Fast-Track Treason and the Coming Corporate Coup

[marmar]

Fast-Track Treason and the Coming Corporate Coup

Thursday, 19 February 2015 00:00
By Rivera Sun, Truthout | Op-Ed


Corporations aren't people - otherwise, we'd be trying them for treason. If it were known that a handful of powerful men and women were meeting in secret to overthrow the authority of the US government and make this nation submissive to external domination, the NSA, CIA, FBI, US president, Congress and the military-industrial complex would declare them "terrorists of the year" and bomb them back into the Stone Age.

But corporations aren't people. They enjoy superhuman status, and are awarded privileges and protections well beyond what ordinary citizens of the United States can expect. (The last time a corporation was shot dead in the streets by a police officer was - well, never.) Corporations are given preferential treatment by judges, laws, politicians, investigators, tax agencies, financial institutions and much of our consumer-capitalist society.

So, when corporations spend years in secret negotiations to set up a trade agreement that gives them the legal power to overrule federal, state and local laws, subjugating not only the United States, but also the rest of the world to their control, our Congress lines up to help them.

This is treason by another name. It's called fast-track authority for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

Congress, on the whole, has not seen the secret, thousand-page text of the TPP. Yet, congressional members are curiously willing to eschew their right and responsibility to review this international trade treaty and fast-track the legislation without debate or revision. If they vote to fast-track the TPP, they are silencing the people and handing the nation over on a silver platter to corporate domination. ......................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/29187-fast-track-treason-and-the-coming-corporate-coup

[djean111]

1. People who keep insisting that the US will "lift other countries' workers up" -

In addition to stating trade rules, the TPP also sets up a corporate-run international tribunal court whose legal task is to overrule federal, state and local laws that restrict trade or give one nation an "unfair advantage" over another. Don't be fooled by the altruistic-sounding phrase: What this really means is that all labor, environmental, health and safety laws would be reduced to the lowest common denominator. Say hello to lead poisoning and sweatshops. Say goodbye to health benefits and living wages. Also, city zoning laws that keep industrial developments from lowering the value of your home can be gutted by this tribunal court. Factory farms and sludge fields can move in next door. Toxic plants can be located next to the schoolyard. Gone are the fracking bans and GMO-labeling laws we worked so hard to pass. One hundred and fifty years of labor history is being thrown in the gutter by the regressive nature of the TPP.

Also alarming is the possibility that TPP sections would allow venomous attacks on public assets like schools, water district utilities, parks, bridges, roads, public banks, buses and social programs. Regarded as awarding an "unfair advantage" to those enterprises via government support, the TPP would allow the feeding frenzy to privatize public assets to reach a new height. If the TPP is passed, it is only a matter of time before we, the people, own nothing and they, the private individuals and corporations, own everything.

[Populist_Prole]

2. Bingo. Well said.

Wonks and neoliberal ideologues are worse than corporate conservatives in that at least coproratists are bold in their aims: Cheap labor production abroad and sales to existing markets here.

The former groups try to sound all noble but they're just wealthy/financially secure pricks who are all too happy to use the working class as cannon fodder to some silly ideological aim that'll make them feel good...at least posthumously, as the "leveling" from trying to "lift other countries workers up" would take multiple generations, if at all. Meanwhile, as Keynes said "In the long run, we're all dead".

Of course in the short run, the corporatists solidify their gains that much more as their bottom lines get fatter yet.

[Hoyt]

3. Agree Corporations aren't people. But let's be honest, corps will not be able to overrule laws.

That's a big exaggeration, bordering on fabrication. The tribunals have been in NAFTA and similar agreements for at least 20 years, and are used by the European Union in settling trade disputes among nations, etc., without impacting "national sovereignty."

Obama has not gotten Fast-track authority, and I bet he doesn't get it.

Assuming Obama thinks the final draft of any ultimate agreement is worth presenting to Congress, we'll see it and have time to comment, protest, whatever, if necessary before Congress votes to approve or disapprove it.

Corporations are not direct party to the negotiations, it's handled by our government officials. Yes, there is plenty of corporate lobbying, but the government officials are accountable. I doubt all -- or any -- of the nations party to the TPP are going to approve anything that approaches what the conspiracy folks are touting as COULD HAPPEN under a trade agreement.

