Do Fast Track and TPP Have Momentum?

[xchrom]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/01/07-0



As the administration tries to sell Congress on passing fast-track trade promotion authority in order to push through the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement, we may be seeing some familiar tactics at work. This time it is an effort to get people to jump on a supposed bandwagon, claiming the treaty has momentum.


The Financial Times has a story today, “Obama challenge on selling trade deals to resurgent left,” that Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism says, “looks to be a clear media plant” that is “falling in with the official line.”

The FT story says Obama and his team do not consider TPP to be, as they put it, “for the benefit of its multinational corporations, rather than ordinary workers, exacerbating wage stagnation and income inequality.” FT writes that the administration “have vowed to do things differently this time, by insisting on tougher standards on workers’ rights, environmental regulations, the role of state-owned enterprises and intellectual property protections.”

Are they “doing it differently this time?” Do consumer, health, labor, environmental and human rights groups have input into and access to the negotiating process? Or is it just another giant-corporate-rigged process? Is there transparency, or do we have to read about the treaty in documents leaked to Wikileaks?

So far, it doesn’t look like they are “doing it differently this time.”

[djean111]

1. The TPP is kind of a watershed moment for me - it means that supporting Democrats blindly,

hoping that things will be better, is abysmally stupid, and no longer feasible, much less palatable. That hey! we need to get more Dems in office thing has stopped working.

The FT story says Obama and his team do not consider TPP to be, as they put it, “for the benefit of its multinational corporations, rather than ordinary workers, exacerbating wage stagnation and income inequality.” FT writes that the administration “have vowed to do things differently this time, by insisting on tougher standards on workers’ rights, environmental regulations, the role of state-owned enterprises and intellectual property protections.”

Kiss my ass. I learned to read and reason before public education got so fucked up.

[pampango]

2. China and Heritage Foundation agree: excessive U.S. posturing on environmental and labor standards.

Unfortunately, TPP negotiations to date have included excessive U.S. posturing on environmental standards and labor regulations. There is a danger of further such posturing as a proposed U.S.–European Union FTA moves forward.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/07/2013-global-agenda-for-economic-freedom

If the Heritage Foundation thinks that US negotiators are engaging in 'excessive posturing on environmental standards and labor regulations' the negotiators must be doing something right.

...the negotiation is subject to the U.S. domestic politics. At the very beginning of the negotiation, the United States reminded other countries that the U.S. Congress would not accept a TPP without strong labor and environmental measures. Obviously, the United States aims to lower the comparative advantages of developing countries so as to create more job opportunities for itself.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90777/8113289.html

And China knows that the TPP is not a good deal for them. "Obviously, the United States aims to lower the comparative advantages of developing countries so as to create more job opportunities for itself."

It is certainly possible that China and the Heritage Foundation are worried about nothing. We shall see.