Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 06:34 AM Sep 2013

A Corporate Coup of a Different Order: The Growing Resistance to the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Transparency was supposed to be a White House priority from the very start. In his first inaugural address, when the world celebrated an historic and improbable election, Barack Obama made the case for how an open government was necessary to earn the trust of the people.[1] The next day, he issued a memo that asserted his commitment to creating an “unprecedented level of openness.”[2] And in February, more than four years later, President Obama claimed his to be “the most transparent administration in history.”[3]

Perhaps the least publicized example of that statement’s dishonesty is the White House’s efforts to negotiate the biggest trade agreement since the mid 1990s in near-total secrecy.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, has been in negotiations since 2007. In November 2009 the Obama administration made it a centerpiece of the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) work.[4] The 12 countries currently negotiating the deal, which include Australia, Chile, Japan, and Singapore, account for nearly 40% of the global economy and one-third of international trade.[5] Yet to characterize the TPP as a trade deal is imprecise, if not disingenuous. The agreement has less to do with the exchange of goods than with altering regulations covering medicine, agriculture, finance, intellectual property, and labor and environmental standards. For example, under the TPP, if a U.S. law conflicted with the pact’s mandates, foreign investors could sue through an independent tribunal to re-coup their so-called “expected future profits.” The TPP stands as a threat to sovereignty at the federal, state and local level.

Prying at the Text

Despite its claims to the contrary, the Obama administration has been far less transparent on trade-related deals than its predecessors. In 2001, during negotiations over the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), George W. Bush’s trade representative made the deal’s working text public, with some redactions so as to preserve anonymity. The current administration has so far refused demands to release the text. What little is known about the deal is based on the generalized testimony of those who have seen the text and on portions that have been anonymously leaked.

Frustration and outrage have been building. In March of this year, 400 civil society groups, including the Sierra Club and Global Exchange, signed a letter deploring the administration’s secrecy and demanding a public debate around the deal.[6] Even members of Congress have been denied access to the text, and those who have seen parts of it have been unable to share it with their assistants because of its classified status. In June, two-thirds of Democratic freshmen in the House of Representatives signed a letter to party leadership about the lack of debate.[7] Shortly thereafter, in response to a wave of citizen comments, the USTR gave Representative Alan Grayson access to the TPP’s text. In an email to supporters, he wrote that the TPP “hands the sovereignty of our country over to corporate interests.”[8]

<snip>

http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/globalism/3382-a-corporate-coup-of-a-different-order-the-growing-resistance-to-the-trans-pacific-partnership

this is a long, immaculately researched piece; one of the best I've read on the TPP- and you know I've read a lot.

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Corporate Coup of a Different Order: The Growing Resistance to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (Original Post) cali Sep 2013 OP
FOIA seems in order. GeorgeGist Sep 2013 #1
FOIA? cali Sep 2013 #2
I think it means Freedom of Information Act laundry_queen Sep 2013 #5
ah, of course. thanks cali Sep 2013 #8
kick. because this article really is worth the read. cali Sep 2013 #3
This is a tricky subject for me - as I'm not opposed to free trade in principle el_bryanto Sep 2013 #4
I think the thing here- and it's been pointed out in a lot of articles- cali Sep 2013 #7
I agree with that last point; I think the Obama admin sees them selves as representatives for el_bryanto Sep 2013 #9
K & R AzDar Sep 2013 #6
Listened to a little bit of Ed Schultz's radio show yesterday, and he bullwinkle428 Sep 2013 #10
I"m really glad that's happening. cali Sep 2013 #11
thanks, cali. K&R. nt antigop Sep 2013 #12
The administration is also secretly negotiating an Atlantic Pact. olegramps Sep 2013 #13
Yup, the TTIP. It's equally odious, secret and not about trade BelgianMadCow Sep 2013 #14
Great article. jsr Sep 2013 #15
In this Cyber-era there are no longer any jobs to export. Activist are always fighting the last CK_John Sep 2013 #16
Kick dedicated to Union Scribe Sep 2013 #17
K&R johnnyreb Sep 2013 #18
K&R. Brickbat Sep 2013 #19
Kick to find later n/t hootinholler Sep 2013 #20

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
4. This is a tricky subject for me - as I'm not opposed to free trade in principle
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 08:46 AM
Sep 2013

I generally think Free Trade is a good thing, tying economies together. Our economies are going to be tied together anyway - it's a global market - so let's have something that's regulated.

