General Discussion

eridani

(51,907 posts) Fri Apr 1, 2016, 05:20 AM Apr 2016

The Changing Politics of Free Trade — Politicians are Finally Listening

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/03/31/changing-politics-free-trade-politicians-are-finally-listening

As a result of the TPP focus in the presidential election, a spotlight now shines on the shortcomings of the free trade agenda. A highly-acclaimed Tufts University study found that the TPP would cost nearly half a million U.S. jobs and worsen economic inequality. Even the deal’s cheerleading economists admit that the real costs of the TPP could include 50,000 layoffs annually and “lasting wage cuts and unemployment” for manufacturing workers. What these trade deals really do is trade good jobs for bad.

Not surprisingly, this refreshing attentiveness and more balanced reporting has provoked a counter-attack. The defense of corporate globalization includes tired arguments about its purported benefits and often trivializes the experience of those who have lost their jobs. Washington power couple Cokie and Steve Roberts authored a saccharine pro-trade broadside that dismissed reporting on job losses because, “It’s easy to take pictures of a shuttered steel plant or furloughed furniture workers.” Remember those 1,400 laid-off Carrier workers?

Opponents of the TPP do not reject global commerce; they reject a tilted model of trade that favors only big business interests, corrodes the economic security of working families and undermines our environmental and public health safeguards.

As Vice President Biden’s former economic advisor Jared Bernstein wrote recently, “don’t conflate trade with trade agreements. They’re not at all synonymous.” Free trade deals like the TPP establish policy priorities that have nothing to do with liberalizing trade, like forcing other countries to accept long and stringent patent and copyright terms for our pharmaceutical, high-tech and entertainment industries. The TPP includes special protections for investors, allowing them to sue over new domestic rules the companies contend interfere with their future earnings. And it includes tough new language making it easier to trump food safety and environmental rules at foreign trade tribunals.

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Changing Politics of Free Trade — Politicians are Finally Listening (Original Post) eridani Apr 2016 OP

Some on this board would go with Cokie and Steve, sadly. HughBeaumont Apr 2016 #1

"It isn’t the idea of international commerce, but the structure of the trade deals that has failed pampango Apr 2016 #2

Never seen why it is necessary to give tobacco corporations the right to sue governments-- eridani Apr 2016 #3

True. Of course, that is the one indisputably good thing that TPP does is take away that right pampango Apr 2016 #5

And ISDS puts it right back in there n/t eridani Apr 2016 #10

No it doesn't. It is the 'carve-out' that prevents Big Tobacco from using ISDS that has enraged pampango Apr 2016 #11

A good thing, then. If enough Repubs oppose it, it's done n/t eridani Apr 2016 #12

Thank You For Sharing cantbeserious Apr 2016 #4

This is one of the reasons I support Bernie B Calm Apr 2016 #6

TPP: Obama's final betrayal. Scuba Apr 2016 #7

agreed mtasselin Apr 2016 #9

Great article. Thanks. djean111 Apr 2016 #8

HughBeaumont

(24,461 posts)

1. Some on this board would go with Cokie and Steve, sadly.

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 06:08 AM

Apr 2016

"Sure there's pain, and job loss, and crippling debt as a result of trying to make up the income, and less tax revenue, and if they get a job it pays way less than their old one . . . but the overall gains are BREATHTAKING YOLO!!!"

pampango

(24,692 posts)

2. "It isn’t the idea of international commerce, but the structure of the trade deals that has failed

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 06:56 AM

Apr 2016

to deliver the promised benefits.

Opponents of the TPP do not reject global commerce; they reject a tilted model of trade that favors only big business interests, corrodes the economic security of working families and undermines our environmental and public health safeguards.

Good article, eridani. As it points out the existence and extent of global commerce is not the problem. It is the nature of the agreements and organization that create and enforce trade rules.

As FDR knew, we need some type of international cooperation and organization to govern trade. He rejected the model of 'every-nation-for-itself' which his predecessors used to drive global trade to extinction. The problem is the nature of the rules that international organization creates and how they are enforced. His ITO was a model of fair trade with enforced standards on labor rights and business regulation but republicans killed it. Now we are left trying to create a modern version of it.

eridani

(51,907 posts)

3. Never seen why it is necessary to give tobacco corporations the right to sue governments--

Reply to pampango (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 07:01 AM

Apr 2016

--for warning labels on cigarettes has to do with selling apples, wheat, planes and software to the rest of the world.

pampango

(24,692 posts)

5. True. Of course, that is the one indisputably good thing that TPP does is take away that right

Reply to eridani (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 07:21 AM

Apr 2016

from Big Tobacco, which it should never have had in the first place.

eridani

(51,907 posts)

10. And ISDS puts it right back in there n/t

Reply to pampango (Reply #5)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 03:01 AM

Apr 2016

pampango

(24,692 posts)

11. No it doesn't. It is the 'carve-out' that prevents Big Tobacco from using ISDS that has enraged

Reply to eridani (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 07:27 AM

Apr 2016

'tobacco' republicans who had supported TPP and fast track.

