There's not much of an argument against NAFTA left after 12 years of it.
Really? I'm sure the same arguments that were suggested at the time of its inception still apply.
The idea that NAFTA would result in a giant sucking sound seems pretty stupid now, so no the original argument against the bill doesn't apply. Perhaps there is some peripheral argument out there someplace, but the central argument against NAFTA was disproven.
Really? I believe the lower working class is in quite awful shape these days, and union membership has declined. Arguably the impoverishment of the worker has a great many causes, and even among foriegn causes China has probably had a greater effect than Mexico. But still, there is no doubt that the NAFTA certainly harmed at least the lower half of the U.S. population.