Anti-TPP Amendment Fails at Heated Dem Platform Meeting

[portlander23]

Anti-TPP Amendment Fails at Heated Dem Platform Meeting
Nike Knight
Common Dreams

When Democratic Party platform committee members arrived at the committee's final session in Orlando, Florida, on Saturday morning, 700,000 signed petitions against the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement had been delivered there to meet them.

Yet despite passionate arguments and widespread public opposition to the deal, the committee voted down an amendment that would have opposed a Senate vote on the agreement.

The amendment was introduced by activist and author Jim Hightower, who called the TPP "manure" in his argument for his amendment:

Jim Hightower speaking for clear & specific anti-#TPP amendment: "Old saying, if you're not at the table you're on the menu" #DemPlatform

— Kevin Gosztola (@kgosztola) July 9, 2016

Opposition to the TPP is a cornerstone of Sanders' presidential campaign. While Hillary Clinton campaigned for the deal in her role as secretary of state, she switched her position several months ago and now publicly opposes the TPP.

CSPAN continues to broadcast the meeting live.

Bad policy and worse politics. This will allow Trump to continue to hammer on Mrs. Clinton and cast him self as the candidate of working America. Serious misstep.

[villager]

1. Definitely a bad choice by Dems. But don't forget there won't be any anti-TPP language in the GOP's

....platform, either.

Meaning both candidates will be free to spin a position separate from each party's "official" one.

[portlander23]

2. Perot

Ross Perot got 19% of the vote without the backing of a major party and without 24 years of free trade destroying the lives of working people in the United States. I don't want to hand that to Mr. Trump.

[villager]

3. Well, if he talks it up more than Clinton. But neither party will be "officially" against it.

One wonders if this would provide an opening for Gary Johnson, in the Perot role, but I can't imagine the Libertarians being "officially" against further corporate capture of our government, and trade, either.

[portlander23]

4. Libertarians won't bite

Trump, full of shit though he may be, is talking populist talk and that will resonate with some people. He's mixing it with racism and nativism which is a nasty combination. The Democrats have the opportunity to put forward a progressive answer to neoliberalism, but it doesn't look like that's forthcoming.

Given a choice between a demagogue who's pretending to address real concerns vs. a party that appears uninterested, a lot of people are going to go with the demagogue. It's terrible electoral strategy. This gives Trump ammunition to say that Mrs. Clinton is not sincere in her opposition to TPP, and that's to his advantage.

[840high]

5. .+1

[villager]

6. The real question is whether the Democratic rank-and-file can kill it off.

Another danger is the upcoming lame duck session, for this last bit of "hope and change" flung in our direction.

But Trump won't be able to say he represents a party that is against it, and I assume Clinton is smart enough to bring up even more enthusiastic GOP support for the TPP, when the issue comes up.

But can she pushed into actually supporting it, when said "push" comes to shove?

[portlander23]

7. Lame duck is to our disadvantage

The TPP “Lame Duck” Push Insults Democracy
Dave Johnson
Common Dreams

Here is why the push is on. The so-called “lame duck” session of Congress is particularly unaccountable. Those who might have been tossed in the November elections are still able to vote. Newly elected and reelected legislators are not yet sworn in, so they can’t vote. And reelected legislators have the opportunity to pay back the big donors who funded their campaigns, knowing voters have two long years to forget what they did.

For example, Rep. Randy Forbes, a Republican representing Virginia’s 4th congressional district who is a proponent of TPP, lost his primary to Scott Taylor, a TPP opponent who called the deal “Obamatrade” in the Republican primary. The TPP, and Forbes’ earlier vote for “fast track” trade authority to grease the skids for TPP, was a major issue in the primary.

But even though Forbes was tossed out by his constituents because of his support for fast track and TPP, he will still be able to vote if TPP comes up in the lame duck session of Congress. Forbes will be looking for a job – probably from the very corporations that support TPP.

See if you can guess which way he will vote on TPP, after being tossed out for supporting “free trade.”

