General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsElizabeth Warren: If people knew what was going on, they would stop it
That's been the government's argument for not releasing the basic trade negotiation documents. Let me explain:
Trade agreements are important. They affect everything -- our imports and exports, wages, jobs, the environment, financial services, and even the Internet.
But if people can't follow the basic outline of the negotiations, then they can't have any real input into the process.
Right now the U.S. Trade Representative is negotiating a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal with eleven countries, including Japan, Mexico, Canada, Singapore and Vietnam. For months, the Trade Representative has refused any public access to the Trans-Pacific Partnership's composite bracketed text the language proposals being negotiated on by the United States and other countries.
I believe in transparency and democracy, and I think the U.S. Trade Representative should too. So I asked President Obama's nominee for U.S. Trade Representative, Michael Froman, three questions:
1. Would he commit to releasing the composite bracketed text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership?
2. If not, would he commit to releasing just a scrubbed version of the bracketed text that made anonymous which country proposed which provision? Even the Bush Administration put out the scrubbed version during negotiations around the Free Trade Area of the Americas agreement.
3. Would he provide more transparency behind what information is made to the trade office's outside advisors? Currently, there are about 600 outside advisors that have access to sensitive information -- industry, labor, environmental groups and other NGO representatives. But there is no transparency around who gets what information and whether they all see the same things, and I think that's a real problem.
Mr. Froman's response was clear: No, no, no. He will not commit to make this information available so the public can track what is going on. For that reason, I voted against Michael Froman's nomination as U.S. Trade Representative on Wednesday.
I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant.
In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States.
We need a new direction from the Trade Representative -- a direction that prioritizes transparency and public debate. The American people have the right to know more about the negotiations that will have dramatic impact on the future of the American economy.
Michael Froman was confirmed to his new position Wednesday night, but I'm not going to stop asking him the tough questions. We should have a serious conversation about our trade policies, because these issues matter. And it all starts with transparency from the U.S. Trade Representative.
Thank you for being a part of this,
Elizabeth
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)Divine Discontent
(21,056 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)try to figure out how to cope with it rather than not allowing it in the first place.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)whistle-blowers, pesky investigative journalists, protesters, conspiracy talk, and liberal ideas. In fact some lash out if you dare to upset their reality view.
kardonb
(777 posts)nothing like it , we just deal with REALITY !
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)there will be who know what is going on. No American wants Foreign Corporations writing their laws and as she says, if they knew they would stop it. That is why the information is not being disseminated by the MSM.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)to us.
No flowery language
No vague non-specific phrases
Tho I do fear it is much too late for any accountability by almost anyone, now.
SamKnause
(13,110 posts)I think Bernie Sanders should be on that list.
3, a total of 3.
That is a sad list.
I agree.
It is TOO LATE.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)sigh....sad, isn't it?
East Coast Pirate
(775 posts)And Bernie Sanders as SamKnause said.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)He's been fighting the good fight far longer than Warren or Grayson. Personally, I hold all three in high regard.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)CrispyQ
(36,509 posts)Money = speech. Holy fuck.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)(even our libertarian "dissidents" are rightists), delusional adoration, RW conspiracy theorists to provide cover and white noise
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Babel_17
(5,400 posts)Paper Roses
(7,475 posts)There must be others with the courage to speak up. We are in such a downward spiral that we need all who can do so to help. Alan Greyson, Al Franken, Bernie Sanders...who else?
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)I'm going to guess the congress critters have just a tad more pull than John Q Public.
In the meantime, I guess we should all just go donate to her PAC.
They complain about the money in government then ask for money to fight the system.
Logical
(22,457 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)I'm all for it.
forestpath
(3,102 posts)a racist.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)"While America Was Sleeping" -- it is bound to be a great read some twenty years from now. Subject of the book: How a whole nation was assured by its lying sack of shit puppet leaders that it is okay to be spied on as it keeps you safe.
In reality what it is keeping safe is the corruption, the lack of sanity and all that goes with throwing 500 billions of dollars into a surveillance society. How the revolving door between industry and the government means that bankers can do as they want, no matter how it destroys the world economy. How Monsanto can promote its famine foods. How drone scan kill innocent people, some of them just kids, as long as those kids are labeled "terrorists."
WillyT
(72,631 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)During Campaign 2008, Candidate Obama promised several times that if elected President,
he "would re-negotiate NAFTA"!
Well, HERE it IS!...FINALLY!
Promise KEPT!!!!
Quick, add it to the List of Obama's Other Accomplishments!
dflprincess
(28,082 posts)He never did say how he'd negotiate it so it probably will get added to his accomplishments - at least for those he's actually working for.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)Yep, that didn't work.
The Purchased Congress of America doesn't care.
Amonester
(11,541 posts)up to the ten-percenters back to 90% while at the same time close all those pesky tax havens all around the world making it illegal to hide money there like rmoney & co.
And of course pass a public campaign funding act while rendering all lobbyist corruption illegal with long jailtime if found guilty (like the mafia).
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)the resident third-way crew here on DU will be all over the board like white on rice, pushing how great their candidates are, and how the liberal ones, you know - the ones we SHOULD be choosing, have an ice cubes chance in hell of winning, etc., etc. Standard operating routine around here.