I'm still convinced Obama will not endorse a final agreement that sells us down the river. I know there are plenty who thought he'd gut Social Security, push the pipeline, work against net neutrality, etc., but he hasn't.

And I believe Obama when he responded to Matt Yglesias the other day by saying: "Where Americans have a legitimate reason to be concerned is that in part this rise has taken place on the backs of an international system in which China wasn't carrying its own weight or following the rules of the road and we were, and in some cases we got the short end of the stick. This is part of the debate that we're having right now in terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the trade deal that, you know, we've been negotiating. There are a lot of people who look at the last 20 years and say, 'Why would we want another trade deal that hasn't been good for American workers? It allowed outsourcing of American companies locating jobs in low-wage China and then selling it back to Walmart. And, yes, we got cheaper sneakers, but we also lost all our jobs.'"

"And my argument is two-fold. Number one: precisely because that horse is out of the barn, the issue we're trying to deal with right now is, can we make for a higher bar on labor, on environmental standards, et cetera, in that region and write a set of rules where it's fairer, because right now it's not fair, and if you want to improve it, that means we need a new trading regime. We can't just rely on the old one because the old one isn't working for us."

"But the second reason it's important is because the countries we're negotiating with are the same countries that China is trying to negotiate with. And if we don't write the rules out there, China's going to write the rules. And the geopolitical implications of China writing the rules for trade or maritime law or any kind of commercial activity almost inevitably means that we will be cut out or we will be deeply disadvantaged. Our businesses will be disadvantaged, our workers will be disadvantaged. So when I hear, when I talk to labor organizations, I say, right now, we've been hugely disadvantaged. Why would we want to maintain the status quo? If we can organize a new trade deal in which a country like Vietnam for the first time recognizes labor rights and those are enforceable, that's a big deal. It doesn't mean that we're still not going to see wage differentials between us and them, but they're already selling here for the most part. And what we have the opportunity to do is to set long-term trends that keep us in the game in a place that we've got to be. . . . . . ."

http://www.vox.com/a/barack-obama-interview-vox-conversation/obama-foreign-policy-transcript


Again, I'll wait till there is something formal to review, and Obama says whether the agreement is worth submitting to Congress for their review. I do not believe he will endorse a bad deal for us, or other countries. Merely wanting to see if one can negotiate an agreement that helps us and other countries is not a conspiracy to relinquish our "national sovereignty," especially when those other countries have to approve it too. I see no reason to mistrust/bash Obama on this yet.

[grasswire]

4. "horse is out of the barn...."

Is that "get over it"?

Or is it "look forward, not backward"?

[Hoyt]

5. It means we are fools to do nothing while the world passes us by under some mistaken idea we can

do all the things we want -- universal healthcare, free education, improved social programs, guaranteed income for people misplaced by technology, jobs, etc. -- by trading among ourselves.

Of course, to get there, trade agreements are only part of what is necessary. But it's a big part.

[Populist_Prole]

8. We are fools doing something in return for the less important things you list

Best way is not to let ( yet more ) working class erosion happen in the first place. Less need for compensation to counter the former.

Go back and tell your handlers that the true progressives are not going to accept neoliberal economic policy in exchange for social issue BS. Economic populism is where it's at, and we won't just STFU and go away. We're gonna' be trouble for you.

[Hoyt]

9. Unfortunately, you'll be trouble for yourself. Good luck from "my handlers."

[Populist_Prole]

19. No doubt meaning you'll ram this through no matter what

But you'll try to make us all feel good about it.

Third-Way or no way apparrently.

[Hoyt]

20. I won't be ramming anything through. I do hope they get a good agreement

that helps you and others in the future.

[Dems to Win]

6. Thank you for this food for thought. nt

[bvar22]

10. "Yes, there is plenty of corporate lobbying,...

...but the government officials are accountable."

[Hoyt]

12. Although I love him, would you prefer "The Rent Is Too High" guy negotiate a complicated

legal, economic, environmental, human rights, etc., agreement that over a dozen countries will have to abide by, and could seal our economic status for decades?

[rhett o rick]

13. Your arguments don't make sense in the least. You say that government officials are writing

the agreement and not corporations. That sounds hard to believe. Do you have a link? And if it's true that government officials that are beholding to the President are writing the agreement then why is what we've seen so damaging to the middle and lower classes?