The lame duck session gives incentives to vote for unpopular legislation. This also hurts Mrs. Clinton because she does not support TPP but her brand is to build on top of Obama's foundation. This short circuits her sales pitch.

On the other hand, Trump's brand has been running against the GOP establishment, so having the backing of a party that disagrees with him plays into his narrative.

This really is the nexus of bad policy and bad politics for Democrats.

That said, progressives and working people will carry on the fight.

[villager]

10. Good point. If this administration craps out TPP all over us during the Lame Duck, that will severly

....undercut Clinton on the campaign trail.

[w4rma]

52. Her "campaign trail" would be over, at that point. It would knee cap her administration. (nt)

[pangaia]

57. I'm just tired of 'brands.'

Oh me, oh ,my. it sounds like I have to buy General Mills of Post.

Can't we just have ideas, position, good or bad?

[CentralMass]

29. Her eventual support will be due to some "new protections" or some such b.s .

that will have been added to the bill

[villager]

30. would seem likely. nt

[dishatin]

65. TPP Opposed by the American People

The 'Democratic Platform Committee'is as disconnected from the citizens of this country and life in America today as never becore. The Democratic Platform Committee members crave power for themselves and display amoral selfishness and self entitlement. Once again one must ask who runs the Democratic Party? Will the real Democratic Party please stand up? All supporters of TPP might consider joining the GOP as they represent not the core principles of the Democratic Party.

[w4rma]

8. I really don't care about how "embarrassed" Obama is over his TPP support.

He, nor any other Democrat, should not be promoting any legislation that looks anything like the TPP.

Save Obama's legacy and stop him from shoving it down our throats in the lame duck session.

[annavictorious]

9. Put your egos in your pockets and stop the grandstanding.

The Democratic party is not going to include platform language that embarrasses a sitting president.
This lost 116-64.
It wasn't even close.

[w4rma]

11. The loss was about President Obama's ego. And the opposition to the TPP won't stop.

Remember that Democrats lost Congress for the first time in a generation over NAFTA.

[annavictorious]

14. Obama needs to be permitted to allow this to quietly die.

And he will.

The ego problem is with the people who want to be able to claim credit for what is going to happen anyway.

[w4rma]

15. If he is fine with it 'quietly' dying, then he shouldn't oppose statements against it, anywhere.(nt)

[whathehell]

58. Thank you.

Agreed.

[portlander23]

12. It's ok to screw working people as long as we don't embarrass a sitting president

Even if it undermines the person who's actually running!

[annavictorious]

16. The Sanders side needs to stop being so concerned about who is going to be able to claim credit.

[w4rma]

17. It's not about "claiming credit". It's about stopping the TPP from ever becoming law. (nt)

[annavictorious]

23. How would the proposed amendment stop TPP from becoming law?

How would an amendment opposing a senate vote have done anything other than embarrass Obama and give the Republicans a "divided party" narrative?

It was meaningless grandstanding.
And that's why it lost so resoundingly.

[w4rma]

25. Stating that Democrats are against the TPP allows no wiggle room to rewrite history and be for it.

If you are worried about a "divided party" narrative, don't divide the party, in reality, by promoting policies that only a small minority of Democrats support, over the wishes of the vast majority of Democrats.

The folks opposing NAFTA *still* oppose it, now. And the folks opposing the TPP will always oppose it.

[Lord Magus]

66. "Wiggle room" for who?

Anybody who's going to vote for TPP is not going to care whether the platform says Democrats oppose it.

[DianaForRussFeingold]

63. I agree!

Thank You!

[DianaForRussFeingold]

44. Interesting! nt

[DemonGoddess]

69. Thank you!

[TDale313]

13. Fuck any "Dem" who supports this retched deal.

It will complete our transition to an oligarchy and destroy what's left of the middle class. This is a deal breaker for me.

[annavictorious]

19. Nobody wants the deal at this point.

I am no great fan of Obama, but the platform is going to give him the cover he needs to make TPP quietly go away.

There's an element of gamesmanship that some are missing in their overarching desire to claim bragging rights and to grab credit.

