levels in the meat import law; assess user fees to 

 importers to enhance border inspection; require county of origin labels; prohibit ad- 

 ditional countries from joining the NAFTA unless entire agreement is renegotiated; 

 provide protection for Mexican family farmers; protect American producers form Ca- 

 nadian transportation and pricing structure; maintain tariffs on imports from com- 

 panies that exploit workers, worker safety or environment; and solve Mexico's for- 

 eign debt problem. 



National Forest Products Association 



Supports the agreement because at the end of a 10-year transition period it will 

 provide unrestricted access to the Mexican market. Achieved important nontariff ob- 

 jectives. While it would have liked to see tariffs eliminated over a shorter period, 

 the U.S. industry will be better off with the agreement than without it. One concern 

 it does have is the possible lack of enforcement for collecting duties from 

 maquiladora companies. 



National Grange 



Supports the agreement. It should provide long-term growth for U.S. agriculture, 

 and new trade agreements like the NAFTA are more important to agriculture and 

 rural America than any farm bill. Implementing legislation should strengthen the 

 rules of origin and further protect import sensitive crops. 



National Grain and Feed Association 



The Association strongly supports NAFTA. The agreement is of vital importance 

 to the grain and feed industry, and the economy in general. Agricultural producers, 

 processors, exporters, and consumers will benefit from free trade with Mexico. Ap- 

 proval of the agreement should not be linked to unresolved issues under the U.S.- 

 Canada Free Trade Agreement. 



National Hay Association, Inc. 



Does not support the agreement because it does not address Canadian export sub- 

 sidies for forage trade. It will continue to withhold support until Canada is pre- 

 vented from undermining U.S. competitiveness in the Mexican market. 



