Annotations for Places: Canada

This is news from Latino USA. I'm María Martin. Hearings have begun on the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico. While concurrently in Washington, Latino leaders held a national Latino seminar on NAFTA. Andres Jimenez of the University of California at Berkeley says this is the first time Latino organizations attempt to formulate a common strategy on a major national question because of NAFTA's far-reaching impact on US Latinos.

The impact of job displacement, environmental concerns, and not just protection of spotted owls, but protection of water in the air where people live along the border.

Latino organizations, including the National Council of La Raza, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Puerto Rican Institute for Policy Studies have signed on to a Latino consensus position on NAFTA, which calls for parallel agreements on immigration, job retraining, the environment, and for a North American Development Bank. Other organizations, including the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, accept NAFTA as negotiated.

Overnight, Latinos were an issue in Washington DC.

Where US Latinos stand on the Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico.

The jobs that are expected to be lost are the low-skilled, low-paying jobs that so many Latinos in this country hold.

Also, Afro-Cuban jazz pioneer, Mario Bauzá, and some thoughts on what's really important.

Here on top of the earth, we have everything a man can need. What more can one ask for?

All this here on Latino USA, but first: las noticias.

I'm María Hinojosa. Trade talks are now underway regarding the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico. NAFTA perhaps, as no other US economic initiative, will have a significant impact on US Latinos. With us to speak about the future of the controversial free trade agreement are three journalists who cover Washington DC politics: Sandra Marquez of the Hispanic Link News Service; freelance journalist, Zita Arocha; and José Carreño, DC Bureau chief for the Mexican daily, El Universal.

The biggest misperception in this whole thing is that even if NAFTA is a new document, in a way, it is something that is already happening at the border, as well, the people who's in Texas and California can say. Now what is going to happen? I think that there will be a lot of pressures on Mexico and the United States mostly in the environment and labor problems. Congressman Gephardt and a number of other Democratic freshmen went to Tijuana to take a look at the ecological situation there. They came out saying, "No way that way. At least the actual treaty has to be upgraded." We'll see a lot of the arguments in the next few months about it.

In fact, we've seen a lot of arguments already. Sandra, how much has the debate over NAFTA divided the Latino community in particular?

I think there's tremendous division among US Latinos on the issue of NAFTA because primarily, the jobs that are expected to be lost as a result of this agreement are the low-skilled, low-paying jobs that so many Latinos in this country hold. So, there is concern that the jobs that Latinos have are going to be exported to Mexico, but at the same time, Latinos realize that they have this intrinsic link with their Mexican kin across the border. And so, they realize there's tremendous potential that because of Latinos' bicultural skills that they can really tap into this and benefit more so than other Americans in this country.

The Latino population is also divided in terms of convenience. For instance, in Texas, there is a lot of people who's in favor of NAFTA because most of the import-export businesses are going through Texas and of course, they're getting a boost out of it. But in California, for instance, where there is a lot of Latinos in this low end of the industry, they're having a lot of problems, a lot of hesitations about it. So, I think that it is also related a lot with where are the jobs.

I think the Mexican government has realized that US Latinos can be very good promoters of this plan. And they have started a NAFIN fund, a $20 million fund for US Latino business leaders to create joint ventures with business partners in Mexico. And US Hispanic chambers of commerce here in this country have also been leading in terms of creating these trade partnerships and expose and taking people from the United States to Mexico and really helping to create these links.

There's another benefit to Latinos and I think Latinos are beginning to see this, that if the agreement leads in less immigration from Mexico to the United States…from Latin America in general to the United States, then those low-end jobs will not be taken away as easily as they would be if we continue to see hundreds of thousands of people coming across the border every year. There is some resistance on the part of some Latinos for fear that a lot of the low-end jobs will go to Mexico, but at the same time, there is also a realization that there will be benefits long term that will come from fewer immigrants coming over and you know, taking US jobs at the low end.

Thank you very much, Sandra Marquez, Zita Arocha, and José Carreño for joining us here on Latino USA.

Welcome this evening, César Chávez of the United Farm Workers of America.

