Obama’s Trade Deals Could Overturn New York’s Fracking Ban and Accelerate Climate Change

[madfloridian]

Obama’s Trade Deals Could Overturn New York’s Fracking Ban and Accelerate Climate Change

Thanks to a recent Wikileaks’ leak, certain truly onerous provisions of President Obama’s secret trade deals are no longer secret. As reported this week in the New York Times, the Transpacific Partnership (TPP) would “grant broad powers to multinational companies operating in North America, South America and Asia. Under the accord, still under negotiation but nearing completion, companies and investors would be empowered to challenge regulations, rules, government actions and court rulings—federal, state or local—before tribunals organized under the World Bank or the United Nations.”

As terrible as this sounds for the rule of law, and democracy, it’s even worse. Long-time consumer advocate, Ralph Nader describes how the Investor State Tribunals would work:

...Suppose that Brazil sues the U.S. and says “your food labeling laws are too restrictive and they are keeping out our exports to your country.” Then we send our Attorney General to Geneva before the Tribunal. There can be no press, no public disclosure of what happens behind closed doors. If we lose, as we almost certainly will, there is no independent appeal. It circumvents our courts, legislative and regulations. Foreign corporations can take our food, health and safety protections and bring us before these tribunals and if they lose, we pay millions of dollars in compensation.


...The cases are argued, tried and judged by a small, revolving group of elite corporate attorneys, taking turns playing the role of judge and prosecutor. The potential for conflicts of interest and secret handshakes exceeds even the current regulatory revolving door, in which industry lawyers, officials and consultants move into key positions in public agencies, alter governmental regulations in industry’s favor and then return to their bespoke industry.

Under the terms of the agreement, corporations would have the right to sue U.S. federal, state and local governments if regulations, laws or bans, for example, those protecting health or the environment, cause a reduction in the company’s future profits. Nobel Prize winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz, told a group gathered in Queens, New York last month, that New York’s fracking ban would be a likely candidate for a Tribunal suit, should these agreements be signed by the President.

...“Once passed, the TPP will unleash a gigantic explosion of trade in fossil fuels. Some of the biggest promoters of these deals are Chevron, Exxon, and BP,” predicts William Waren, senior trade analyst for Friends of the Earth. Waren delineates the plans which companies and their elected officials are expectantly putting into place, awaiting the imminent Fast Tracking of the TPP:

A list of the harms by this uncontrolled explosion of trade follows in the article.

Hard to believe both parties and our president are pushing a trade deal that might cause so much harm to us as a nation.

[In_The_Wind]

1. That's really effin wonderful.

[Autumn]

2. This TPP is obscene.

Rec

[TreasonousBastard]

3. Could give us all pimples, too...

Like there's no trade in fossil fuels now. Or individual nations give a shit about World Court or UN decisions with no enforcement mechanism.

More handwringing and freaking out over leaks designed to get everyone upset.

Hard to believe so many people think the world will end over one more of the hundreds of trade deals already out there.

[madfloridian]

4. Over this? Yes, I am "handwringing and freaking out" as you put it.

[progressoid]

5. This ain't no ordinary trade deal.

The total GDP of the current TPP parties is approximately $27.5 trillion & comprises 40 percent of global GDP and one third of world trade.

[stillwaiting]

11. This is SUCH an important point.

When you add in the economies of the TTIP, I wonder what the % of global GDP would total...

It's staggering how binding these will be as well since it will require ALL countries to agree to any changes.

Since that is the case, you can be sure that the multinationals are making sure they get just about everything they want this time. It will be next to impossible to make changes in the future. They could EASILY find a reason to claim we can't make any changes in the future.

Hideous.

[TreasonousBastard]

13. So? China and S. Korea GDP is...

approaching 12 trillion, and they're not in the deal. A large part of this deal is to provide balance to China, which is already larger than the US but hasn't started seriously throwing its weight around yet.

Face it, the US is fast heading south economically and has little left but our military. If we aren't to be swallowed up by China, Brazil, and whoever else wants to buy the pieces, we have to work out deals.

Personally, I'm not thrilled being the replacement for the British Empire, but if we go down, we will go down a lot harder than they did.

