Given that the agreement is more than 23 years old, many clarifications and technical improvements could be made in all areas of trade covered by NAFTA, such as labour, environment or culture. NAFTA would also benefit from the inclusion of new areas of trade, such as e-commerce, that are not currently covered, to ensure that the agreement is adapted to today`s economic realities. NAFTA has been complemented by two other regulations: the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation (NAALC). These tangential agreements were aimed at preventing companies from being relocated to other countries to take advantage of lower wages, softer health and safety regulations for workers, and more flexible environmental regulations. Many critics of NAFTA saw the deal as a radical experiment developed by influential multinationals that sought to increase their profits at the expense of ordinary citizens of the countries concerned. Opposition groups argued that the general rules imposed by NAFTA could undermine local governments by preventing them from passing laws or regulations to protect the public interest. Critics have also argued that the treaty would lead to a significant deterioration in environmental and health standards, promote the privatization and deregulation of key public services, and move family farmers to signatory states. The objective of NAFTA was to remove barriers to trade and investment between the United States, Canada and Mexico. The introduction of NAFTA on 1. January 1994 saw the immediate removal of tariffs on more than half of Mexico`s exports to the United States and more than a third of U.S.
exports to Mexico. Within 10 years of the implementation of the agreement, all tariffs between the United States and Mexico should be eliminated, with the exception of certain U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico, which are expected to expire within 15 years.  Most of the trade between the United States and Canada was already duty-free. NAFTA also aimed to eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade and protect intellectual property rights in traded goods. The debate on the impact of NAFTA on signatory countries continues. While the U.S., Canada, and Mexico have all experienced economic growth, higher wages, and increased trade since nafta`s introduction, experts disagree on the extent to which the agreement has actually contributed to these gains, if any, in U.S. manufacturing jobs, immigration, and consumer goods prices.
The results are difficult to isolate, and over the past quarter century, other important developments have taken place on the continent and around the world. An October 2017 op-ed in Toronto`s Globe and Mail asked if the U.S. wanted to renegotiate the deal or planned to walk away from it no matter what, noting that new U.S. Ambassador Kelly Knight Craft is married to the owner of Alliance Resource Partners, a large U.S. coal company. Canada is implementing a carbon plan, and there is also the issue of the sale of bomber aircraft. “Americans inserted so many poison pills into last week`s talks in Washington that they should have been charged with murder,” columnist John Ibbitson wrote.  NAFTA is often blamed for things that could not have been their fault. In 1999, the Christian Science Monitor wrote of an Arkansas town that it would “collapse, according to some, like so many NAFTA ghost towns that have lost jobs in trade and needle manufacturing to places like Sri Lanka or Honduras.” Sri Lanka and Honduras are not parties to the Agreement. NAFTA built on the success of the former Canada-United States. Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA), which entered into force in 1989 and complements World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements with greater commitments in certain key areas.
Before sending it to the U.S. Senate, Clinton added two side treaties, the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC) and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), to protect workers and the environment, as well as to allay the concerns of many members of the House of Representatives. The United States has required its partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to their own. [Citation needed] After lengthy deliberations and lively discussions, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act on November 17, 1993, with measures 234-200. Among the supporters of the deal were 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. The bill was passed by the Senate on 20 November 1993 by a vote of 61 to 38.  The Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats.
Republican Rep. David Dreier of California, a staunch supporter of NAFTA since the Reagan administration, has played a leading role in mobilizing support for the deal among Republicans in Congress and across the country.   Fifth, all NAFTA countries were required to respect patents, trademarks and copyrights. At the same time, the agreement ensured that these intellectual property rights did not affect trade. NAFTA was the largest free trade agreement in the world when it was established on January 1, 1994. NAFTA was the first time that two industrialized countries signed a trade agreement with an emerging market […].