[Clapping]

Very early in our struggle, we found that…we really couldn't beat the growers at their own game…in their own turf. And taking a page from…Gandhi and Dr. King and others, we came to the conclusion that we had to involve half of the world to beat the growers and that we could not do it through public policy. Workers are not covered by any protective laws for collective bargaining. And…those local courts will issue out injunctions like…they were going out of style. We were going to strike. But we also found out that they couldn’t really…although they're very powerful, that they really couldn't reach out to Chicago or Boston or even San Francisco or [unintelligible] or other places…across the border to Canada or Mexico. And that there, we could begin to have a more level playing field.

I'm talking now of public action or the boycott. It is a boycott… public action…that saved this union. It is the only way we've ever made any progress, is through the boycott. We've never won anything without the boycott. The boycott or a threat of the boycott. It's a terrible irony that in our day and our age, our country produces more food than what it really needs…yet the men, women, and children whose labor harvests this food often go to bed hungry. That's a terrible irony, and that's why we're here, and we ask you to join us, to join us to put a stop to that. Thank you very much.

[Clapping]

[Corrido music about César Chávez]

This is news from Latino USA. I'm Maria Martin. The future of the North American Free Trade Agreement remains in question. Since the US district judge ruled the Clinton administration may not present NAFTA for approval in Congress until its impact on the environment is determined.

It caught some people by surprise.

Judge Charles Richey's ruling was a victory for environmentalists opposed to NAFTA and a disappointing setback to its supporters like Abel Guerra of the National Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

We feel NAFTA provides many environmental safeguards, which are now nonexistent. The defeat of NAFTA would actually harm the environment more than these environmental groups know.

Opponents of the present trade agreements say the court ruling validates their long-standing concerns about the treaty. Labor organizer Victor Munoz of the AFL-CIO says he's hopeful the recent court decision will lead to negotiating an entirely new trade agreement.

If it could be renegotiated completely, I think it would give us a very good opportunity to create a much better trade agreement than the one we have right now.

The Clinton administration plans to shut down phone services allowing people in this country to call Cuba through Canada. State Department officials say companies advertising toll-free numbers, which link callers to Cuba, may violate the U.S. trade embargo. The embargo against Cuba was established more than 30 years ago and has been expanded in recent years.

Latin jazz great Mario Bauzá died July 11 of cancer in his Manhattan home, just blocks from where I live. Mario Bauzá, an integral part of New York's Latin jazz scene, was 82 years old.

I remember this great musician sitting on a milk crate outside a bodega, surrounded by friends, drinking coffee, and enjoying the simple things of life. You would've never known it by seeing him that this small, tender, smiley man had totally revolutionized American music.

In the 1940s, he influenced popular music by innovating a new musical style which mixed popular Afro-Cuban rhythms with American jazz.

Emilio San Pedro prepared this remembrance of Latin jazz legend Mario Bauzá.

[Afro-Cuban jazz]

Mario Bauzá was first exposed to American jazz in 1926, when he visited New York. In 1930, anxious to become a part of that scene, Bauzá left his native Havana for New York, frustrated that in Cuba, Afro-Cuban music was considered merely the music of the streets, not the music of the sophisticated nightclubs, country clubs, and hotels of pre-revolutionary Havana.

Had to happen outside of Cuba before the Cuban people convinced themself what they had, themself over there. They didn't pay no attention to that. When I got big in United States, Cuba begin to move into that line of music.

[Afro-Cuban jazz]

In the 1930s, Bauzá performed with some of New York's best-known jazz musicians, like Chick Webb and Cab Calloway. In fact, in those days, Bauzá was responsible for introducing singer Ella Fitzgerald to Chick Webb, thus helping to launch her career. It was also Bauzá who gave Dizzy Gillespie his first break, with the Cab Calloway Orchestra.

During their time touring and working with Cab Calloway, Mario Bauzá and Dizzy Gillespie, along with the Afro-Cuban percussionist Chano Pozo, played around with Afro-Cuban rhythm and jazz arrangements and created something entirely new: Afro-Cuban jazz.

[Machito--Sopa de pichon]

In the early 1940s, Mario Bauzá formed the legendary band Machito and his Afro-Cubans, along with his brother-in-law, Francisco Perez, who was called Machito. Bauzá was the musical director of the band, and he composed and arranged some of the group's most memorable songs.

