Release of TPP Full Text Shows Victory for Corporate Rights

Margaret Flowers challenges President Obama's claim that the trade deal will promote a strong middle-class

November 5, 2015

Dr. Margaret Flowers is a pediatrician in the Baltimore area and a co-chair of the Maryland chapter of Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP). She is also a Co-Director of PopularResistance.org and It's Our Economy.

The release kicks off months of public and congressional review, and it's been championed by President Obama, who has billed the deal as a boon for the middle class and says that for the first time in history, a trade deal includes fully enforceable standards that will protect workers' rights and the environment. But to secure its passage, the president will likely need Republican support to overcome opposition from labor, environmental, and privacy groups who say the TPP only serves to expand corporate power and wealth at the expense of the majority of citizens, while renewed global protests have already been planned, with a week of action in DC kicking off on November 14.

Now joining us to discuss all of this and more is Margaret Flowers. She is a co-director of PopularResistance.org, and It's Our Economy. She is a physician and a candidate for the U.S. Senate from Maryland. Thanks so much for joining us, Margaret.

MARGARET FLOWERS: Thank you for having me, Jaisal.

NOOR: So Margaret, we know you've been following this for some time now, since this whole process began some five years ago. And now that we actually have started to look at the text we know it's massive, 30 chapters. Where does it, where do things lie? Is this going to be the saving grace for the middle class, as President Obama has said? Or is it going to lead to further corporate domination?

FLOWERS: What's really interesting, because we have more than 20 years of experience now with these types of so-called trade agreements, and the evidence has been very consistent and very clear that despite the rhetoric that we hear, that these are going to bring us more exports and more jobs, it does exactly the opposite. And we see an increase in our trade deficit with countries that we have these agreements with. That means for every time that we increase the trade deficit, that means more lost jobs. We see that they've claimed before to have strong worker protections, environmental protections. But just as we see in our daily life, you can create all the regulations that you want. But if they aren't enforced they really mean nothing, and that's what we've seen from these agreements.

So all evidence points to the fact that these are going to continue the same failed model of trade that we've had for more than 20 years now.

NOOR: But what do you say to people like President Obama that say these protections are enforceable? And supporters also point to what's happening, for example, in Vietnam. The New York Times notes that as part of this deal the U.S. won union rights and the right to protest for workers there.

FLOWERS: First the evidence, we've seen this from the president over and over throughout these past years of the negotiations. And there was a point where the White House put out a statement saying that environmental groups are standing with him, with this agreement, because of environmental protections. And then when the environmental groups were contacted about their positions it was actually the opposite. They were saying no, we are opposed to this agreement because it has unenforceable environmental protection. The president claimed that it was going to, the Trans-Pacific Partnership would create 650,000 jobs. When the Washington Post decided to fact check that claim, they found out that it was absolutely false. They gave him four Pinocchio noses for that.

There was a lot of concern about including the country of Malaysia in the Trans-Pacific Partnership because of their very poor record on human rights and human trafficking there. And so what did the administration do, they downgraded Malaysia to say that they had a better record than they actually do with no evidence to support that. So I think they've lost all credibility on this, and we have to recognize that as people that--we have to call out what's going on. We have to tell the truth, we have to look at the evidence of what has happened.

NOOR: And Margaret, I wanted to ask you, because we know some major labor unions have come out against this, but isn't there some truth in saying unions oppose this deal not really because they're concerned with workers in other countries, because they're still fighting to maintain relative privilege within the global labor force for U.S. workers?

FLOWERS: Actually, when Larry Cohen, the president of CWA testified before the Senate Finance Committee, he said that this must have the highest labor standards. And not just for the U.S., but around the world. We recognize, and I think the unions recognize, that these agreements drive a race to the bottom, and that impacts all of us. That when we promote higher labor standards elsewhere, they improve our labor standards here. It's all connected.

So the Columbia free trade agreement actually had these very high standards, labor standards. And what we've seen there, years later, five years later, is that they continue to have a very hostile environment for trade unionists there, including assassinations of them and injuries of them. And so these high labor standards just aren't being enforced by the U.S. or the other countries.

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=15051