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: US Lawmaker Slams Monsanto Provision in Fast Track Bill for TPP [View all]Hoyt
(54,770 posts)65. At least you produced some language, but I think it's a giant stretch to interpret it as the OP.
(3) TRADE IN AGRICULTURE.The principal negotiating objective of the United States with re-spect to agriculture is to obtain competitive opportunities for United States exports of agricultural commodities in foreign markets substantially equivalent to the competitive opportunities afforded foreign exports in United States markets and to achieve fairer and more open conditions of trade in bulk, specialty crop, and value added commodities by
. . . . . .(I) developing, strengthening, and clarifying rules to eliminate practices that unfairly decrease United States market access opportunities or distort agricultural markets to the detriment of the United States, and ensuring that such rules are subject to efficient, timely, and effective dispute settlement, including
. . . . . . . . . . .(i) unfair or trade distorting activities of state trading enterprises and other administrative mechanisms, with emphasis on requiring price transparency in the operation of state trading enterprises and such other mechanisms in order to end cross subsidization, price discrimination, and price undercutting;
. . . . . . . . . . .(ii) unjustified trade restrictions or commercial requirements, such as labeling, that affect new technologies, including bio-technology;
. . . . . . .. . . . (iii) unjustified sanitary or phytosanitary restrictions, including restrictions not based on scientific principles
in contravention of obligations in the Uruguay Round Agreements or bilateral or regional trade agreements;
. . . . . . . . . .(iv) other unjustified technical barriers to trade; and
. . . . . . . . . .(v) restrictive rules in the administration of tariff rate quotas;. . . . . . .
http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/TPA%20bill%20text.pdf
____________
And remember, all these TPA "negotiating objectives" mean -- even if you interpret that clause as in the OP -- is that if the objectives aren't met in the actual TPP, Congress could withdraw Fast-Track Authority.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
71 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
I'm for food labeling too, but there is nothing in the TPA related to food labeling
Hoyt
May 2015
#6
read the bolded paragraph- and yes, obviously I know the tpa is not classified, dearie
cali
May 2015
#42
I've read everything that is done to date, and so far no one has produced a Monsanto Amendment
Hoyt
May 2015
#59
At least you produced some language, but I think it's a giant stretch to interpret it as the OP.
Hoyt
May 2015
#65
At the beginning of this subthread you claimed there was no labeling provision in the TPA.
pa28
May 2015
#67
The OP says that the TPA includes language allowing companies to sue states for requiring GMO
Hoyt
May 2015
#68
When the framers wrote the 10th Amendment, did they have the Monsanto Provision in mind?
Faryn Balyncd
May 2015
#13
sn't DeFazio in trouble now, I thought that the legislators were not allowed to discuss the details
hollysmom
May 2015
#14
Opposition to DDT was based on science. The anti-GMO movement is based on distrust of science.
True Blue Door
May 2015
#32
Right, consensus. But there's not even a *basis* for general opposition to GMO.
True Blue Door
May 2015
#56
There are a few hundred scientists and more than a dozen countries that will disagree with you.
gregcrawford
May 2015
#23
What Happened To This Obama - Promoted The Modification (Scrapping) Of NAFTA - So Confused
cantbeserious
May 2015
#28
See The Monsanto Provision - He Is Negotiating For The Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks
cantbeserious
May 2015
#43
How's about you take a stab at citing the Monsanto Amendment in the TPA. No one else has found it.
Hoyt
May 2015
#48
I'm not looking for an article by another prevaricator. I'm looking for the amendment
Hoyt
May 2015
#53
Without The TPA There Is No TPP - You Should Learn The Difference Before Posting
cantbeserious
May 2015
#62
The TPA is not secretive, though. And, only thing secret about the TPP is that it is not finished.
Hoyt
May 2015
#66
It is more than that also. Any Corporation can sue to get at any environmental resource it wants.
glinda
May 2015
#52