[paleotn]

28. Oh, horse shit.....

...more "free trade" with super low labor cost, environmentally unfriendly nations is not going to solve anything. We've tried that and look where it's gotten us. What we need is a real industrial policy and not more corporate, "this will create jobs in the US" bullshit trade deals that only benefit multinational corporations and their shareholders. Until that happens our economy will continue to stagnate and the only thing the vast majority of American consumers will be able to afford is cheap shit from China.

[TreasonousBastard]

46. Be specific about that "industrial policy" of which you speak...

In Western Europe it seems to be more social policy driving the positive effects of the economies.

Anyway, what's your magic formula for getting businesses of all sizes to pay properly for making and selling good stuff that you approve of?

[GeorgeGist]

8. 51

[Skittles]

52. hard to believe people excusing this garbage

seriously WTF

[Octafish]

6. This is why I vote Democratic.

Our Party stands for the Little Guy.

[Demeter]

18. Stands on the little guy, you say?

Oh, I must need glasses....and a new party. Or at least, a new president.

[Octafish]

23. Rip van Octafish

Fell asleep in 1981. When I awoke in 2015 this Pruneface guy was on the side of the dime:



Keep on cutting taxes for the rich and cutting Social Security for the rest was what the cool kids from both sides of the tracks were all saying in synch, non-stop.

[madfloridian]

32. ...........

And confusing posters everywhere.

[randome]

7. No one is doing away with our environmental and safety laws.

There is a reason the U.S. has never lost these kind of disputes in the past. Unreasonable tariffs or laws designed for protectionism will likely be the only criteria.

I say 'likely' because none of us know what the final text will be but so far there is nothing to say that our laws are invalidated.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[madfloridian]

10. How will we know what they do? They are keeping it secret from the people.

[randome]

12. Well, the result won't be secret.

Most trade disputes are handled out of the public eye, I would think. Can you imagine if every dispute was televised? Something even more boring than C-Span.

The most likely consequence of the TPP -I think- is that smaller countries will shore up their own environmental and safety standards to more closely align with ours. Fewer sweatshops in the world would be a good thing.

Again, that's just my guess. I'm as much in the dark as everyone else, I just don't think the TPP spells Armageddon as some want to believe.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[madfloridian]

21. See post #16

[Elwood P Dowd]

14. We have lost 184 trade disputes, and that's just the WTO disputes.

https://www.citizen.org/documents/WTODisputesSummaryOnePagerwtables.pdf

[Doctor_J]

29. i guess you and randome have different definitions of the word "never"

Last edited Thu Mar 26, 2015, 10:34 PM - Edit history (1)

[Elwood P Dowd]

43. His definition comes from The CATO Book Of Bullshit. (nm)

[Zorra]

9. We must end private ownership of our government ASAP. This is fascism. nt

t

[annabanana]

15. No kidding!

Some corporate, profit driven tribunal could trump all local concerns.

[Ichingcarpenter]

16. I'll wait for the final release ,,,,,,, thank you.

[madfloridian]

17. .....

[Ichingcarpenter]

22. .....

[Demeter]

19. We will be waiting a long time, then. There are NO plans to ever release it

[ybbor]

25. What a maroon!

They are playing for fools, and we are letting them.

[madfloridian]

30. Did you look at the picture in the post?

[ybbor]

36. Do you mean the TPA?

[madfloridian]

38. I thought you called Ichingcarpenter a maroon...

So I supposed you did not catch the picture in that post.

There's so much name calling around here now, that I wasn't sure how to take it.

[ybbor]

44. Oh no, I loved ichingcarpenter's picture

I was attempting some 1950s era humor to go with his picture and the quote.

[madfloridian]

45. Gotcha, thanks.

[hifiguy]

20. The final ceding of economic soverignty to corporations.

The Golden Road to worldwide corporate fascism. All behind closed doors. The peons need to know nothing.

