Why I am so obsessed with the TPP. I think it's the most important issue of the day

[cali]

and that includes the TPPI as well.

What don't these FTAs threaten? They threaten the environment:

For example:

Lone Star Resources vs Canada under NAFTA Chapter 11 Investor State resolution process:

The truth is becoming clear -- trade rules are being used to threaten policies that protect wildlife, preserve scarce natural resources, and promote clean energy and green jobs. The most recent clash between free trade and our environment is in Quebec, where communities are fighting against the harmful effects of fracking, the hazardous process used to extract natural gas by blasting significant amounts of water, chemicals, and sand into rock formations deep underground.

On November 8th, Lone Pine Resources, a Delaware-incorporated oil and gas firm with operations in Canada, filed notice of its intent to sue Canada for $250 million under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) over Quebec’s moratorium on fracking. The moratorium is set to stay in place as Quebec studies the environmental risks associated with fracking. Quebec also passed legislation in June banning drilling below the St. Lawrence River.

Placing a moratorium on fracking in order to study environmental risk is sound public policy. Who can argue that?

Answer: Lone Pine Resources. The company claims that the moratorium violates their rights as an investor under NAFTA and constitutes an expropriation of their drilling permit. They’re taking advantage of NAFTA’s controversial chapter on investment that gives corporations the right to sue a government over nearly any law or policy that the government argues is hurting its ability to profit. It’s almost impossible to believe, but it’s true.

http://sierraclub.typepad.com/compass/2012/11/nafta-fracking-case.html


Laws protecting waters in the Great Lakes and Aquifers? They can be challenged under NAFTA and the same will hold true under the TPP and TTIP.

Laws regarding pharmaceuticals: They too can be and are being challenged.

Copyright, food, tobacco labeling: All can be are being challenged under NAFTA and other FTA investment protection rules.

This doesn't happen in the court of any nation. It happens in Tribunals made up of lawyers with cozy relationships with the corporations and people they are making decisions about.

The TPP and TTIP are enormous and would expand this action which is already rampant, letting that many more corporations and investors in on the action.

It's a huge threat. We've seen the poisoned fruit of the other U.S-FTAs even if they don't make headline news. It literally provides license for corporations and the investor class to loot and pillage without government oversight.

[djean111]

1. Kicked. Thank you.

There can be no defense of this.
Unless, of course, we are to believe that the reason the TPP is so super sekrit is that is is so awesomely awesome and rolls back all the evil NAFTA stuff and therefore the people and corporations and Congress can't see it.
Oh wait.

[The Magistrate]

2. I Quite Agree, Ma'am: These Things Are Detestable And Disasterous

And most explicitly so in the 'investor rights' provisions you cite.

An investor has no right whatever against a law or regulation duly established by a state, particularly not by a democratic state, certainly not by any means outside the normal political process and courts of a state.

"The trouble with our modern corporations is that they have neither bodies to be kicked nor souls to be damned."

[PDJane]

3. Disastrous for the environment and for people....and it will increase global warming.

Which is something we really don't need to happen.

[dixiegrrrrl]

4. Found a website dedicated to fighting the TPP

provides a lot of information about the plan.


http://www.exposethetpp.org/TPPImpactsYou.html

[cali]

5. thanks. I'll check it out. I have several more

on hand if you're ever interested.

[dixiegrrrrl]

6. This seems to be a very approp. post

if you would like to share the sites.

[Brickbat]

7. K&R

Keep it up, Cali.

[obxhead]

8. Stay on it cali

I don't give a shit who is in charge of passing these FTA's and what letter follows their name.

It's a shit sandwich the WORLD does not deserve. They must be stopped. They being everyone involved in making it law.

[zeemike]

9. Thank you Cali for keeping this front and center.

K&R for our dedicated DUers who do the work...

[JEB]

10. Please keep up

the excellent work. And thank you.

[cyberswede]

13. So, who did you vote for? Who do you support?

[cyberswede]

18. Well, since this is a site for Democrats, I think it's a reasonalbe question.

Please tell me you're not a Paulite, or something...

[frylock]

19. i'm not a democrat..

am I allowed here?

[cyberswede]

20. Sure, why not?

[frylock]

34. coolio

[cyberswede]

27. I asked because...

this statement reads like you're talking to voters who voted differently than you ("YOU" as opposed to "WE&quot .

YOU are being SCREWED by Those YOU Elected and Support

I'm not paranoid, but we do get some Paul supporters here from time to time trying to peddle that bullshit.

I've been a Dem since I voted for McGovern...in 1st grade.

[cyberswede]

32. .

[hrmjustin]

21. Yes we do.

[LuvNewcastle]

12. I am against anything that increases corporate power, and this will

do it in spades. Basically, like NAFTA, it facilitates the growth and domination of multinational corporations over our elected governments. Those corporations have too much power as it is. We need our government to find ways to increase the people's power over these multinational behemoths, not the reverse.

[Vincardog]

14. Agreed. The apologists who claim not to have seen the proof need to take a long look in the mirror

and decide if they see a 'person' there or a autobot working for the matrix of the wealthy elites.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

15. kick. rec.

