It became law as P.L. 107-43 onSeptember28, 2001. During the Senate debate, Senator Phil Gramm warned that he will oppose any effort to turn theU.S.-JordanFTA into a model for how future trade agreements should deal with worker rights (and environmental protectionissues). The Larger Debate About Including Worker Rights Provisions in Trade Agreements

The labor provisions of the U.S.-Jordan FTA and reaction to them can also be viewed in the context of the larger ongoingdebate in Congress about the linkage of worker rights and trade. Underthat authority, NAFTA was negotiated with its labor side agreement. Stakeholders in favor of including labor provisions in the body of trade agreements argue in favor of using the U.S.-JordanFTA labor provisions as a model for other trade agreements. Comparison of Key Provisions of U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA
The U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement (FTA), implemented as P.L. 107-43, which went into effect December 17, 2001, breaks new ground by including multiple worker rights provisions inthe bodyof a U.S. trade agreement, rather than as a side agreement, for the first time. For this reason, it adds somecontroversy to thecongressional debate over whether worker rights provisions should be included in future trade agreements. Someobserverseye this configuration of worker rights protections as a model for future trade agreements; others view it as aone-timeoccurrence justified only because Jordan has a strong tradition of labor protections; still others oppose the inclusionof laborprovisions in trade agreements under any circumstances. This report will be updated as events warrant.