Progressives like Sen Sanders are saying this is a bad idea. Conservatives are telling us to trust and have FAITH. We trusted that Pres Clinton wouldn't sell us down the river and he did with Gramm-Leach-Bliley and NAFTA. Since those decisions Clinton has made 80 million dollars. Now you are telling us to trust Pres Obama.

Other countries are having trouble with these agreements that allow corporations to sue governments if the governments pass laws that harm the corporation's potential profits. Germany is being sued by a nuclear power corporation because Germany is trying to move away from nuclear power, thus harming this corporations potential future profits.

Campaign Obama ran on government transparency. Pres Obama wants to keep the TPP secret.

[Hoyt]

15. You need to do the research ypurself, look up Office of US Trade Representative. You might learn

something.

The process is plenty transparent considering over a dozen countries are discussing some serious matters. We'll all see any agreement if it is ever finalized and will have plenty of opportunity to comment or even protest in the streets if it really is bad (although I can't see Obama accepting a bad agreement).

The suit you mention will not overrule German law. Germany is abandoning nuclear energy and the lawsuit will not change that.

The law suit is to recover a portion of the money invested by a Swedish company in Germany under an energy agreement. It's questionable the Swedish company will receive anything for all the money the pumped into operating a German nuclear plant. The. Swedish company is packing up and leaving Gernany, no way around that because they can't change German law as you guys keep saying.

They are asking for the value of assets they are leaving behind under an energy agreement signedbet Sweden, Germany and almost 50 other goverments.

Interestingly, Sweden paid a German company several years ago for its assets when Sweden decided to close nuclear plants under similar circumstances.

[rhett o rick]

16. I need to do research? You are the one making claims here. "The suit you mention will not overrule

German law. Germany is abandoning nuclear energy and the lawsuit will not change that." Really? Love to see where you got that.

I have asked and asked Pres Obama supporters to show any evidence that the TPP will benefit the 99%, with nothing in return except mocking and rudeness.

I have asked my two Democratic Senators to explain the benefits to the 99% for the TPP and the best I got was that those that will lose their jobs will get training. Right. They will learn how to twirl signs for a couple of bucks.

Sen Sanders, whom I respect says this:

1. TPP will allow corporations to outsource even more jobs overseas.
2. U.S. sovereignty will be undermined by giving corporations the right to challenge our laws before international tribunals.
3. Wages, benefits, and collective bargaining will be threatened.
4. Our ability to protect the environment will be undermined.
5. Food Safety Standards will be threatened.
6. Buy America laws could come to an end.
7. Prescription drug prices will increase, access to life saving drugs will decrease, and the profits of drug companies will go up.
8. Wall Street would benefit at the expense of everyone else.
9. The TPP would reward authoritarian regimes like Vietnam that systematically violate human rights.
10. The TPP has no expiration date, making it virtually impossible to repeal.

Do you think he is lying?

Can you refute any of the above?

[Hoyt]

18. Learn to do an Internet search, you can read all about it.

As it stands right now, corporations can pretty much outsource whatever jobs they want.. I like a lot of Sanders' positions, but here Bernie is doing playing to his audience, knowing they won't look it up.

Collective bargaining won't be threatened. Wages might not either if Obama achieves his objective of beginning to level the playing field. If he doesn't, he won't endorse the agreement. Vietnam would have to improve its human rights status. Food safety would be enhanced by any agreement. Environmental standards will be part of the agreement.I could go on, but you don't seem willing to look things up.

Good luck depending on protectionism to provide decent jobs for any length of time.

[bvar22]

21. Remember, Rhett,

Hoyt assures us that our government officials will be "accountable",
so what are you worried about?

[aspirant]

7. .. and don't forget about

TYRANNY and the TYRANTS behind it.

[woo me with science]

11. "This is treason by another name."

That's exactly what it is.

So is the mass surveillance.

So are the secret laws and courts and the police state.

So is the criminalization of investigative journalism and whistleblowing.

And so is the draining of our national treasury into war and propaganda machines.

This country has *already* been seized by criminals. They are just making the changes they need now to ensure that the new fascism cannot be resisted.

[rhett o rick]

14. Wow woo, that's pretty strong statements.

I agree completely. It's time to organize the populist movement.

[StopTheTPP]

17. Rec. Call your rep and senators.