The War on Tobacco Makes It Into the TPP Free Trade Deal

The TPP is the first U.S. trade deal to exempt anti-smoking measures from the lawsuits that investors may bring under the agreement. Tobacco companies, business groups and Republican lawmakers oppose this carve-out, arguing it undermines the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system and will lead to health exceptions in future trade deals for other consumer goods such as alcohol and sugar.

To start, tobacco is the only legal consumer good that has a binding international treaty dedicated to its control and prevention. One hundred and eighty countries have ratified the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), making it one of the most widely subscribed treaties in the world.

This convention entered into force in 2005 and, like nearly all treaties concluded since that time, the U.S. Congress has yet to ratify it. The United States has signed the convention, however, and is fully compliant with its terms and participates in its meetings. All 11 of the other TPP countries have ratified and are legally bound to adopt the measures prescribed by the convention. The tobacco control measures carved out in the TPP match the measures mandated in the FCTC and its implementation guidelines.

The TPP specifically respects the legitimacy of environmental, health and safety regulations and includes stricter limits on ISDS claims, but the value of these provisions are discounted by those citing the tobacco carve-out as proof the changes are not protective enough.

http://www.newsweek.com/war-tobacco-makes-it-tpp-free-trade-deal-426206

15 Republicans Will Oppose TPP Over Tobacco

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a U.S. anti-smoking group, is actively lobbying Democratic members of Congress hoping to sway them in support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) based on the argument that the agreement's tobacco carveout is a major public health victory, according to the head of the organization.

So the President of an anti-tobacco group is lobbying for the TPP, not because of the free trade parts, but because it carves tobacco out of the TPP's investment provisions to some extent. Presumably, he thinks this sets a good precedent for the overall relationship of trade and tobacco in international law. This precedent is so important to him that he is willing to campaign for the TPP even though its main focus has nothing to do with tobacco which many anti-tobacco folks object to.

When the Obama administration was strategizing about how to get the TPP through Congress, they must have done some calculations about how to package and market the agreement. As part of this, they seem to have decided to pursue some liberal votes at the risk of losing some conservative votes. By carving tobacco out of ISDS, they hoped they would end up with enough votes for TPP to pass, with additional Democratic votes outnumbering lost Republican votes.

As for the Republicans, we have already heard that a number of members of Congress -- mostly Republicans, I think -- might vote against the TPP based on the carveout. But those members have other constituents who will support the TPP for other reasons. Will they really vote against the TPP based solely on the treatment of tobacco?

http://worldtradelaw.typepad.com/ielpblog/2016/01/how-will-the-tobacco-carveout-affect-the-congressional-tpp-vote.html

North Carolina’s two U.S. senators, Republicans Richard Burr and Thom Tillis supported fast track. Now oppose TPP.

eridani

(51,907 posts)

12. A good thing, then. If enough Repubs oppose it, it's done n/t

Reply to pampango (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 2, 2016, 04:55 PM

Apr 2016

cantbeserious

(13,039 posts)

4. Thank You For Sharing

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 07:18 AM

Apr 2016

eom

B Calm

(28,762 posts)

6. This is one of the reasons I support Bernie

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 07:32 AM

Apr 2016

Sanders!

Scuba

(53,475 posts)

7. TPP: Obama's final betrayal.

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 07:50 AM

Apr 2016

mtasselin

(666 posts)

9. agreed

Reply to Scuba (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 08:15 AM

Apr 2016

Scuba, if a republican would have lied to us the American people we would be outraged, but because this guy pretends to be a democrat good hard working people are not only looking the other way, but defending him. This is the same guy who said he would renegotiate nafta and that any trade agreements labor would be sitting at the table. SELLING OUT AMERICA ONE SMILE AT A TIME.

djean111

(14,255 posts)

8. Great article. Thanks.

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Fri Apr 1, 2016, 08:04 AM

Apr 2016

The TPP has really helped me define who I am going to support. Good starting point. No one who voted for Fast Track, or votes for the TPP and other corporate giveaways, will get my support. I extend that to the membership of the Third Way advised New Democrat Coalition.

The TPP and other agreements like it are not one-issue things - they will hurt people all over the world, in many different ways.

Reply to this discussion