Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve no doubt heard of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a a proposed regional regulatory and investment treaty negotiated in secret and which is alleged to contain a host of provisions that would extend restrictive intellectual property (IP) laws across the globe and place a three-lawyer tribunal in charge of settling trade disputes.
The most controversial provision of the TPP is the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) section, which strengthens existing ISDS procedures. ISDS first appeared in a bilateral trade agreement in 1959. According to The Economist, ISDS gives foreign firms a special right to apply to a secretive tribunal of highly paid corporate lawyers for compensation whenever the government passes a law to do things that hurt corporate profits — such things as discouraging smoking, protecting the environment or preventing a nuclear catastrophe.
Arbitrators are paid $600-700 an hour, giving them little incentive to dismiss cases; and the secretive nature of the arbitration process and the lack of any requirement to consider precedent gives wide scope for creative judgments.
To date, the highest ISDS award has been for $2.3 billion to Occidental Oil Company against the government of Ecuador over its termination of an oil-concession contract, this although the termination was apparently legal. Still in arbitration is a demand by Vattenfall, a Swedish utility that operates two nuclear plants in Germany, for compensation of €3.7 billion ($4.7 billion) under the ISDS clause of a treaty on energy investments, after the German government decided to shut down its nuclear power industry following the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011.
Under the TPP, however, even larger judgments can be anticipated, since the sort of “investment” it protects includes not just “the commitment of capital or other resources” but “the expectation of gain or profit.” That means the rights of corporations in other countries extend not just to their factories and other “capital” but to the profits they expect to receive there.
In an article posted by Yves Smith, Joe Firestone poses some interesting hypotheticals:
Under the TPP, could the US government be sued and be held liable if it decided to stop issuing Treasury debt and financed deficit spending in some other way (perhaps by quantitative easing or by issuing trillion dollar coins)? Why not, since some private companies would lose profits as a result?
President Barack Obama is a staunch supporter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and has been instrumental in efforts to get it fast-tracked through Congress, while progressive champion Senator Elizabeth Warren has been a vocal opponent of the TPP. Ironically enough, Democrats in Congress are actually allying themselves with Tea Party Republicans in opposition to the TPP, making for some very strange bedfellows.
What I’d like to hear is what you all think of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Is it a good thing, as President Obama would have us believe, or does it do more harm than good?
Zach, thanks.
Appreciate you emphasizing what a sham that the Investor-State Dispute Settlement is. T-PP cedes U.S. sovereignty to multi-nationals. US courts, local, state, and federal do not have jurisdiction.
Obama has pointedly stated that this is not a ‘secret’ deal; therefore I would like to hear Scott Walker’s views on it.
Agree, but Gov. Walker’s running the same “trust us,” talking points as President Obama and Sec. Clinton and the local media won’t cover it.
“TPP Proponents Close to Clinton Remain Optimistic About Her Support”
“I spoke to Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin last Saturday, who had this to say about the TPP and TTIP (emphasis added):
Well, I talked about TTIP the other day in Germany in Hanover at the industrial fair there, and I think fair and open trade is a good thing on either side of the continent for the United States, whethere it’s on the Atlantic or the Pacific. Obvious the details need to be worked out and there’s a lot of details including some specific to my state that need to be worked out. But I think in the end, having a deal that’s fair and offers fair and open trade would be a good thing for the United States and for our trading partners.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/04/24/tpp-proponents-close-hillary-clinton-remain-optimistic-will-support-controversial-trade-agreements/
I’m a fair trade guy. I want Wisconsin exports to thrive. As long as foreign workers make a decent enough wage, so they can afford to buy our exports, it’s part of having a “balanced” economy. Unfortunately, that won’t happen, because the U.S. State Department takes their marching orders from the multi-nationals who don’t want to pay decent wages or contend with environmental issues. The U.S. routinely backs foreign governments who are explicitly anti-union. ”
AFL-CIO’s Trumka: USTR Told Us Murder Isn’t A Violation Under U.S. Trade Deals the U.S.”
