BANGOR, Maine — Christine Greenleaf has seen the cost of foreign competition firsthand. Three times since 1979 she found herself out of work as her employers — including a shoe shop and a woolen mill — closed because they couldn’t compete against foreign imports.
“I would still be at any one of them making an honest living had they not closed, because I loved the feeling of producing a product that was sold all over the country,” Greenleaf said. “I took great pride in that.”
Greenleaf was one of several people from across the state to testify against the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact before the Maine Citizen Trade Policy Commission at a forum held Thursday evening at Eastern Maine Community College in Bangor. The commission is seeking public comment about the trade pact to communicate to the state Legislature and Maine’s congressional delegation.
Although she wasn’t well versed in the details of the proposed trade pact and had considered not testifying, Greenleaf said, “I just wanted to put a human face onto the facts.”
The Trans-Pacific Partnership, struck in October after more than five years of tense and secretive negotiations, seeks to liberalize trade across 12 Pacific Rim nations, including the United States, that together encompass 40 percent of the global economy.
If approved, more than 18,000 tariffs will be eliminated on everything from car parts to lobsters. A minimum standard for environmental and labor regulations in the region also would be established.
Maine exports to Trans-Pacific Partnership nations in 2014 totaled $1.8 million, accounting for about 67 percent of Maine’s international trade, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Just how the trade pact will affect imports, exports and job growth in the U.S. economy may not be clear until at least May 2016, when the U.S. International Trade Commission releases its economic impact analysis.
The audience at the forum was overwhelmingly skeptical of the trade pact and urged commission members to ask Congress to reject it. Many participants were critical of the secrecy in which the trade pact was negotiated as well as a provision allowing foreign companies to challenge local regulations in trade tribunals outside domestic courts.
But the biggest concern was the potential to lose jobs to competition overseas.
“In all these international trade agreements there’s always winners and losers,” commission member state Sen. John Patrick, D-Rumford, said. “With NAFTA, Maine had far more losers than winners. I think with the TPP there will be more losers than winners.”
Alex Jackimowicz, an electrical contractor and steering committee member of the Maine Small Business Coalition, said that removing tariffs and easing trade barriers won’t be a boon to small- and medium-sized businesses in the state but “actually poses substantial threats to American jobs and wages.”
“The aims of the TPP are contrary to the interests of small, local businesses in Maine,” Jackimowicz said. “The TPP will not strengthen our economy.”
Commission member Sharon Treat said she was surprised that no one gave testimony in favor of the trade pact but that the skeptical testimony shows Mainers are worried about how it will affect the local economy.
“It’s hard to see what the benefits [of this trade pact] are, but the negatives are obvious,” Treat said. “It’s a trade deal that Mainers aren’t supportive of.”