[Machito--Sopa de pichon]

The sensation caused by Machito and his Afro-Cubans and by other Latin musicians in the 1940s made New York the focal point of a vibrant Latin music scene.

It's the scene of the Mambo kings you know, and that's why a lot of people will say Mambo is not Cuban music or it's not Mexican music. Mambo is New York music.

Enrique Fernandez writes about Latin music for the Village Voice.

It was here that this kind of music became very hot, that it really galvanized a lot of people, that had really attracted a lot of musicians from different genres that wanted to jam with it, and that created those great encounters between Latin music practitioners and jazz practitioners, particularly Black American jazz practitioners, that brought all this stuff together that later on, generated salsa and it generated Latin jazz and a lot of other things.

[Machito--Si si no no]

Groups like Machito and his Afro-Cubans were responsible for sparking a Latin dance craze in the United States, from New York to Hollywood. Mario Bauzá's sister-in-law, Graciela Pérez, began singing with Bauzá's orchestra in 1943.

Pero jurate que la música de esta…[transition to English dub] The music made by Machito's orchestra created such a revolution that you could say people began to enjoy because dance schools sprang up to teach the mamba and the guaguanco and all that [transition back to original audio]…el guaguanco todo todo.

Graciela and Mario left Machito's band in 1976 to form their own group, Mario Bauzá and his Afro-Cuban jazz Orchestra. Achieving recognition came slowly for the new band as general audiences lost interest in the traditional Afro-Cuban jazz sounds.

But in the late 1980s, Bauzá's music experienced a resurgence in popularity. His orchestra played to packed houses in the United States, Canada, and Europe. And in the last two years, Bauzá still active and passionate about his music, recorded three albums worth of material.

Meringue, meringue from San Domingo. Cumbia's cumbia from Colombia. Afro-Cuban is Cuban. That's why I've got to keep a bunch of these Afro-Cuban rhythms. Danzón Cubano, la danza Cubano, el bolero Cubano, el cha-cha-cha Cubano, el mambo es Cubano, guaguanco Cubano, la Colombia es Cubana.So I've got to call it Afro-Cuban, yeah.

In a 1991 interview, I spoke with Mario Bauzá about his extraordinary musical output.

You've brought out these great musicians, you've helped create or created Afro-Cuban jazz, brought Latin music and Latins to Broadway.

That's it.

And you're 80 years old.

Yes.

Many people at 80 years old are sitting by the pool or in the rocking chair and whatever. You don't look like it.

You know me. It ain't going to be like that.

What else could you do at this point, what more?

I don't know. I ain't through, I ain't through. I just wanted my music to be elevated. That's why I want to record this suite now. I want to see the word, music is music. You tell me what kind of music. I like any kind of music that we're playing. And that's what I tried to do, present my music different way. Some people might don't like this, don't like that, but when they hear that, they have a right to choose for. That's what I want them to do.

[Mario Bauza--Carnegie Hall 100]

Mario Bauzá worked steadily until his death. He recently released a compact disc on the German record label Messidor called My Time is Now.

For "Latino USA," I'm Emilio San Pedro.

[Mario Bauza--Carnegie Hall 100]

As representatives from the US, Canada, and Mexico prepare to enter into the final round of negotiations regarding the final form of the North American Free Trade Agreement, in San Antonio, Texas, bankers from both countries met recently to discuss infrastructure needs along the 2000-mile stretch between the United States and Mexico. Latino USA's Maria Martin prepared this report.

There is always a lot of talk about what we're going to do and when we're going to do it, what the border does need and what the border does not need.

Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and his Mexican counterpart, Mexico Secretary of Social Development Luis Colosio, touted as a strong possibility to succeed President Salinas, convened the gathering of government officials and some 400 business executives. Represented were some of the largest corporations in the US and Mexico. They came to make deals and to discuss ways to bring badly-needed infrastructure to the border area. A region which, in the last 10 years has seen a dramatic increase in population along with rising environmental pollution and deteriorating roads, bridges and sewer and water systems.

