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: Question about the TPP [View all]yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)1. Read it yourself - we don't need speculation.
Question
Is it true that Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) would allow corporations to override laws, including environmental and public health regulations?
Answer
No. ISDS cannot change law in the United States or any other country. No government measure (federal, state, or local) can be blocked or reversed under the ISDS provisions or any other part of TPP. The United States would never negotiate away its right to regulate in the public interest, and we dont ask other countries to do so either. This is true with regard to public health and safety, the financial sector, the environment, and any other area where governments seek to regulate.
Put simply, ISDS is a mechanism to promote good governance and the rule of law. ISDS protects basic rights such as protection against discrimination and expropriation without compensation akin to those enshrined in U.S. law and the Constitution. We already provide these protections at home to foreign and domestic investors under U.S. law. Thats why although we are party to 51 agreements with ISDS the U.S. has never lost an ISDS case. Our trade agreements ensure the same kinds of protections to U.S. businesses and investors operating abroad, where they face a heightened risk of discrimination and bias.
TPP includes a number of enhancements that strengthen the transparency and integrity of the dispute settlement process under ISDS. These include making hearings open to the public, allowing the public and public interest groups to file amicus curiae submissions, ensuring that all ISDS awards are subject to review by domestic courts or international review panels, ensuring that governments have a way to dismiss claims that are without merit on an expedited basis, and more.
In addition, after consultations with Members of Congress, the United States pushed for and secured additional safeguards that will establish a code of conduct for ISDS arbitrators and facilitate the dismissal of frivolous claims, among other first-of-their-kind provisions.
ISDS ensures that a wide range of American businesses including small businesses are protected against unfair discrimination when investing abroad. This will benefit the millions of American workers employed by these companies, as outside analysis shows that about half of ISDS cases are initiated by small- and medium-sized businesses, or individual investors.
https://medium.com/the-trans-pacific-partnership/frequently-asked-questions-on-the-trans-pacific-partnership-eddc8d87ac73#.w3c4wzdlh
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
44 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
Okay, that's one side of the arguement - but doesn't address the if x, then y part of my question
floppyboo
Jun 2016
#2
Why are you against AFL-CIO being able to sue foreign countries over labor violations?
Recursion
Jun 2016
#15
That was for you. Why do you oppose AFL-CIO being able to sue foreign governments when they violate
Recursion
Jun 2016
#18
Something isn't "off-topic" just because you have no positive way to address it. (nt)
w4rma
Jun 2016
#29
Uh no- its off topic because it doesn't address the OP and has nothing to do with anything in the OP
floppyboo
Jun 2016
#34
Here is an interesting take on what would need to change in the wording of the agreement
floppyboo
Jun 2016
#4
Maybe you can ask Hillary what it is in the TTP's wording that she objects so strongly to
floppyboo
Jun 2016
#24
US companies use ISDS (Investor State Dispute Settlement) courts to pollute other countries.
Eric J in MN
Jun 2016
#33
Hasn't happened under NAFTA and hundreds of trade agreements with the same provisions since 1959.
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#38
they were not written by corporations, they were at the table, but were controlled in those days
swhisper1
Jun 2016
#39
There's much more to the story. Canada could not ban MMT under its environmental laws, so they
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#37
interesting, thank you. It is these nuanced terms that allow the citizens to be screwed
swhisper1
Jun 2016
#40
Almost every advanced country is party to TPP or the Trans-Atlantic negotiations. I believe
Hoyt
Jun 2016
#41