“Trumka pointed specifically to the Colombia trade pact that was signed in 2006, but passed by Congress in 2011. Trumka said that even after the Obama administration crafted an agreement to tighten labor protections four years ago, some 105 labor organizers have been killed, and more than 1,300 have been threatened with death.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/22/fast-track-trade_n_7113412.html
“Background: Violence Against Trade Unionists in Colombia”
“From 2005 to 2010, 265 trade unionists were murdered in Colombia; 51 trade unionist were murdered in Colombia in 2010; 29 were murdered in 2011. In the last two decades, more than 2,800 Colombian trade unionists have been assassinated with a near total rate of impunity (over 95%).”
http://usleap.org/usleap-campaigns/colombia-murder-and-impunity/more-information-colombia/background-violence-against-
AFAIK, the only Democratic Senator they’ve got on board for T-PP so far is Ron Wyden (D-OR), and that’s critical, because as long as you get “one” from the other side, you can claim your vote was “bi-partisan.” Sen. Joe Lieberman from Connecticut elevated voting with the GOP to an art form, which is why he was so destructive. Everyone thought because he was from CT, he was “liberal.” On some stuff he was, but on a lot of key issues, Clinton’s impeachment, he gave Republican’s cover.
The bi-partisan label on a vote can be crucial for Senators from both parties to avoid a primary, and depending on the state, it can help in the general election too. Jane Hamsher used to call Congress the “incumbency-protection racket.” What they (the multi-national corporations) really don’t want is new people in the Senate (especially), but the House usually works the same way. They want folks they know they can “trust” to deliver the legislation they want. Once they know they can trust you to be a “team-player,” there’s tremendous pressure to keep incumbents winning.
Wyden’s been terrific on civil liberties (paging EmmaR), trying to hold the CIA/NSA/DOJ plus Big Data (Google, Amazon, the Telecoms) accountable. AFAIK, he’s generally consider as liberal a Dem as you will find in the Senate. But, he has to pay for that latitude on civil liberties, and the invoice is public support for NAFTA ON STEROIDS/ aka T-PP.
Although I support President Obama’s treaty with Iran, he and all the Senate Dems have to use the same tactic to get the treaty past the Senate. They’re targeting Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN), who if he votes for it will allow all Dems to claim they cast a “bi-partisan” vote.
“White House courts key GOP senator on Iran nuclear deal”
“The White House is aggressively courting Sen. Bob Corker as it seeks to buy time for the final stretch of negotiations with Iran over a nuclear deal.
The Tennessee Republican helms the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and is working to assemble a veto-proof majority for legislation that would allow members of Congress to review any nuclear agreement.
Yet White House officials view Corker as someone they can work with.
Corker, a centrist who is not up for reelection until 2018, was one of seven GOP senators who did not sign a controversial letter to Iran’s leaders warning that Congress could invalidate any nuclear agreement. He also agreed to delay a vote on the approval measure last month as negotiators worked to hammer out an outline of a deal.”
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/238038-white-house-courts-key-gop-senator-on-iran-deal
Because Corker’s not up for re-election until 2018, it’s relatively easier for him to cast this tough vote. That’s another variable in the equation. Once you know that, consider the problems Sen. Baldwin’s having on the VA in Tomah? She’s not up for re-election until 2018. Are those VA issues, because she’s bucking the corporations?
OT, but one of President Obama’s and the Dems largest mistakes was in the first two-years of his first term (when Dems had majorities in the Senate and the House), when they didn’t make the District of Columbia a state. DC has more people than several states, so it’s no problem to make them a state. That would have given Dems two reliable liberals in the Senate. As I grow more cynical, I’m afraid that omission was deliberate. Same with the delay on Obamacare, which came AFTER Dems lost the House. In the first two-years of his first term, Obamacare could have been single payer, Medicare-for-all. No individual or employer mandates, no using the IRS to go after people who don’t have coverage.
