Dan Kaufman, a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine and author, reveals how NAFTA reshaped American politics and its workforce. Former Master Lock employee Chancey Adams shares personal stories illustrating the human toll of industrial job losses. They discuss the political realignment between parties and the working class, alongside the initial economic growth versus the long-term effects of job displacement and rising inequality. Together, they highlight the emotional and societal shifts that continue to influence U.S. political dynamics today.
NAFTA reshaped American politics by transforming party alignments, leading Democrats to abandon the working class for wealthier constituents.
The agreement sparked significant job losses in manufacturing, escalating income inequality and prompting both parties to adopt protectionist rhetoric.
Deep dives
Impact of NAFTA on American Politics
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), enacted in 1993, marked a pivotal shift in American politics, particularly affecting the relationship between the two major parties and the working class. It led to the outsourcing of good-paying manufacturing jobs from the Rust Belt states, resulting in a painful transition for many workers who had relied on these jobs for their livelihoods. This shift realigned the Democratic Party away from its New Deal roots focused on the working class towards appealing more to the professional and wealthier classes, effectively abandoning its traditional base. Conversely, the Republican Party began to adopt working-class rhetoric, enhancing its appeal to disaffected voters who felt let down by the changes brought about by free trade.
The Debates Surrounding NAFTA
The debates leading up to the passage of NAFTA reflected a stark divide in political ideology regarding trade and its impact on the economy. President George H.W. Bush championed the agreement as a means to bolster exports and job creation, while independent candidate Ross Perot vehemently opposed it, warning of significant job losses with his 'giant sucking sound' metaphor. Democratic nominee Bill Clinton attempted to find a middle ground, advocating for fairer trade terms while still supporting the agreement to regain the presidency. This balancing act highlighted the complex relationship between political aspirations and the voices of working-class Americans who feared the consequences of such trade policies.
Consequences of NAFTA on the Workforce
Following the implementation of NAFTA, the American workforce experienced significant turmoil, particularly in the manufacturing sector, which saw millions of jobs lost and many factories move overseas. For instance, companies like Master Lock, once a staple of manufacturing in Milwaukee, shifted jobs to lower-wage regions, leading to a steep decline in domestic employment and contributing to a rise in income inequality. Although the economy overall may have seen GDP growth, the benefits were disproportionately felt by wealthier individuals, negating many gains for workers, particularly those without a college education. This trend of outsourcing manufacturing jobs and diminishing union power created a lasting sense of insecurity among American workers, particularly in industrial regions.
Political Realignments Post-NAFTA
The political fallout from NAFTA contributed to a significant realignment within both major parties, particularly observable in the campaigns leading up to the 2016 elections. Donald Trump seized the opportunity to capitalize on the disaffection of the working class, leveraging concerns over job losses to reshape the Republican Party's platform and distance it from its earlier pro-NAFTA stance. Meanwhile, Democrats began to shift away from their previous endorsements of free trade agreements as the voices of the working class grew louder, indicating a broader acknowledgment of the hardships faced by these voters. The ultimate election outcomes suggested a fundamental change in voter priorities, reflecting a growing demand for job security and frustration with the previous trade policies that had dominated American economic strategy for decades.
On the campaign trail, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are constantly talking about trade, tariffs and domestic manufacturing.
In many ways, these talking points stem from a single trade deal that transformed the U.S. economy and remade both parties’ relationship with the working class.
Dan Kaufman, a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine, explains how the North American Free Trade Agreement broke American politics.
Both Democrats and Republicans are expressing support for tariffs to protect American industry, reversing decades of trade thinking in Washington.
For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.
Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
