General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGo Progressives! Congressional Progressive Caucus Offers A Real Alternative on Trade
3/5/2015
Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch just postponed the introduction of fast-track trade authority legislation until April.
Fast track is designed to grease the skids for passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement that is still being negotiated behind closed doors. Postponing the debate on fast track gives opponents another month to build opposition. It gives Republican leaders and the administration a month to line up every vote so that once introduced, it could be voted on overnight. Theyre hoping to fast-track fast track....
... The president and his allies keep puffing the treatys potential to increase exports without mentioning what it will do for imports. They keep arguing the treaty will have the strongest labor rights provisions ever, while ignoring the fact that Vietnam, designated as the major low-wage producer in the deal, doesnt even allow independent trade unions. They portray past treaties as successful, while claiming this one is different. Opponents tend to rail against various aspects of the still secret deal that has far more to do with rigging the rules for foreign investors than lowering tariffs. But objectors are often scorned as protectionists, Luddites who simply want to shut America off from the rest of the world.
This week, the Congressional Progressive Caucus broke through this mire, releasing its Principles for Trade: A Model for Global Progress. The principles lay out elements of an alternative trade strategy, one built to benefit workers, not investors, and to serve the public interest, not the special interests of global companies and banks. The CPC seeks more trade, but on terms that will strengthen working families, not sabotage them.
The CPCs first principle is that the U.S. should commit to balanced trade. The CPC would have the U.S. announce the goal of restoring balanced trade, and create the policies needed to achieve this.
The CPC principles then elaborate, upending the thrust of current trade negotiations. Instead of the focus being on protecting foreign investors and cutting elaborate deals for various corporate interests, the CPC argues that trade accords should put workers first, contain labor protection provisions that can be enforced, by the Congress itself if necessary. All trade accords should require that signatories adopt the domestic labor rights as provided by core International Labor Organization conventions. This would require the U.S. to strengthen its labor laws as well.
Any agreement should prohibit currency manipulation, the central tactic of China and other mercantilist nations to capture markets.
Any agreement should provide a floor under environmental protections, while enabling countries to raise their standards above the floor. This is a stark contrast to current provisions that enable multinationals to collect damages if tighter environmental standards impacts their potential future profits.
Any agreement should enable countries to pass consumer protection measures without challenge. Trade accords would be prohibited from superseding domestic food and safety standards, financial regulations, and other consumer policies.
Any agreement should enable strong Buy America provisions in government contracting, and their equivalent for other countries. Surely taxpayers should have the right to use their taxes to give preference to domestic producers, not to foreign manufacturers.
Any agreement should secure affordable access to essential medicines and health services. The backroom deals driven by Big Pharma to protect and extend their patents make medicines too costly for many. No trade accord should delay access to affordable generic drugs.
Any U.S. trade accord should uphold the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Trade accords should be an instrument that promotes basic human rights, not undermine them.
Most important, the CPC would terminate the creation of a private court system for foreign investors. The current Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions give a foreign investor the right to sue a government in a specially created private court system. A small throng of high-priced lawyers serves as both advocate and arbiter. There is no appeal. Companies have sued for damages from countries strengthening their environmental laws, curbing cigarette packaging, deciding to shut down dangerous nuclear plants. This appalling subsidy to foreign investors domestic corporations have no such protections exemplifies the effects of backroom deals that serve corporate interests, against the public interest....
READ MORE~
http://ourfuture.org/20150305/the-congressional-progressive-caucus-a-real-alternative-on-trade?utm_source=progressive_breakfast&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pbreak
peacebird
(14,195 posts)asiliveandbreathe
(8,203 posts)for the most people..of the ol' USA - standing O - and to the voters of members of the CPC
very smart...thoughtful vetting of our representatives....my hat is off to you all!
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Who TRULY represent US.
*********
Caucus Members
Co-Chairs
Raúl Grijalva
Keith Ellison
First Vice Chair
Mark Pocan
Vice Chairs
Matt Cartwright
David Cicilline
Ruben Gallego
Michael Honda
Sheila Jackson-Lee
Jan Schakowsky
Mark Takano
Whip
Barbara Lee
Senate Member
Bernie Sanders
House Members
Alma Adams
Karen Bass
Xavier Becerra
Don Beyer
Suzanne Bonamici
Corrine Brown
Michael Capuano
Andre Carson
Judy Chu
Katherine Clark
Yvette Clarke
Steve Cohen
Bonnie Watson Coleman
John Conyers
Elijah Cummings
Danny Davis
Peter DeFazio
Rosa DeLauro
Sam Farr
Chaka Fattah
Lois Frankel
Marcia Fudge
Alan Grayson
Luis Gutierrez
Janice Hahn
Jared Huffman
Sheila Jackson-Lee
Hakeem Jeffries
Eddie Bernice Johnson
Hank Johnson
Joe Kennedy III
Brenda Lawrence
John Lewis
Ted Lieu
David Loebsack
Alan Lowenthal
Carolyn Maloney
Jim McDermott
James McGovern
Gwen Moore
Jerrold Nadler
Grace Napolitano
Rick Nolan
Eleanor Holmes Norton
Frank Pallone
Chellie Pingree
Jared Polis
Charles Rangel
Lucille Roybal-Allard
Jose Serrano
Louise Slaughter
Mark Takai
Bennie Thompson
Nydia Velazquez
Maxine Waters
Peter Welch
Frederica Wilson
*****************
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Democratic Caucus within the Congress. Peter DeFazio, Maxine Waters and Bernie Sanders were among the initial organizers of the Progressive Caucus back in 1992. During the George HW Bush administration. Now great as she might currently be, Senator Warren is not a member of the Caucus and in 1992 she was a Republican voting for Bush. This is why is it so very insulting to other Democrats, elected and voters, when people make the claim that Warren is the only progressive in Congress moving all the others to the left. It is a claim that is absurd to anyone who knows even a shred of legislative history.