On the other side, the elites and the corporations find it easy to buy seats in the United States Senate in low population states such as Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, …. Ad rates are very low, compared to larger media markets (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami….) and they can easily dominate the local media, especially talk radio.
So if an Australian mining company bought Gtac’s Penokee Hills leases, and a future state legislature repealed Act 1, could that mining company sue the state of Wisconsin for the billions of dollars of iron ore estimated to be contained in that vein in the Penokee Hills? That boggles the mind.
That’s exactly the kind of question Gov. Walker would be asking, if he were not a mouth piece for the elites/multi-nationals.
Excellent example Steve, afaik, that is what would happen and the kicker is that this “settlement,” is not decided in US courts, but by a three person tribunal selected and installed by the multinational corps and thus the surrender of US sovereignty over labor, environmental, or any other civilized safeguards to protect ourselves in any manner, as a country are gone.
So now it’s “Corporations are sovereign, my friend”
Has anybody heard a reasonable, detailed argument for TPP, or the concept of Investor-State Dispute Settlement? All I’ve seen are vague appeals to “economic growth” and “incentivizing innovation,” etc.
Seems to me that NAFTA and it’s clones have only served to make it easier for millionaires to become billionaires and put the screws to everybody else, fueling income inequality and all the nasty stuff that goes with it. Why would TPP be any different?
I think we’re doing pretty ok before NAFTA, and we’re still a big enough market that folks from around the world want to sell their goods here. Does anybody campaign on getting out of these deals and going back to tariffs?
The beauty of this for the GOP is that it’s a replay of Clinton signing NAFTA. When the !@#$ hits the fan in a few years, the GOP will do with T-PP exactly what they’ve already done with NAFTA, put it on Democrats.
Think “Obama & TPP: Every One That Doeth Evil Hateth the Light,” is excellent.
“Here is the “money quote” from Warren and Senator Sherrod Brown’s letter responding to Obama’s attack.
“‘Executives of the country’s biggest corporations and their lobbyists already have had significant opportunities not only to read [the TPP text], but to shape its terms,’ the letter reads. ‘The Administration’s 28 trade advisory committees on different aspects of the TPP have a combined 566 members, and 480 of those members, or 85%, are senior corporate executives or industry lobbyists. Many of the advisory committees — including those on chemicals and pharmaceuticals, textiles and clothing, and services and finance — are made up entirely of industry representatives.’”
In sum, Obama stacked the committees to ensure that the CEOs’ lobbyists would completely dominate the secret drafting of TPP. And everyone in America know that the result of that has to be a Faux Trade agreement crafted to allow the CEOs to plunder with impunity.
…
“Obama did not simply allow lobbyists to largely draft TPP in secret – he classified their drafts – treating them as national security secrets. This would be downright funny if it were not so wicked. It is most certainly revealing about the fact that Obama and the lobbyists knew that the drafts were so outrageous in their substance that Obama had to take preposterous steps to safeguard them from honest experts. Carter’s most recent article explains:”
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2015/04/obama-tpp-every-one-that-doeth-evil-hateth-the-light.html”
T-PP and related such agreements will crush Wisconsin exports. Amazing that WIGOP and local media don’t see that. Paul Ryan’s one of T-PP’s biggest supporters.
“Paul Ryan: Obama a ‘blind squirrel’ on trade”
“President Obama has a “terrible” foreign policy but is right on trade, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Wednesday in a TV interview.
A blind squirrel finds a nut every now and again,” Ryan said of Obama on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Wednesday.”
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/239660-ryan-cruz-backing-obama-on-trade
John, thanks for that “Everyone That Doeth Evil..” article. I highly recommend it!
In response to criticism of the TPP, Obama actually says:
“The idea that we can shut down globalization, reduce trade … is wrong-headed,’ Obama said on a conference call. ‘That horse has left the barn.”