The destruction of all that is beautiful--the natural world--in order to meet the overwhelming needs of an ever expanding human population that destroys everything to satisfy its own needs is more upsetting than I can stand.

[OnyxCollie]

16. I'm listening to a lecture about the TPP right now.

Randy Mandell & Yoram Bauman: The Carbon Tax and the TPP (September 5, 2013)
http://archive.org/details/scm-360449-randymandellyorambaumanthecar

[el_bryanto]

22. Could the Mexican/Canadian subsidy sue a United States government (state or local)

to require a local ordinance be overturned?

Bryant

[cali]

24. What do you mean by subsidy? do you mean investor under the

Chapter 11 definition of such?

[el_bryanto]

28. Sorry not clear - A US corporation with subsidies in Mexico or Canada

It's clear that US corporations can sue Mexican or Canadian governments to overturn environmental legislation - could it work the other way? And, more to the point, could a US corporation do so through a subsidy - requiring a state or a county to overturn labor or environmental regulations?

Bryant

[cali]

31. yes, it does work the other way around

and yes, it can and does do so through subsidies.

the first part of this chart details some U.S. cases.
http://www.citizen.org/documents/investor-state-chart1.pdf

And it's not just NAFTA. The U.S. has other FTAs.

[panader0]

25. K and R

Thanks for your fierce and informative opposition.

[Locrian]

26. i agree - this is super top important

If these seeds are sown, it will be unprecedented power and cause immense suffering.

To me, the whole TPP is a terrorist manifesto.

[jsr]

30. It is a monstrous assault against working Americans.

[bvar22]

40. The "monstrous assault against working Americans" began under Reagan,

but continued in 1992 under Bill Clinton and the DLC 3rdWay "New Democrats" (funded by Koch Brothers) with NAFTA and serial Deregulation of Corporations,
and, sadly, is continuing under the current administration.


Ross was RIGHT!!!

Ross was RIGHT,
but Bill was SMOOTH!

What we are seeing with the TPP (TransPacific Partnership) and TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) is the 1% Final Solution.
The Ring that Binds Them is being forged in the "secret" negotiations that have Locked OUT all representatives of Organized LABOR, Workers Rights, Human Rights, Consumer Rights, and Environmental Protections.

The goal is to make PROFITS a guaranteed RIGHT of Global Corporations,
which will actually be given the RIGHT to Levy Taxes (fines) on countries that interfere with their RIGHT to make a PROFIT by doing things like protecting their environment,
or boycotting Genetically Modified Seeds or even labeling GM Foods.


What could possibly go wrong?

The Fast Track Authority being requested by President Obama is especially discouraging... and revealing.



You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[awoke_in_2003]

41. I think it started...

with Nixon's visit to China.

[bvar22]

46. Trading with China is not the problem.

"Unregulated" trade with China is the problem.

[awoke_in_2003]

60. True, but we have "free" trade...

instead of fair trade, which was the whole plan. The American worker cannot compete with slave labor.

[AzDar]

33. K & R

[99th_Monkey]

35. Your concern is well placed, and I share it.

It's still hard for me not to blame Clinton for letting the "free trade" camel's
nose in under the Democratic tent. The "free trade" scam is a Republican
wet dream.

Why ANY Democrat supports this shit is beyond me. <-- actually I know
why, it's all about the fucking money.

[JDPriestly]

36. K&R. And the TPP will be the worst yet.

[merrily]

37. It's hard to pick which threat is the biggest anymore and I was never good at

putting disparate things in strict order of worst to best. However, the TPP does strike me as horrific, as does Obama's desire to have the Senate "advise and consent" only after Obama obligates the US to it.

I don't think that is what the Constitutional requirement of "advise and consent" means.

Silly me to worry about what the Constitution says on the subject. I may as well worry what Zeus thinks of it.

ETA: BTW, I am not sure if Obama desires to bypass the Senate on this, or if the Senators desire it. After all, many of them want to stand for re-election until they keel over dead and he's home free at this point.

[great white snark]

38. Yes, by now we all know the ones who decide what's important on neo-DU.

Now hoping versus the non lock-step people who decide for themselves is a different matter.

[Democracyinkind]

53. So what's your view on the TPP?

[WillyT]

39. K & R !!!

[awoke_in_2003]

42. Great post, Cali

[cali]

43. thank you so much. and thanks for the kick

[awoke_in_2003]

59. You got a rec, too...

[Enthusiast]

44. Kicked and Recommended!

It's the most important issue of the day.

[woo me with science]

45. Well, this, and assaults on journalism, and the surveillance state...

So hard to choose these days.

[suffragette]

47. "Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement Could Block Patient Access to Affordable Generic Medicines"

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/press/release.cfm?id=6868
KUALA LUMPUR/NEW YORK, JULY 15, 2013—As negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement move to Malaysia this week, Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) urges negotiating countries to remove terms that could block people from accessing affordable medicines, choke off production of generic medicines, and constrain the ability of governments to pass laws in the interest of public health.