[KMOD]

18. Of course it failed.

There was no way the party was going to let Bernie Sanders take a potshot at the President.

[portlander23]

20. But it's fine to take potshots at working people

And undermine the candidate.

[KMOD]

22. It doesn't need to be in the platform.

Pushing for it to be there was a petty potshot at the President.

Hillary has already gone on record saying it will not go through in its current forum.

[annavictorious]

24. The Sanders faction wants credit. It's disgusting.

Look at the link provided.
One candidate has "apparatchiks".
The other candidate has "integrity".

[KMOD]

42. It is disgusting.

[w4rma]

50. What is disgusting is these weaseling-out-later words. (nt)

[w4rma]

27. "In it's current form" Those are weasel-out-of-it words. (nt)

[KMOD]

47. see post #40

It's in reply to your post as well.

[CentralMass]

33. Allowing wiggle room to eventually support it.

[KMOD]

40. We are going to need to do something to correct bad trade agreements.

In the words of Richard Trumpka

This isn’t a matter of whether or not to trade. It’s about what the rules are and who benefits from them. Of course, we should open up new markets for our products and do business all over the world. The real challenge is to advance trade policy that creates shared prosperity. The pending Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), like Nafta before it, fails that test miserably.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jul/04/richard-trumka-donald-trump-anti-trade-hypocrisy

[DemonGoddess]

71. +1000!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. Of course it did. It's Too LIBERAL!!

[arcane1]

26. Hillary will surely be uncomfortable, since she supposedly hates the TPP and all.

She may have to support it against her will now.

I wish we had a "how convenient" smiley.

[w4rma]

28. So "uncomfortable" that she's given the word to most all of her surrogates to not oppose the TPP

in any way, shape or form.

[annavictorious]

32. It's like trying to explain chess

to a 5 year old.

Luckily there were enough adults in the room (116-64) to reign in the grand-standers.

[w4rma]

35. Remember the last time the Clintons 'played chess' with a 'free' trade agreement?

Democrats lost Congress for the first time since the New Deal was passed.

[Lord Magus]

64. You continue to miss the point.

This isn't about free trade agreements, it's about understanding what a platform actually is. The platform is completely irrelevant to whether TPP gets voted on, and to whether it passes if it does get voted on.

[DianaForRussFeingold]

49. Huh, to a 5 year old

Last edited Sat Jul 9, 2016, 11:38 PM - Edit history (1)

Bernie is The adult in the room--We should have listened to him all along.

Bernie Sanders on the right side of history.:

Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) delivers a House speech against a fast track trade agreement with Mexico, urging instead national investment in American employment and infrastructure. May 9, 1991:

Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) calls for the rejection of a free trade partnership with China – highlighting the gross suppression of freedom and democracy in China and the consequent erosion of American labor that would result.:

"You don't need a PHD in economics to understand what these trade deals are about!" Bernie Sanders

[think]

62. The unions, environmental, indigenous, human rights groups and many top Democrats are opposed

And yet the party chooses not to listen. There is a HUGE disconnect.

Unfortunately it seems that corporate profits and influence are out weighing the complaints of all these different groups who are united in their opposition.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/02/18/top-house-democrat-on-trade-opposes-trans-pacific-partnership/

http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Free-Trade-Agreement-TPP/Ten-Critical-Problems-with-the-Trans-Pacific-Partnership

http://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2016/03/major-environmental-landowner-indigenous-groups-congress-learn-keystone-xl

http://www.sierraclub.org/compass/2015/10/more-dozen-environmental-organizations-warn-trans-pacific-partnership-risks

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/12/trans-pacific-partnership-serious-rights-concerns


Elizabeth Warren just made a very well reasoned plea to try and stop the passage of this corporate rigged process:

And everyone knows that the corporations basically wrote the TPP for their own benefit:

Revealed Emails Show How Industry Lobbyists Basically Wrote The TPP

by Mike Masnick - Mon, Jun 8th 2015 9:29am

Back in 2013, we wrote about a FOIA lawsuit that was filed by William New at IP Watch. After trying to find out more information on the TPP by filing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, and being told that they were classified as "national security information" (no, seriously), New teamed up with Yale's Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic to sue. As part of that lawsuit, the USTR has now released a bunch of internal emails concerning TPP negotiations, and IP Watch has a full writeup showing how industry lobbyists influenced the TPP agreement, to the point that one is even openly celebrating that the USTR version copied his own text word for word.