It's a development problem is what it really is. We are dealing with a border that is unique in the world, that is a linkage between the most developed country in the world and relatively poor country of which gap you'll find nowhere else. In Europe, the largest gaps are about a four to one difference. In US/Mexico it's a 10 to 1 difference.

UCLA economist, Raul Hinojosa, says the current discussion regarding financing for border infrastructure in anticipation of NAFTA presents a major challenge, since neither the government of Mexico nor this country will be able to afford the steep price tag of cleaning up and building up the border.

The real issue is how do we get the economies of North America such that there's rising living standards and environmental standards on both sides of the border? That is a concrete problem that is not going to be solved by simply reducing tariffs. That's going to have to mobilize both government and the capitalists of the private sector to get involved jointly in solving the environmental problems and solving the infrastructure and social infrastructure, physical infrastructure, housing, all of these very serious problems

As a way of dealing with those problems, the coalition of Latino organizations calling itself the Latino Consensus on NAFTA has come up with a proposal to establish a North American development bank. According to its proponents, including the National Council of La Raza and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the so-called NAD Bank would be able to fund 20 billion dollars of infrastructure with 1 billion of startup investment. Antonio Gonzalez of the Southwest Voter Research Institute in Los Angeles was at the finance conference advocating for the development bank proposal.

This was the only viable proposal put on the table. People heard it. People saw it. The media grabbed onto it, and I think very soon the administration may indeed embrace the development bank as the kind of third pillar of his NAFTA package. First pillar being NAFTA. Second pillar being the supplementary negotiations on labor and environmental. Third pillar being the development bank or financing mechanism, and the still missing element would be the new package of current US laws to retrain and support displaced workers.

Legislation to establish a North American Development Bank has been introduced in Congress by California representative Esteban Torres. But others say the development bank may not be the best way to finance border infrastructure, that perhaps existing institutions such as the Inter-American Bank could do the job. Still another idea is to establish a border transaction fee. Economist Hinojosa, a proponent of the development bank believes this solution is not viable considering the present economic reality along the border.

These are already poor communities right now, and you're going to be taxing the trade that you're going to try to enhance, in fact, for the benefits on both sides of the border.

The next few weeks will be key for the future of the North American Free Trade Agreement. As negotiations on the treaty and supplementary agreements on labor standards and the environment continue, and as proponents and opponents of the treaty gear up for the final vote in Congress. Meanwhile, polls show many Americans haven't even heard of NAFTA and in the Latino community there's been a steady erosion in support for the treaty as concern has grown about the possibility of job losses to Mexico. Latino organizations lobbying for NAFTA have their work cut out for them. Andy Hernandez of San Antonio Southwest Voter Research Institute spent the day following the finance conference in San Antonio, planning a strategy to advocate for the Latino consensus position on NAFTA.

So, I think the way we answer is this; you don't solve the job flight problem by taking down NAFTA. You can build a NAFTA with the side agreements to protect workers' rights on both sides of the border. And frankly, what the opponents of NAFTA have not been able to answer to us and where Chicano labor is not [unintelligible]. How do things get better if NAFTA's defeated? Are we going to have fewer jobs leaving or are we going to have more political will to clean up the environment? Are we going to have any focus at all upon our populations along the border?

If NAFTA becomes the reality, it would create the world's largest free-trade zone, removing virtually all barriers to trade and investment throughout North America. From the Yukon to the Yucatan, I'm Maria Martin reporting.

Will the predatory Statue of Liberty, devour the Virgin of Guadalupe, or are they merely going to dance a sweaty cumbia. Will Mexico become a toxic and cultural waste dump of the US and Canada? Who will monitor the behavior of the three governments? Given the exponential increase of American trash and media culture in Mexico, what will happen to our indigenous traditions, social and cultural rituals, language, and national psyche? Will the future generations become hyphenated Mexican-Americans, brown-skinned gringos and canochis or upside-down Chicanos? And what about our northern partners? Will they slowly become Chi-Canadians, Waspbacks and Anglomalans? Whatever the answers are, NAFTA will profoundly affect our lives in many ways. Whether we like it or not, a new era has begun and the new economic and cultural topography has been designed for us. We must find our new place and role within this new federation of US republics.