G_j
(40,370 posts):Sarcasm: just getting that out of the way..
of course, most who use that term hope it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Say it often enough.....
Volaris
(10,274 posts)I would walk through Fire for her, and I don't offer that to some close FAMILY.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)Even when we win...we lose somehow.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)representatives is just a myth. They are pushed on us, and any candidates that do not kiss up to the oligarchy are destroyed by fabrications, misconceptions, slander, and denial of party funds to compete. It's a racket. Ever wonder why many EVM's have no paper trail, or receipt, and always appear functionally problematic? Consider that ATM's, Gas pumps, postal Kiosks, Red Boxes and the like all handle thousands of transactions reliably, give a printed receipt, and do all of this often in an outdoor exposed environment, and then we have EVM's. Design flaw or design feature? We live in a banana republic, with only the illusion of Democracy.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Too bad it can't be MUCH sooner, like yesterday.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Amonester
(11,541 posts)You think he operates in solo with a corruption-free congress that will pass everything he will ask them to?
backwoodsbob
(6,001 posts)this is getting unreal
enlightenment
(8,830 posts)Executive Cabinet position. An appointee, chosen by the President - and yes, approved by Congress - ultimately a member of the President's Cabinet.
No, the President doesn't write "that stuff" but he damn well knows that one of his Cabinet officers is telling members of Congress to suck wind because he doesn't have to share the information that they have a Constitutional right to know.
Stop deflecting. This isn't about whether or not a do-nothing Congress approves this trades agreement, it's about the transparency of the process. (Yes, they probably will approve it because there are many more career politicians than there are people who actually give a rat's arse what happens to this country)
The Executive branch has, over the years and without much of a peep from Congress, exerted control - largely by executive order - over foreign trade negotiations. But that doesn't change the fact that Congress still has to vote on them because the power to make trades deals is a Legislative, not an Executive authority under the Constitution.
The Trades Rep is out of line on this and because his boss is the President, the President is responsible for bringing him to heel.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... and it's exactly the opposite. Like a private Corporation. Have you ever gone into a business and asked to see anything? They call Security (if he's not standing right there at the front desk) and ask them to show you out. And if you are obstinate, they call local police and have you arrested for trespassing on their private Corporate property.
LuvNewcastle
(16,856 posts)Anybody who's paying attention can see what they're up to -- more for the rich and powerful and to hell with everyone else. Anyone who can't see that by now is either an idiot or willfully ignorant.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Honestly the population is almost immovable. We will need to run out of bread like Egypt first.
villager
(26,001 posts)or rather, another expected Obama pick.
Mushroom
(341 posts)about what could be considered negotiable but when dubya was playing prez I had wondered if doing business with his creepy buddies meant having to take our rights away. Labor unions, education, women's health, equality, shit the list is long. It isn't that there is a war on anyone or anything, it's just business and we're wondering WTH are they thinking? They're just doing business and maybe it doesn't matter which party is in power. Business is business. Anyone or anything is negotiable.
We absolutely need transparency.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Good to hear Senator Warren point this out. However, as I keep saying, you can't unrotten the apple.
- We need a whole new tree......
Yes, we need a whole new tree.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)Our elected leaders worked for the American People, not for the Corporations.
Now it's the other way around.
Our elected leaders now work for the Corporation, not for us.
And the American People are left out in the cold, left to adjust to whatever might be coming down the pike. We have no right to know how their decisions are going to affect our lives.
Everything is bassackwards.
Give 'em Hell, Elizabeth.
Dustlawyer
(10,497 posts)and see how much influence they have! Publicly funded elections is THE answer!
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... absolutely enact CCFR legislation immediately. Help overthrow the GD SCOTUS by new Amendment to the Constitution taking fucking personhood from Corporations forever and ever. Amen!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)This is contrary to the very spirit of the nation. We the people should know. If we don't, why not?
I trust Warren. I do not trust the untrustworthy President Obama.
pscot
(21,024 posts)for standing up for the 99% whose voices are never heard in Washington.
Dustlawyer
(10,497 posts)raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)People are strong & willing to stand up for whats right. Unless of course it involves not sharing in the corporate honey hole. Then they turn into jellyfish.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)If a sole GOP member can filibuster and hold up Obamas appts, etc; then is there no reason Warren can't hold this up when it comes to Senate for ratification? Yes, it won't make her Dem colleages happy, but her constituents and supporters will be thrilled...and its the right thing to do.
AndyA
(16,993 posts)I have yet to see a trade agreement that was beneficial to the United States. Why we continue to do them is beyond me.
Thank goodness Elizabeth Warren isn't afraid to speak up and direct attention to these issues. Hopefully, the American people will WAKE. THE. HELL. UP. someday and put a stop to this crap.
TransitJohn
(6,932 posts)for opposing an Obama Administration nominee. Things I learned from DU.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)mike_c
(36,281 posts)However, to those whose response to Warren's remarks is that she should be a presidential candidate in 2016: recall that candidate Obama was a strong proponent of transparency, too. That didn't work out very well.
MelungeonWoman
(502 posts)When she follows in the footsteps of Bush and Obama we'll get the standard reply,
"You knew she was an ex Repub and bankster! What are you whining about? Must be the fact she's a woman!", from the usual suspects.