Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The barnstorming charge here rushing to defend the deplorable TPP [View all]riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)2. Yup. Here's a NAFTA court case for you Will. Children being poisoned in Peru
these cases will be global with the TPP...
This is a prominent case in Peru where investor-state treaties have provided an avenue for companies to delay or reverse agreements which had been enforceable in courts:
...Renco Group Inc., a company owned by one of the richest men in America, invested in a metal smelter in La Oroya, Peru. The site has been designated as in the top 10 most polluted in the world. The firm has been sued in U.S. court on behalf of severely lead-poisoned children in La Oroya. Sulfur dioxide concentrations at La Oroya greatly exceed international standards, with sulfur dioxide levels doubled in the years after Rencos acquisition of the complex. Rencos Peruvian subsidiary promised to install sulfur plants by 2007 as part of an environmental remediation program. Although it was out of compliance with its contractual obligations, the company sought (and Peru granted) two extraordinary extensions to complete the project.
In December 2010, Renco sent Peru a Notice of Intent that it was launching a U.S.-Peru FTA investor-state attack, alleging that Perus failure to grant a third extension of the remediation obligations constituted a violation of the firms FTA foreign investor rights. The company is demanding $800 million in compensation from Peruvian taxpayers. The Renco case illustrates two deeply worrying implications of investor-state arbitration.
Even the mere threat of a case can put pressure on governments to weaken environment and health policies. Recent developments suggest that the threat of this case was highly effective. While full environmental compliance has yet to be seen, the government has allowed the smelter to restart zinc and lead operations. That would be bad enough, but Renco is also attempting to evade justice in U.S. domestic courts through the investor-state mechanism.
Renco has now successfully argued that the U.S. lawsuit filed on behalf of La Oroyas children must be removed from a U.S. state court, where it had a decent chance of success. Renco tried to derail the case this way three times before without success. But after filing the investor-state case, the firm claimed that the matter now involved an international treaty and thus was outside the state courts remit. In January 2011, the same federal judge who rejected the past attempts determined that the existence of the investor-state case made this a federal issue and allowed Renco to terminate the state court case...
In December 2010, Renco sent Peru a Notice of Intent that it was launching a U.S.-Peru FTA investor-state attack, alleging that Perus failure to grant a third extension of the remediation obligations constituted a violation of the firms FTA foreign investor rights. The company is demanding $800 million in compensation from Peruvian taxpayers. The Renco case illustrates two deeply worrying implications of investor-state arbitration.
Even the mere threat of a case can put pressure on governments to weaken environment and health policies. Recent developments suggest that the threat of this case was highly effective. While full environmental compliance has yet to be seen, the government has allowed the smelter to restart zinc and lead operations. That would be bad enough, but Renco is also attempting to evade justice in U.S. domestic courts through the investor-state mechanism.
Renco has now successfully argued that the U.S. lawsuit filed on behalf of La Oroyas children must be removed from a U.S. state court, where it had a decent chance of success. Renco tried to derail the case this way three times before without success. But after filing the investor-state case, the firm claimed that the matter now involved an international treaty and thus was outside the state courts remit. In January 2011, the same federal judge who rejected the past attempts determined that the existence of the investor-state case made this a federal issue and allowed Renco to terminate the state court case...
read more: http://www.citizen.org/documents/fact-sheet-tpp-and-environment.pdf
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
215 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The barnstorming charge here rushing to defend the deplorable TPP [View all]
WilliamPitt
Apr 2015
OP
If people are viewing the agreement on the basis of "which side supports it", and I am sure some are
still_one
Apr 2015
#1
I don't have a problem with those that choose to "wait and see" how much damage is done
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#15
and I am addressing the OPs premise that not everyone is pro TPP because they are picking "sides"
still_one
Apr 2015
#56
Good point. Some people secretly belive in trickle-down. What's good for corps is good for us.
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#155
Whoah!! Take a step back. Re-read the flow of the discussion. I think you're going off half-cocked
Populist_Prole
Apr 2015
#184
I don't know about that. There are tea party members who are not for it, and there are
still_one
Apr 2015
#83
since the republicans all love it, and are in a huge majority, it won't be. yours may be the
Doctor_J
Apr 2015
#95
Perhaps, but I believe there are enough Democrats, and some republicans in Congress to stop the TPA
still_one
Apr 2015
#130
Kind of lends credence to the idea that the administration wanted a Republican Congress. /nt
Marr
Apr 2015
#177
Agreed. I'll refrain from losing my shit until I actually get to read why I should be losing my
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#88
I don't know, I thought treaties required 2/3 vote. I guess I need to re-examine
still_one
Apr 2015
#133
Thanks for the information. I wonder if it can be delayed until 2016 when a new Congress comes in?
still_one
Apr 2015
#136
You are the guys using the retort that TPP must be bad if Republicans are for it.
Hoyt
Apr 2015
#141
and then Democrats can object powerlessly as the TeaPubliKlans shove it through.