Latino USA commentator Guillermo Gomez-Pena is an award-winning performance artist based in California. In 1991, he was a recipient of a MacArthur Genius Grant. Well, what do you think of NAFTA? Give us a call and leave a brief message at 1-800-535-5533.

This is news from Latino USA. I'm Maria Martin. The struggle over the North American free trade agreement continues to intensify. Even as treaty negotiations draw to a close, supporters and opponents of NAFTA heat up the lobbying effort for votes in Congress. Among vocal opponents of NAFTA coming to Capitol Hill recently were members of Mexico's opposition Democratic Revolutionary Party. From Washington, Patricia Guadalupe reports.

While Mexican president Carlos Salinas de Gortari has staked his political reputation on passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement, Congressman Miguel Huerta of Mexico's Democratic Revolutionary Party said he had to come to Washington to tell his counterparts here that the North American Free Trade Agreement would hurt citizens of both countries.

It's not the problem that because we are opposed to Salinas, we are opposed to NAFTA. It's not... that's not the argument. We are opposed to some fundamental chapters of this NAFTA because it's bad for the citizen of the two countries. We are opposed to NAFTA because some chapters and some principles establishing the NAFTA are opposed to the interest of citizens of Mexico, of United States, and of Canada.

Since then, six Democratic senators have sent a letter to President Clinton, urging him to renegotiate the free-trade agreement. For Latino USA, I'm Patricia Guadalupe, in Washington.

US Senator Barbara Boxer of California is defending her controversial proposal to have the National Guard patrol the US-Mexico border. Boxer says her suggestion is meant to limit the backlash against legal immigration by using the troops to deter undocumented immigrants. Boxer's suggestion is being heavily criticized by many Hispanic officials in California, and another immigration-related proposal came under fire in Washington.

It's not going to accomplish anything in keeping people from crossing the border. It'll simply prevent them from wanting to come over to buy American goods.

That's California Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard reacting to Senator Diane Feinstein's proposal to charge a fee for crossing the border as a way to pay for more border patrol agents. At a hearing in Congress, some experts warn such a fee might cause even longer delays at the border and perhaps difficulties with the governments of Mexico and Canada. Larry Francis is the mayor of El Paso, Texas.

Any kind of fee will cause Mexican nationals to cross the Rio Grande illegally, worsening our problem. Over a broader view, any attempt to reduce the flow of people will have an economic impact on both countries.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service also expressed concerns about the border-crossing fee.

This is news from Latino USA. I'm Maria Martin.

Today I'm pleased to announce that the governments of the United States, Mexico, and Canada-

Now that the governments of North America have agreed on labor and environmental accords to the North American Free Trade Agreement, President Clinton has named a NAFTA czar. He's William Daley, brother of current Chicago Mayor Richard Daley. It'll be his job as head of the administration's task force on NAFTA to push the free trade agreement through a still undecided Congress.

After months of protracted talks, negotiators for the United States, Canada, and Mexico have reached agreement on side accords to the North American Free Trade Agreement. But not everyone is happy with the final consensus, not labor, not environmental groups. Not even an organization called the Latino Consensus on NAFTA, a coalition of groups which generally support NAFTA. From Washington, Patricia Guadalupe has more.

The agreement reached includes oversight commissions that will monitor environmental and labor standards in Mexico, the United States, and Canada. Sanctions and fines are established for failure to obey labor and environmental laws. US trade representative Mickey Kantor called it, "A momentous pact that raises the standard of living for the three countries."

For the first time a free trade agreement covers workers' rights and the environment. This will serve as a model in the future.

But the same groups the negotiators were trying to appease are still not convinced. Labor and environmental groups attacked the agreement saying it didn't go far enough. Ron Carey is president of the Teamsters Union.

President Clinton made it very clear the protections that he would be looking at and the kinds of things that were important to him were raising the wages, protecting the environment, and providing good jobs for Americans. Well, these side agreements simply don't do that. American corporations through this agreement are encouraged more than ever to move to Mexico. So, when you look at that from our perspective and from working people in this country, what you see is that corporations get NAFTA and working people in this country get shafta.