What is striking in the emails is not that government negotiators seek expertise and advice from leading industry figures. But the emails reveal a close-knit relationship between negotiators and the industry advisors that is likely unmatched by any other stakeholders.

The article highlights numerous examples of what appear to be very chummy relationships between the USTR and the "cleared advisors" from places like the RIAA, the MPAA and the ESA. They regularly share text and have very informal discussions, scheduling phone calls and get togethers to further discuss. This really isn't that surprising, given that the USTR is somewhat infamous for its revolving door with lobbyists who work on these issues. In fact, one of the main USTR officials in the emails that IP Watch got is Stan McCoy, who was the long term lead negotiator on "intellectual property" issues. But he's no longer at the USTR -- he now works for the MPAA.

You can read through the emails, embedded below, which show a very, very chummy relationship, which is quite different from how the USTR seems to act with people who are actually more concerned about what's in the TPP (and I can use personal experience on that...). Of course, you'll notice that the USTR still went heavy on the black ink budget, so most of the useful stuff is redacted. Often entire emails other than the salutation and signature line are redacted.

Read more:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150605/11483831239/revealed-emails-show-how-industry-lobbyists-basically-wrote-tpp.shtml

When the TPP was "fast tracked" only 28 House Dems vote for it. Around 190 members of the GOP voted to fast track the TPP. The overwhelming majority of Democrats in congress voted against fast tracking the TPP


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/6/18/1394407/-These-are-the-28-Democrats-who-voted-for-fast-track-twice

https://www.thenation.com/article/why-so-many-democrats-rejected-obamas-lobbying-trans-pacific-trade-deal/

[stopbush]

31. Yeah, the TPP could easily knock a half to three-quarters of a % point

off Hillary's lead over Trump...or not.

[w4rma]

34. NAFTA cost the Democrats control of Congress for the first time since the New Deal. (nt)

[stopbush]

36. Different times, different issue, myopic reading of history.

Elections are never decided on a single issue. Never.

How can support of TPP by the Ds hurt them when the Rs also support it? Do you really think people are going to cast their vote based on a non-issue? Are you going to vote for Trump and the Rs support for TPP just to poke your finger in the eye of the Ds for not opposing TPP?

[w4rma]

37. The Republicans *say* they oppose these 'free' trade agreements, then quietly vote for them.

But neoliberal Democratic presidents promote, sign and campaign for these 'free' trade agreements, so the public blames Democrats.

[stopbush]

38. I hate to tell you, but TPP is not an issue in this election for the vast

majority of Americans.

The worst thing the party could have done would have been to publicly rebuke Obama over an issue that isn't an issue. It now sits buried in the platform where few will notice, along with the planks that Sanders WAS successful getting included.

[w4rma]

41. You don't 'hate' to say that. It's not even true. These 'free' trade agreements underlie Trump's

entire ability to win the Republican primary. And these 'free' trade agreements are a key piece in why Sanders nearly defeated Clinton for the Democratic primary. And these 'free' trade agreements are a huge reason for the rise of income inequality in America, the Occupy Wall Street Protests and the economic issues facing the vast majority of Americans, currently.

These 'free' trade agreements will result in the populist right-wing (fascists) taking over America's government, eventually.

[stopbush]

48. Sanders did NOT nearly beat Hillary. He lost OVERWHELMINGLY by any

metric you look at. Only in Sandersworld is losing by 13-14% equal to "nearly" winning. Sheesh!

Honestly, it's way too early to attempt to rewrite history.

[DanTex]

59. No, Trump's ability to win the GOP primary was based on open racism.

[annavictorious]

39. "The apparatchiks of the Orwellian neoliberal candidate voted against

our meaningless attempt at grandstanding!"