Someone got moved to the left, and that someone was Warren.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Boy oh boy! Just wait until our "most progressive President ever" hears about this! He'll be all over it!!!!
Response to RiverLover (Original post)
aspirant This message was self-deleted by its author.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)suggest trouble in the senate?
daleanime
(17,796 posts)stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)Their budget which reduced the deficit more than any other proposed budget while simultaneously offering MORE to average Americans than any other budget.
We have to get the word out to others that's for sure.
K&R & Forwarded to Many...
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)And like you said, this won't get coverage in our "liberal media" (spin of the century!).
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)when they actually have the numbers to demand serious deal in to the card game or else the game stops.
The progressive caucus needs to get some hard nose, no prisoners, LBJ roughness leadership to grab party leadership by the balls and squeeze with a death grip instead of being the "Lay down Sally with great ideas caucus".
Hotler
(11,425 posts)nenagh
(1,925 posts)I'm bookmarking for hope..
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)it probably would have been more effective/influential had it been put out at the start of the negotiations (10 years ago), rather than at the tail end of negotiations.
But good job CPC ... These principles would be a good framing for the US objectives, particularly in the area of the ISDS.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)NAFTA was Sr's brainchild and the TPP was Jr's.
I don't think the CPC had an foot in the door. Why President Obama won't allow their input now, as he's only going for the Fast Track which disallows it, I'll never know for sure.
But hopefully, their report, and an alternative, will appeal to enough in congress that the TPA/fast track will be denied.
It has a 5 year shelf life though. So even if TPA miraculously doesn't pass this congress, the TPP will live on as a possibility down the road.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)If this guide is/can/will be effective now, it would have been more effective 10 years ago.
Because the CPC just put the guidelines out, what ... less than a week ago? The ship rarely turns so quickly. And besides, from what I read ... at least three of the principles are contained in the US negotiating Objectives.
That is possible, assuming the final agreement has all/most of the horrible stuff in it.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)And after Bush, the Democratic majority in the Senate always blocked any hope of Obama's fast track. I imagine the CPC began their alternative trade proposal shortly after the rethugs took majority in both houses.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)drawing up a gameplan in the 4th quarter of the game?
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)But let's hope for all of our sakes that the CPC pulls off a surprise interception & a 4th qtr winning touchdown.
I applaud them for trying, and representing us over corporations.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)from the beginning. No one should have to tell him they are important.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the is overlap in the labor and environment areas. I haven't been back to check on the other areas, but I do know the ISD section that everyone is up in arms about Has been in existence for the last 60 years ...with hardly a peep.
randome
(34,845 posts)Although there are some amorphous terms like 'balanced trade'. Who determines this? And Vietnam's trade union problem? The sentiment is right but I'm betting that's going to be a 'sticky wicket'.
Still, overall, a good list.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"The whole world is a circus if you know how to look at it."
Tony Randall, 7 Faces of Dr. Lao (1964)[/center][/font][hr]
pampango
(24,692 posts)the past."
The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) released broad principles today to establish standards for U.S. trade policy that put workers first, balance trade deficits, and improve labor and environmental protections around the world. The Congressional Progressive Caucus believes it is possible to negotiate a trade agreement that doesnt replicate the mistakes of the past, and instead creates a new model for trade, promoting balanced growth for the global economy.
U.S. trade policy must focus on creating economic opportunity for working people in the United States and abroad, not only on maximizing short-term profits for large corporations
The United States negotiates some of the worlds largest trade agreements. These deals must put working families and our environment first. The United States must stop using trade agreements as investment deals for the worlds wealthiest corporations and instead prioritize higher wages, safer work and environmental standards, and a healthier world economy.
http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=61&itemid=984
A great list of objectives. Thanks for posting it, RiverLover.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Wouldn't it be nice if it made the evening news??
jwirr
(39,215 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)cigarette packaging, deciding to shut down dangerous nuclear plants."
Maybe lawsuits for lost profits caused by Net Neutrality and denial of Keystone XL will be next under TPP.