"Just prior to hosting an international AIDS conference two weeks ago, the Malaysian government made an important pledge to reject harmful provisions in the TPP trade deal that will increase medicine prices for Malaysians, who already pay some of the highest prices for HIV drugs among developing countries," said Judit Rius, US manager of MSF’s Access Campaign. "We need all negotiating countries, including the United States, to not only make the same strong public pledge to protect public health, but also to ensure that the technical details of the deal truly fulfil their principled commitments to global public health."

With negotiators under pressure to finalize a deal, time is running out to fix the flawed TPP agreement, which currently contains a number of United States proposals that will extend monopoly protection on high-priced pharmaceuticals and delay the entry of affordable generic medicines. Restrictive intellectual property provisions could seriously constrain the role that pharmaceutical producers across Asia currently play in providing affordable medicines to both developed and developing countries; for example, by putting up new patent barriers that restrict the production and distribution of generics.

“The critically important role that many Asian countries have in supplying both generic medicines and the active pharmaceutical ingredients needed to produce drugs, is in jeopardy because of new restrictions proposed in the TPP,” said Rius. “The TPP threatens to put a stranglehold on the world’s supply of affordable treatments, with dire consequences for patients, treatment providers, and pharmaceutical producers in developing countries.”

- See more at: http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/press/release.cfm?id=6868#sthash.kj8eWbgW.dpuf


My representative, Jim McDermott, has also expressed his concern about this in May 2013. Here's an excerpt:

http://www.rollcall.com/news/worlds_apart_making_sure_trade_policies_improve_global_health_commentary-225237-1.html?pg=1


At the beginning of TPP negotiations two years ago, for reasons that are unclear, the U.S. asked the other 10 countries to accept new and very rigid intellectual property measures that would greatly limit availability of the affordable generic medicines that the success of U.S.-supported global health programs require. For example, more than 98 percent of HIV/AIDS medicines used to fight AIDS in Africa are generics, mostly made in Asia.
The United States is currently party to many international agreements that include strong intellectual property protections. These agreements protect innovation, including 20-year patents on new drugs, but they also allow enough flexibility for poorer countries to respond to public health needs with accessible, low-cost drugs. We worked hard to get these rules in place and they are working well.
But the U.S.’ current TPP proposal on medicines upends the present well-structured balance by extending monopoly protections much further. It would force people in developing countries to wait longer for affordable medicines, if they can access them at all. It would extend patents beyond the current 20-year norm and block national regulators from using existing clinical trial data to approve the production of generic or “bio-similar” drugs.
Alarmingly, the proposal also outlaws “pre-grant opposition” that allows doctors and patients to provide information to their governments about patents they believe do not meet national rules, an important democratic safeguard. The proposal also requires the patenting of new versions of old medicines, even when the new versions offer no additional therapeutic benefits. It even requires patenting of surgical, therapeutic and diagnostic methods, which not only is unethical but also could increase medical liability and the cost of practice.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

48. Thank you. This IS the most important issue of the day.

[LWolf]

49. It is certainly one of the most important issues of the day.

I've got a couple of others, but they are all inter-related, and this one is the most immediate long-term disaster about to happen.

[antigop]

50. K&R. thanks, cali. Keep exposing it. nt

[pffshht]

51. How can it be stopped, even theoretically?

ALEC has not asked the permission of the American people for any law they've bought so far.
So let's suppose everyone in the U.S. knows about TPP and nobody in the 99% wants it.
Is that going to make any difference? I don't think so.

[cali]

52. I think it can be stopped. in order to do so the congress has to fail to pass

what's known as fast track- Trade Promotion Authority.

And no, once people know about it, it's going to be hugely unpopular.

[Democracyinkind]

54. It is one of the big questions. And it's not about free trade.

The aspects you discussed in this thread is what it's really about: Expanding the system of parallel courts, staffed by corporations, that is entirely removed from the democratic process. The TPP takes this a step further as it is much broader than NAFTAish constructs and will be used to attack all kinds of governmental regulations that our corporate overlord want to abolish (all regulations)

This is the shape of things to come. They want a world in which they are absolutely immune from whatever happens at the ballot box. "They" are not just Americans.

[johnnyreb]

55. Thanks Cali, for your energized attention and advocacy. K&R

As a fifteen-year caregiver to my bedridden WWII Pacific veteran father, I deeply appreciate your efforts.

[cali]

56. thank you so much

my best to you and your dad.

[bhikkhu]

57. It is true that NAFTA provides the forum for them to sue

but, lacking the forum, their drilling rights could have been expropriated anyway, and it would have been dealt with through the WTO, or one way or another in back-room state department deals.

The Lone Pine Company should be prevented from fracking operations if the local government decides so, but there also has to be some legal process to determine if compensation is justified. Its not the fault of NAFTA that they can sue over it, and it won't be the fault of NAFTA if a court decides they have a case; that's just the way it is supposed to work.

Corporations shouldn't be able to trample on the rights of people or the authority of governments without recourse, and governments shouldn't be able to trample on the rights of people or the properties of corporations without recourse.

[alarimer]

58. It really takes a Democrat to sell us out.

Clinton did it with NAFTA and now this, which, if Obama signs it into law, is the death knell for the middle class.