116-64
Let reasonable people prevail over sloganeers.

[w4rma]

43. Paul Krugman: The Very Serious People who nearly destroyed the American economy have learned nothing

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/06/paul_krugman_the_very_serious_people_who_nearly_destroyed_the_american_economy_have_learned_nothing_from_their_failure/

[annavictorious]

45. Remind me again who Krugman supported in 2008

and again in 2016?

Here's a link to the actual Krugman article. It concerns deficit hawks and austerity budgets. I'm not sure why you think it's relevant here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/06/opinion/austeritys-grim-legacy.html?_r=1

[MohRokTah]

46. BRAVO!!!

[w4rma]

51. You fully support the TPP and don't believe for a second that Clinton/Obama won't try to pass it. nt

[MohRokTah]

53. I'm hoping for a lame duck ratification.

It's one issue I disagree with my preferred candidate on. I wish Hillary supported but understand that she doesn't given the emotionally charged opposition from those who don't understand what it is all about and believe the rhetorical hyperbole from those who are against it.

[w4rma]

54. You're getting your way. She supports the TPP, otherwise she wouldn't be telling her surrogates

to avoid putting anything in writing opposing the TPP.

[MohRokTah]

55. Please provide the link to audio or video of Hillary telling her "surrogates"

to avoid putting anything in writing opposing the TPP.

kthnxbai

[w4rma]

60. Most every surrogate that she picks just happens to oppose writing any anti-TPP statements. (nt)

[MohRokTah]

61. Delegates are not beholden to anybody when voting on the platform.

But don't let the facts get in the way of smearing our Democratic candidate.

[annavictorious]

67. It's pointless to engage with folks

who truly do not understand what a platform is and why a meaningless amendment with language embarrassing to a sitting president is counterproductive to the party's goals.

They want bragging rights. They want to believe that they're revolutionary. And they've been in a echo chamber for so long that they can't face the fact that reasonable, thoughtful, progressive people disagree with them.

116-64
The measure lost 36% to 64%. It was trounced. Stop trying to shove terrible ideas down people's throats.

[think]

72. The important thing is what the TPP actually DOES rather than the considerations of the possible

"embarrassment" of any political figure. Only considering how it will effect the president as an individual just isn't a realistic way to look at important trade deals.

This isn't a football game where people are just rooting for a team in a game with no long term repercussions. This is America's future that is at stake. The lives of people around the globe will be affected by this trade deal. It should work for EVERYONE not just powerful corporations that will profit from it.

And the majority of House Democrats warned a long time ago that there were major concerns with the TPP process:

http://delauro.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1455:delauro-miller-lead-151-house-dems-telling-president-they-will-not-support-outdated-fast-track-for-trans-pacific-partnership&Itemid=21

The top Democrat on trade and many other Democrats are STILL openly opposed to the TPP in it's current form:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/02/18/top-house-democrat-on-trade-opposes-trans-pacific-partnership/

Everyone KNOWS the corporations wrote this for their benefit and profits. The American people have few avenues to try and stop this corporate written trade agreement from passing in the lame duck session. And if it does pass it will be by an overwhelming number for Republicans in congress rather than the Democrats.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150605/11483831239/revealed-emails-show-how-industry-lobbyists-basically-wrote-tpp.shtml

[w4rma]

68. A big reason that you guys support Hillary is for the Clintons' past 'free' trade support.

And you could care less about how NAFTA handed Congress to the Republicans for the first time since the New Deal.

[MohRokTah]

70. And now you claim to know why I support Hillary Clinton?

Can you tell me the numbers for tonight's Powerball drawing?

[Tal Vez]

56. This will not limit what Clinton says or doesn't say about TPP.

Clinton should be given what she wants the platform to say about TPP. She may want it to be silent on the issue, affording her maximum flexibility during the campaign.

[Jitter65]

73. Ok, so the amendment failed. It was discussed and voted on. We like democracy until we don't. nt