So, being concerned about TPP being drafted in secret by CEOs/lobbyists and being opposed to Investor-State Dispute Settlement tribunals consolidating corporate power over and above nation-states is the same as “shutting down globalization, reducing trade”??? What? Patronizing much?
We need a very principled populist (D or R) in a high place (maybe with nothing to lose) to just leak the whole damn thing. Be an Ellsberg or a Snowden. Make the administration justify the secrecy at trial.
Paul Krugman’s an economist and he’s extremely respected/influential inside the beltway, especially with Dems. That’s why his column appears in the New York Times. His way too tepid opposition, however, is still welcome.
“This Is Not A Trade Agreement”
“Personally, I’m a lukewarm opponent of the deal, but I don’t see it as the end of the Republic and can even see some reasons (mainly strategic) to support it. One thing that should be totally obvious, however, is that it’s off-point and insulting to offer an off-the-shelf lecture on how trade is good because of comparative advantage, and protectionists are dumb. For this is not a trade agreement. It’s about intellectual property and dispute settlement; the big beneficiaries are likely to be pharma companies and firms that want to sue governments.”
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/this-is-not-a-trade-agreement/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto&_r=0
One way to read his column is as a “trial ballon” to rip the Investor-State Dispute Settlement part out of it, and pass what’s left.
Well worth a close read.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/04/24/the-trans-pacific-partnership-and-the-death-of-the-republic/
I brought this up to the county D party (very early spring 2012) as I attended a couple of recruitment meetings around the recalls. Not a soul would listen at the time leading up the OFA taking over the county party and its resources, lock, stock and barrel.
Would be nice if we could find a way to leverage international opposition to T-PP:
“Thousands march in South Korea anti-government protest”
“Thousands of South Koreans marched in Seoul for the second straight day Saturday to protest government labor policies and the handling of a ferry disaster that killed more than 300 people a year ago.
Thousands of demonstrators supporting the relatives of ferry disaster victims gathered for a rally on the same downtown street where protesters violently clashed with police last weekend, leaving dozens injured. Saturday’s rally ended peacefully without any reported injuries, said an official from the National Police Agency, who didn’t want to be named, citing office rules.
Hundreds of people marched silently from several locations to participate in the evening rally, many of them wearing face masks and yellow scarfs and jackets, the color that has come to symbolize the plight of the families.
Waving candles and illuminated cellphones, the demonstrators chanted “Salvage the truth” and “Park Geun-hye, step down,” criticizing the South Korean president for her reluctance to accept a more thorough investigation into the sinking, before voluntarily dispersing.
They were joined by some of the estimated 40,000 unionized workers who had demonstrated in front of the Seoul City Hall hours earlier to denounce government policies that they fear will reduce wages, job security and retirement benefits for state employees, said Park Seong-shik, a spokesman for the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions.”
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/c31e956e71604985a42c471c8eb5b8ed/thousands-march-2nd-day-s-korea-labor-protests
You have to scroll down to get to, “Attack on Affordability of Cancer Treatments Revealed in New WikiLeaks Trans-Pacific Trade Pact Text.”
…
“A U.S. proposal in the text – to provide long automatic monopolies for biotech drugs or biologics, which includes most new treatments for cancer – contradicts the policies included in recent White House budgets and if adopted would undermine key cost savings touted by the administration. The past budgets have included a specific pledge to shorten the same monopoly periods so as to reduce cost burdens on Medicare and Medicaid.
If the TPP is ratified with this U.S.-proposed provision included, Congress would be unable to reduce monopoly periods without risking significant penalties and investor-state arbitration.
“The White House undermines its pledge to cut drug costs with the harmful position it is taking in these secretive negotiations, at the behest of the major pharmaceutical companies,” said Maybarduk.”
…
http://www.citizen.org/tpp-ip-wikileaks