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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pampango

(24,692 posts)
Tue Jan 21, 2014, 05:55 PM Jan 2014

NYT Editorial: The environmental chapter of the TPP stinks.

Trade and the Environment

One of the most laudable American goals in negotiating the trade agreement known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership with 11 other countries was to strengthen environmental protections around the world. But a draft chapter of the agreement made public last week by WikiLeaks shows that many of the countries involved in the talks are trying to undermine that goal.

American negotiators have sought to make the environmental provisions in the agreement enforceable through a dispute settlement process, an idea that most of the other countries appear to oppose. That list includes countries like Canada, Australia and New Zealand that might have been expected to play a more constructive role.

The Office of the United States Trade Representative said last week that it would not back down on its environmental agenda. In a statement, it said, “we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the T.P.P. or we will not come to agreement.”

It is important that American negotiators stick to that policy. And members of Congress, who have to ratify all trade deals, should insist on it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/opinion/sunday/trade-and-the-environment.html

Let's hope that the USTR does not back down on environmental standards and enforcement. I don't have much faith but at least he uttered the words. Congress should indeed make sure of it, although getting anything like enforceable environmental standards through the House seems like an impossible task.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NYT Editorial: The enviro...