TheKentuckian
Apr 2015
#124
Yup. Here's a NAFTA court case for you Will. Children being poisoned in Peru
riderinthestorm
Apr 2015
#2
If not extortion, pretty damn close. The NAFTA cases foreshadow TPP's abuses
riderinthestorm
Apr 2015
#37
Obama is history. Let's look ahead. Hillary Clinton loves the TPP and Fracking. Are you Ready?
NYC_SKP
Apr 2015
#3
You replied to Octafish that wind, solar, hydro aren't fuel for transportation
dreamnightwind
Apr 2015
#153
That sort of geothermal will be great at covering steady state grid power demand, but
TransitJohn
Apr 2015
#181
We don't disagree except on your math. Mixing an annual generation figure with battery capacity???
NYC_SKP
Apr 2015
#97
Please help us in our effort to prevent expansion of the use of natural gas, as has been promoted...
NYC_SKP
Apr 2015
#100
No, President Obama is not "history".. even though some would like to think that. He's very much
Cha
Apr 2015
#108
Just the fact that, in a representative democracy, the people are not being allowed to read it
stranger81
Apr 2015
#81
Exactly, Andy.. and what's so "disgraceful" is The "Fingerwagger" who gets so "nasty" accusing
Cha
Apr 2015
#110
People have read the chapters that are leaked. And I trust MSF, Warren, Sanders etc
riderinthestorm
Apr 2015
#46
Yeah, forcing them to take 7-figure jobs in the private sector will show them!!
jeff47
Apr 2015
#200
I understand the feelings, sometimes it takes time, it's not easy to hear others
AuntPatsy
Apr 2015
#8
Paul Ryan budget slasher, Mitch, CoC & others on the right working for TPP says mucho-
appalachiablue
Apr 2015
#13
And somewhere here on DU is a list of corporations who have had input to it. That is not comforting
jwirr
Apr 2015
#26
"he loves me and would never do anything to hurt me" and I'll stand in front of a bus so he may live
cherokeeprogressive
Apr 2015
#54
Sometimes I believe there is a significant number of people here who would trade their lives for
cherokeeprogressive
Apr 2015
#65
and if found to be unacceptable then what? Sign a petition, wring your hands, or pretend it is great
TheKentuckian
Apr 2015
#126
What is calling your Congressman going to do. Odds are if they are a Democrat they are against it
TheKentuckian
Apr 2015
#166
You insist on ignoring that the 60 days means NOTHING. We cannot stop passage
TheKentuckian
Apr 2015
#201
But about 95% (maybe more) of the critics on DU know absolutely NOTHING about the TPP.
George II
Apr 2015
#27
And most of us trust Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Barbara Lee, and the rest
Doctor_J
Apr 2015
#29
I'm sure it corresponds to a spike in "grass roots organizing" expenditures at the DNC/RNC. n/t
lumberjack_jeff
Apr 2015
#33
Bullshit. If the process were open and transparent, Obama's support or not would be secondary
cherokeeprogressive
Apr 2015
#58
As recently as Bush negotiations were more open and transparent than under Obama.
pa28
Apr 2015
#172
Nope. It's a disaster because McConnell, Ryan and corporate negotiators support it.
eridani
Apr 2015
#109
You don't need to read it if you know how all the other "trade" agreements have
eridani
Apr 2015
#196
Either you think that corporations have the right to override governments or you don't
eridani
Apr 2015
#207
You don't have to read it to know that there will be an investors' rights tribunal
eridani
Apr 2015
#209
Probably shouldn't waste your time. I'm sure your toenails need trimming or you can find
Number23
Apr 2015
#94
Just because more than one person disagrees with you doesn't make it barnstorming. nt
Hekate
Apr 2015
#50
SOS - Circle the wagons and extol the "misunderstood virtues" of another dog shit corporate giveaway
whatchamacallit
Apr 2015
#60
i am not seeing necessarily support of tpp, rather calling out the misinformation from those against
seabeyond
Apr 2015
#64
since the supporters also approved of the president signing last year's budget, they could be
Doctor_J
Apr 2015
#85
I'm Australian and I'm opposed to the TPP not coz of anything I've read on DU...
Violet_Crumble
Apr 2015
#199
i do not support tpp. yet those that be like to throw me in the camp. i think you will find another
seabeyond
Apr 2015
#148
What would it take to convince you it was good or bad? Here's the polll you requested.....
Scuba
Apr 2015
#161
there you go. i had already voted, opposed. i do not think anything will convince me it is good.
seabeyond
Apr 2015
#163
seems to me though, per that poll, it does not have the supporters that OP after OP
seabeyond
Apr 2015
#165
Dang, WilliamPitt, I think you have become a brand. ( as a side note I agree ) nt
Snotcicles
Apr 2015
#142
Didn't you write a similar bashing of the Prez last April on ACA, albeit with very vile language?
Hoyt
Apr 2015
#159
When Bush tried this in 2007 they were all against it. So you're right. I was against it then
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#187
Life is easier if you just ignore that type of white noise, unless you are a sadist.
Rex
Apr 2015
#185
They're just trying to cut off debate by discrediting the opposition out of hand
Populist_Prole
Apr 2015
#186
It's not all most Democrats want to know. There is overwhelming opposition to this
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#190