[MisterP]

24. greenest and most pro-middle class President EVER! also, Nader! he did Iran-Contra & the megadrought

but again it feeds into the tavern whining that "left and right are all crooks out to sell us out": it's absolutely not left and right--but it IS D and R

and then the feckless political class and their useless hangers-on say the left is why they keep losing--honestly it's like looking at some insane Army magazine from some banana republic

[Doctor_J]

26. he's giving Exxon Mobil enough rope to hang themselves

He's five moves ahead of them

[MisterP]

31. brilliant rope-a-dope! he'll show you all!!!

but I don't think it's even cognitive dissonance: it's political--the way the party's run is the way the new economy's run is the way the new schools are run: it's a big sweatshop, money/votes funneled to Wall Street and the rest of us told to be thankful at least we're not out in the rain

[Hoyt]

27. Suppose countries have to improve their environmental impact and workers'

plight to garner investments from countries they want to trade with.

[Hoyt]

34. Who is going to hold them responsible if we do nothing?

[madfloridian]

35. View from another country on how costs of medicines will increase. Also food labeling.

http://modernfarmer.com/2015/03/what-the-heck-is-the-trans-pacific-partnership-and-why-should-you-care/

Katie Hirono, a researcher at the University of New South Wales’ Centre for Health Equity, Training, Research and Evaluation, says while “it’s understandable that negotiators need some level of discretion in developing an agreement, without involvement of outside experts and some level of transparency on the potential impacts of the trade agreement, there’s no way for governments to guarantee that these agreements won’t negatively impact people.”

...The report, “Negotiating Healthy Trade in Australia: A Health Impact Assessment of the Proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement,” found that the TPP has the potential to increase the cost of medicines in the member countries outside the U.S., prevent the U.S. from implementing reforms to make medications more affordable, and could negatively impact participating nations’ domestic policies.

According to Hirono, the U.S. has some of the strongest policies related to intellectual property in the world, and imposing U.S. standards in countries with different intellectual property rules “could significantly change the affordability of medications in those countries, as well as locking in current arrangements that keep prices high in the U.S.”

“What this means for medicine is that it takes longer for cheaper generic medications to enter the market, keeping costs higher for patients for longer,” Hirono said in an email.

...Additionally, there are provisions that would allow foreign investors to sue governments of another country when they believe there has been a violation of their property rights, meaning “public policies that are good for health,” such as improved nutrition labeling on food, restrictions on alcohol and health warnings on tobacco products could be challenged by companies under the TPP.

“This not only damages health when good public policies are taken away, but it often deters governments from enacting new policies for fear of litigation,” says Hirono.

[Doctor_J]

37. well, in fairness, this one probably won't affect us that much, seeing as how we already

pay the highest prices. Let's make lemonade from these lemons!!

[madfloridian]

39. House Democrats not happy with secrecy.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/235848-house-dems-angry-over-obamas-classified-trade-meetings

Members will be allowed to attend the briefing on the proposed trade pact with 12 Latin American and Asian countries with one staff member who possesses an “active Secret-level or high clearance” compliant with House security rules. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) told The Hill that the administration is being “needlessly secretive.”

“Even now, when they are finally beginning to share details of the proposed deal with members of Congress, they are denying us the ability to consult with our staff or discuss details of the agreement with experts,” DeLauro told The Hill.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) condemned the classified briefing.

“Making it classified further ensures that, even if we accidentally learn something, we cannot share it. What is USTR working so hard to hide? What is the specific legal basis for all this senseless secrecy?” Doggett said to The Hill.

The reaction from Pro-Trade Democrats:

Senior Democratic aides representing pro-trade lawmakers vehemently pushed back against their party’s criticisms of the White House. One called the complaints “bizarre” and said, “It just makes no sense.”

Bizarre...really shows respect for fellow Democrats.

[RiverLover]

40. I love our house Dems & the CPC !!

Stay STRONG!! We got your backs.

[madfloridian]

41. Yes.

[aspirant]

47. Why is this secret?

C-span telecasting of the negotiations from the people's representatives keeps us informed of what they are doing in our names. Some camera shy countries shouldn't be able to turn off the spotlight.

If they are trying to improve labor and environmental standards, why are they omitting TRANSPARENCY Standards?

The buying and selling of goods and services in an open global market is NOT national security. Tomatoes and onions are not weapons of war.

[madfloridian]

48. All good questions.

And I don't know the answers.

[woo me with science]

49. K&R

[Michigan-Arizona]

50. K&R n/t

[valerief]

51. This will be our new national anthem.

Replace Boston with USA.