There are even those who want a trade agreement but don't like the accords reached. One of those groups is the Latino Consensus, an Association of National Hispanic Organizations that support NAFTA. They are not happy with what the negotiators agreed to regarding the financing of border projects. The Latino Consensus wanted a bank that would not just finance border activity or just concentrate on environmental projects. The financing mechanism agreed to only addresses conditions at the border. Trade policy analysts, Mary Jo Marion of the National Council of La Raza, which is part of the consensus, said that, "This agreement was hastily put together and she doesn't feel it does enough to convince those members of Congress who remain undecided."

We have now formed a block in Congress of people that are on the fence that are part of this bill, they're saying, "If we get the NADBank or most of it, then we can vote for the free trade agreement." I don't think that the administration can afford to ignore that. I mean, they haven't got enough votes. They need to work with us and the proposal that they now have, even with the side agreements are not going to be enough.

A tough fight awaits NAFTA when Congress returns in September, especially in the House of Representatives, even in President Clinton's own Democratic Party. For Latino USA, I'm Patricia Guadalupe in Washington.

With us to discuss the implications of the agreement and the future of NAFTA are three reporters who have been keeping their eyes and their ears on free trade. Richard Gonzalez of National Public Radio, Jose Carreño of the Mexican daily El Universal, and Latino USA's, Washington correspondent Patricia Guadalupe, who's also a reporter for the Hispanic Link News Service. Bienvenidos to all of you. Let's look at to what was actually agreed to in this final round. What about the side agreements and what protections do they offer for labor and the environment on all sides of the border? Richard?

I think what they offer is basically a very complicated, long, convoluted process by which a government entity, a private company, a public agency or an individual might file a complaint saying that one country is not enforcing its own labor and environmental laws. It does nothing about addressing the inadequacy of any laws, but just talks about enforcing laws that are now in the books. And so it sets up this process, if one believes that the process can work, then one thinks that these side agreements are good. If you don't think the process is going to work, then you don't think that the side agreements are any good.

Jose Carreño, from the Mexican perspective will this be good? Will this work or are these more faults in the treaty?

God, that is a great question because it is a completely untried territory, this kind of agreements that has never been done before. So as Richard say, if you believe in those, you think that they will, you hope that they will work. If you do not believe in them, you think that they won't work, but it's completely unchartered territory. There is nothing like this as far I know anywhere else.

Well, the conventional wisdom has it that US based Latinos have a lot to gain from this treaty. Is that still the case with the final version of NAFTA? Are Latinos in this country going to benefit more or less?

I think it depends on who you speak to. I mean, the Latino Consensus, a group of Latinos who want further participation in NAFTA want a treaty, but some of the final details, they don't agree with us. For instance, the financing of a development bank. They agree with the idea, but they don't like the final outcome.

I think that's a very hard question because you really don't know how much it'll benefit the population in general or not, or how much will it harm it. The truth though is that at this point there is this sort of political haggling going around and, "Okay, if you want my support, you will have to give me something."

If the question is, will Latinos in the US say benefit from NAFTA? The answer depends on who you are, where you live, and what you do. If you are a Chicano entrepreneur in the border states, you're likely to do very well by NAFTA. If you are an industrial worker in the Northeast or in the Midwest, you're probably in a situation where your company might find it advantageous to move your job to Mexico, in which case you become a loser. And because of these various circumstances, you see that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus here in Washington up on Capitol Hill is very divided on NAFTA. As one caucus member said to me, "Whenever you bring up NAFTA, you really have to watch your table manners," because people have very strong opinions pro and against inside the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

What kind of a timeline are we looking at and will it be passed or will it not be passed by Congress?

Well, if you had the vote right now, no. Absolutely not. And then there's also the discussions of what healthcare reform and all the other issues that are going up on Capitol Hill. Then the average person here wants that before the treaty. I mean, I don't think the average person has been following NAFTA as much as the press and business people are.

Look, up to now I might say, I think that has been basically inside the beltway issue.

Absolutely.

The population in general has heard only slogans both in favor or against and has sort of decided its position in base of slogans, but the population hasn't heard hard facts, not as well. The Congress itself is, I could bet that most of some of the people who are in favor and some of the people who are against doesn't even have an idea of what they're talking about.

