I can't make up my mind. I just read Yallerdawg's thread "Why President Obama is pushing the TPP," and I felt like the TPP could make sense if there are proper provisions. But reading the op-ed you posted, Cali, I'm now leaning the other way again.
If what the author writes is accurate, it's significant to consider:
While the TPP’s backers present our choice as one of trade versus protectionism, this couldn’t be further from the truth. We already have free trade agreements with the six TPP countries that account for more than 80 percent of the promised trade. Because all TPP nations are currently members of the World Trade Organization, their tariffs have already been cut to minimal levels.
So that blunts a lot of what the TPP would supposedly accomplish.
Then there's this damning statement:
Just this spring, an official U.S. government study by the International Trade Commission noted that the pact would further gut the U.S. manufacturing sector. This, following the loss of 5 million manufacturing jobs since 2000, is a perilous proposition.
And, finally, this reiteration of the growing power of multinational corporations does give on pause:
Of TPP's 30 chapters, only six deal with traditional trade issues. The rest deal primarily with special privileges for multinational corporations and investors—like establishing the rights of companies to sue governments for cash compensation over the impacts of health and safety regulations. These dominant features of the TPP would vastly expand the rights of multinational firms that do not necessarily represent America’s national interests.
I don't know if I'll ultimately come out in favor of the TPP or not. I'm striving to find out whether the bad overshadows the good, and this link of yours makes it sound like that's the case.
= new reply since forum marked as read