And if you are going to negotiate a settlement between different nations with different political systems and customs - there's a rationale to not doing it in the public eye. Discussions and counter offers would be taken apart in the press which would narrow considerably the range of discussion.

That said, the information we do have about this deal, particularly the bit referenced (where you would be able to sue against future profits for labor or environmental regulations) is just terrible. That's not Free trade - that's us imposing our will on other nations or corporations imposing their will on our local governments and states.

Bryant

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
7. I think the thing here- and it's been pointed out in a lot of articles-
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 08:57 AM
Sep 2013

is that the TPP is not really a trade agreement. Evidently only a few chapters out of 20+ deal with actual trade issues like tariffs.

Your point about there being acceptable reasons for not discussing the details in public would hold much more weight if Congress hadn't been shut out and if there were fewer corporate advisors (they have access to the drafts) and more advocates for labor, the environment and the public welfare.

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
9. I agree with that last point; I think the Obama admin sees them selves as representatives for
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 09:01 AM
Sep 2013

labor, the environment and public welfare, but there are good reasons to question that.

Bryant

bullwinkle428

(20,629 posts)
10. Listened to a little bit of Ed Schultz's radio show yesterday, and he
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 09:01 AM
Sep 2013

was speaking out VERY STRONGLY against the TPP! Sounds like he intends to keep talking about it until it comes to an end one way or another.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
11. I"m really glad that's happening.
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 09:05 AM
Sep 2013

I don't listen to Schultz, but it's a good thing that he's raising the profile of this issue. I believe that the TPP is about to enter the political debate in a major way. To date, the U.S. media has barely touched it. I think that's going to change within the next few months.

olegramps

(8,200 posts)
13. The administration is also secretly negotiating an Atlantic Pact.
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 09:41 AM
Sep 2013

I urge everyone to email Obama that this lack of transparency is unacceptable. Everyone of these lousy trade agreements have resulted in loss of American jobs. NAFTA alone cost us around 700,000 jobs. The unions have come out against both of these so-called Pacts.

Obama talks about saving the Middle Class and creating jobs while secretly engaging in negotiations that will put us at a distinct disadvantage to countries that pay peon wages, have no safety rules, and where workers work 60-80 hours a week for starvation wages. This is just another rip off by the corporations to out-source jobs. The rush to the bottom will only result in American citizens enjoying the same standard of living that the workers in other countries suffer.

BelgianMadCow

(5,379 posts)
14. Yup, the TTIP. It's equally odious, secret and not about trade
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 09:54 AM
Sep 2013
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/15/us-trade-deal-with-europe-hype
"In reality, this trade agreement is not about promoting prosperity for all, but powerful industry lobbies trying to dodge regulation".

Given the EU's traditional strong unions and regulations, I'd guess that the TTIP will be a little less bad, but both are clearly similar in scope and goal.

CK_John

(10,005 posts)
16. In this Cyber-era there are no longer any jobs to export. Activist are always fighting the last
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 10:04 AM
Sep 2013

cause and always reactive instead of providing leadership.

johnnyreb

(915 posts)
18. K&R
Fri Sep 27, 2013, 11:19 AM
Sep 2013

From the article:

"The illusion of inevitability is a weapon of our opponent. When our opponent says we’re almost done, this is a done deal—that’s bullshit."
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Corporate Coup of a Dif...