I think what we're seeing is that we'll find the administration will be ready to send this up to the hill sometime in early October after they've sent the healthcare package up to Congress and we won't have a vote until November, maybe even as late as December. So once they send it up to The Hill in October, there's 90 days in which Congress has to act and they're really pushing to get this done by January 1st. Whether it will pass, like Patricia said, today it would not pass. But the vote is not going to be held today. It's going to be held after two or three months of a very nasty, ugly debate. And so I don't think you can place of bet either way.

Well, thank you very much, muchas gracias, for joining us on Latino USA's Reporters Roundtable. Richard Gonzalez of National Public Radio, Jose Carreño of the Mexican daily El Universal, and Latino USA's Washington correspondent Patricia Guadalupe. Muchas gracias.

There was another free trade-related summit in Tijuana, Mexico. This went to form a community-based agenda regarding NAFTA. Joseph Leon has this report.

Hundreds of people representing US and Mexican environmental labor groups met to discuss the North American Free Trade Agreement. The US, Mexican, and Canadian governments believe that NAFTA will tend to the economic and environmental needs of the communities throughout North America. But for the community groups, the agreement will accomplish quite a different goal. Mike Guerrero of the Southwest Organizing Project in New Mexico.

The North American Free Trade Agreement, as it's negotiated now, has nothing to do with free trade. For them to increase their profit margins means cutting our wages, cutting environmental regulations, cutting social services, and that's basically what it's all about.

Those who met in Tijuana hope to influence the public's opinion on NAFTA before the Congress issues their vote in the coming months. For Latino USA, I'm Joseph Leon.

From Austin, Texas, I'm Maria Martin for Latino USA.

When Congress reconvenes in September, they'll be taking up the merits of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. But free trade isn't just about consumer goods, and many artists and intellectuals are talking about a parallel structure to NAFTA, one that would deal with ideas and culture. Commentator Guillermo Gómez-Peña calls it a free art agreement for cross-cultural dialogue.

Mexican and Caribbean cultures can offer the North their spiritual strength, political intelligence, and sense of humor in dealing with crisis, as well as experience in fostering personal and community relations. In exchange, North American artists and intellectuals can offer the South more fluid notions of identity and their understanding of experimentation and new technologies. US and Canadian artists of color, in particular, can offer Latin America sophisticated discourse on race and gender. Through trilingual publications, radio, video and performance collaborations, more complex notions of North American culture could be conceived. This project must take into consideration the processes of diaspora, hybridization, and borderization that our psyches, communities and countries are presently undergoing. Chicanos and other US Latinos insist that in the signing of this new trans-American contract, it is fundamental that relationships of power among participating artists, communities, and countries be addressed. The border cannot possibly mean the same to a tourist as it does to an undocumented worker. To cross the border from north to south has drastically different implications than to cross the same border from south to north. Trans-culture and hybridity have different connotations for a person of color than for an Anglo-European. People with social, racial or economic privileges are more able to physically cross borders, but they have a much harder time understanding the invisible borders of culture and race. Though painful, these differences must be articulated with valor and humor. In the conflictive history of the north-south dialogue and the multicultural debate, American and European sympathizers have often performed involuntary colonialist roles. In their desire to help, they unknowingly become ventriloquists, impresarios, flaneurs, messiahs, or cultural transvestites. These forms of benign colonialism must be discussed openly without accusing anyone. Their role in relation to us must finally be one of ongoing dialogue and a sincere sharing of power and resources. As Canadian artist Chris Creighton Kelly says, "Anglos must finally go beyond tolerance, sacrifice, and moral reward. Their commitment to cultural equity must become a way of being in the world. In exchange, we have to acknowledge their efforts, slowly bring the guard down, change the strident tone of our discourse, and begin another heroic project, that of forgiving, and therefore healing our colonial and post-colonial wounds.

Commentator Guillermo Gómez-Peña is an award-winning performance artist based in California.

A majority of the business leaders assembled support the North American Free Trade Agreement between the United States, Mexico, and Canada. Many say that as Latinos, they can take advantage of the common language and cultural identification with Mexico. Gilbert Moreno, a senior partner for a telecommunications company in El Paso, Texas, says that even though he has problems with the enforcement powers of the labor and environmental site agreements to NAFTA, he feels those who are against the treaty don't realize it as beneficial overall.

I think there's a lot of issues, environmental, a lot of concerns that existed with or without the NAFTA environment here that I think are muddying the water relative to what's happening. And I think that we have no choice as American business people to use some provisions that are not to our liking as the excuse not to move forward. We have no choice, and what I'm afraid of is that most of the legislators who for political reasons may be making the decision not to vote for NAFTA are not taking a look at the big picture and the common ground that we can reach between the three nations.

The North American Free Trade Agreement is now official. Patricia Guadalupe attended the signing ceremonies in Washington.

[Background--natural sound--music] Over 100 supporters, including members of Congress and business and labor leaders came to see President Clinton sign the hotly contested treaty. This pact creates the world's largest market with over 300 million potential consumers. President Bill Clinton.

We are on the verge of a global economic expansion that is sparked by the fact that the United States at this critical moment decided that we would compete, not retreat.

Latino analysts says the Hispanic community, particularly Hispanic-owned businesses, will benefit greatly from NAFTA and the President's emphasis on global expansion. Among those analysts is Raul Yzaguirre of the National Council of La Raza.

If we get our act together, if we do some very specific things, I think we can benefit by increased business and increased employment.

Yzaguirre added that the specific thing he wants to see is Hispanics uniting to make sure that the community now receives the funds it was promised to develop projects along the border with Mexico through the North American Development Bank. This unity was not evident during the vote in Congress, however, with almost all Mexican American representatives voting for NAFTA , and Puerto Rican and Cuban American members voting against it citing fear of loss of jobs and Mexico's friendly relations with Cuba.

Some speculate this has created divisions within the Hispanic caucus, and will affect work on other pieces of legislation. Democratic representative, Kika de la Garza of Texas disagrees.

From this day, like any other piece of legislation, you finish one piece of legislation, you go on to the other. I don't see any connection. I don't see any problems for the President or in the Congress.

The North American Free Trade Agreement will be enacted on January 1st, gradually eliminating tariffs and other trade barriers over the next 15 years. For Latino USA, I'm Patricia Guadalupe in Washington.

A North American Free Trade Agreement has been signed by Canada, the US, and Mexico. Once it becomes law, we will be in the process of becoming the largest artificial economic community of the planet.

Negotiations between the US, Canada, and Mexico continue regarding the North American Free Trade Agreement. If the three parties should come to an agreement regarding environmental protection and labor issues, and if the US Congress approves NAFTA, free trade will be the economic order on the continent. But there are many opposing views on the impact NAFTA will have, should it become law. For performance artist and Latino USA commentator Guillermo Gomez Peña, many questions regarding the free trade agreement remain.

In terms of geography and demographics, it will be much larger than the European community or than the fashionable Pacific Rim. From the myriad possibilities of free trade agreements that could be designed and implemented, the neoliberal version we have is not exactly an enlightened one. It is based on the fallacy that the market will take care of everything. Avoiding the most basic social labor, environmental, and cultural responsibilities, there are many burning questions that remain unanswered. Given the endemic lack of political and economic symmetry between the three countries, will Mexico become, as Mexican artist Yareli Arizmendi says, the largest Indian reservation of the US? Or will it be treated as an equal by its bigger partners?

Will the predatory Statue of Liberty depower the Virgin of Guadalupe, or are they merely going to dance a sweaty cumbia? Will Mexico become a toxic and cultural waste dump of the US and Canada? Who will monitor the behavior of the three governments? Given the exponential increase of American trash and media culture in Mexico, what will happen to our indigenous traditions, social and cultural rituals, language, and national psyche? Will the future generations become hyphenated Mexican-Americans, brown-skinned gringos and Canochis or upside-down Chicanos? And what about our northern partners? Will they slowly become Chicanadians, Waspacks and Anglomalans?

Whatever the answers are, NAFTA will profoundly affect our lives in many ways. Whether we like it or not, a new era has begun and the new economic and cultural topography has been designed for us. We must find our new place and role within this new federation of US Republics.