I love Elizabeth Warren BUT

[medeak]

Talked to my son last night. He monitors China trade for the Commerce Dept, Export Import Bank and more. Not to brag but he had meeting in situation room in Feb and goes to meetings in Paris 4 times a year.

Asked him why Warren and Hillary are against the trade agreement and he said it's political grandstanding. It's a TERRIFIC agreement for the environment and will be terrible if doesn't go through and four years of work down the drain.

[arcane1]

1. Hillary is against it? I missed that.

[morningfog]

64. She has not come out against it.

Her position is mealy mourner middle of the road tending more towards support.

[Joe Turner]

87. Hillary has gone on record many times in support of TPP

Of course now she is silent on the issue. Time for her to clarify her position on TPP since she is running for president. Let's see if it has changed.

[Cali_Democrat]

2. ...

Elizabeth Warren is Not Telling the Truth About The Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Deal


http://thedailybanter.com/2015/04/elizabeth-warren-is-not-telling-the-truth-about-the-trans-pacific-partnership-trade-deal/

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

4. from article WARREN WING OF DEMOCRATIC PARTY

that kind of pisses me off just that

How has she earned a WING?

Obama appointed her, well not really, the repukes said no.

Sorry, that just pisses me off

If she really does come through on wall street and jobs and is EQUALLY good on ALL social issues, then I will join her wing

but no wing, not yet

[Cali_Democrat]

8. Good point. I think this kind of talk is for people who follow politics closely

In the real world, Obama has huge backing among dem voters while Warren is still relatively unknown to many Americans.

[JI7]

21. it's just an internet thing.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

3. How can it be good for the environment, based on EVERYTHING we have seen and read one of the

purposes is so companies can ignore environmental law.

This sounds so far fetched, so please have him explain

[okaawhatever]

6. The idea that it allows companies to ignore environmental law is ridiculous. It forces the

countries who are in the trade agreement to meet certain requirements. It is raising the standards. Any other claim is ludicrous.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

7. Wait, what? Where is that , can you link to that wording?

[okaawhatever]

16. There is no exact wording yet but here is the USTR website stating that was one of their

goals. Also, those who have seen it mostly state the same. There isn't any exact wording yet, which is why it isn't being released.

https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/tpp-chapter-chapter-negotiating-5

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

18. So good, but if no exact wording yet, then TPA is a terrible idea, and maybe that makes

it impossible to negotiate too

[merrily]

63. And that WILL be strictly enforced!!!111!!

[Andy823]

10. One question

Where did that information come from? What is the source?

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

11. IDK , poster here said it

my source is everything I have read, i would love to be wrong though

[ucrdem]

43. "EVERYTHING we have seen and read" usually means a load of baloney

deriving from wikileaks and its many imitators and repeaters, including Senators Warren and Sanders, who haven't exactly been serving as conduits of useful information on this subject.

[Logical]

54. Obama is supporting it for god sake. How if incomplete? Nt

[okaawhatever]

5. Absolutely. I don't know if it's terrific, but I know it could be. There are two ways to make US

goods more competitive: lower our standards or raise theirs. That is what TPP is trying to do. China (who wants to sign on) can't join because they don't have the patent protection, labor laws or environmental protections this agreement requires.

By getting the majority of the world to agree on baseline standards, you're leveling the playing field. That is how we create jobs in this country.

[Hoyt]

33. Good info.

[G_j]

46. just tell us what those standards are nt

[Joe Turner]

85. "leveling the playing field"

That has been the mantra of every single trade agreement prior to its signing. The result of course is that our standard of living declined while our trading partners rose. To believe that TPP will level the playing, especially since the agreement was written by corporate lobbyists that have no allegiance to any country, is the height of naivete.

[Maedhros]

9. Sorry, but no: your anecdotal 'evidence' means nothing.

There has been much analysis of leaked portions of the TPP and all of it shows that the TPP is bad for American workers, bad for American environmental regulations and bad for American consumers.

I doubt the veracity of your anecdote.

[procon]

28. Is your anecdotal evidence better?

When all this teeth gnashing is coming from opinion writers, conjecture and speculation, and some showboating congress people making a hullabaloo (and fund raising) over unverifiable snippets of text purportedly snatched from old drafts, why is that credible?

The facts won't be made public until its released, until then all this infighting over whose baseless opinions seem more pithy, serves no purpose whatsoever.

[okaawhatever]

47. + 10,000 nt

[G_j]

48. correct, it is simple.

don't sign a contract without reading it.

[Maedhros]

65. The evidence isn't anecdotal - it's leaked pages from the actual draft legislation.

So no, Mr. Pro-conservative, I don't buy your bullshit.

/ignore you.

[procon]

78. Would this "evidence" be the same outdated drafts that everyone

is holding up as if they are the same as the still unreleased final version?

BTW, that was a cute, mugging my screen name, but actually its just the initials of my grandkids, not quite as ghastly as your version, but I'll give you 6 just for for coming up with an original passive aggressive retort, yeah?

[99Forever]

12. Got a link to Hillary Clinton saying she opposes it?

I call bull.

Also, sorry, but I don't give a rat's ass that your son likes it. He's nobody to me and I'm not the least bit impressed at his claimed insider status. Elizabeth Warren has a proven track record of fighting for us. I'll take the word of a well known PROVEN progressive every time.

Some random nameless government bureaucrat? Not so much.

[merrily]

82. I don't doubt a link to something equivocal exists somewhere.

Something like, "At first, I supported it. But now, I want to re-examine my support."

Anyway, what does it matter if she supports it or not? It'll probably pass before 2017. If not, and she gets elected, she can always change her mind after she's President. And, you know, gets all the background info that's above the heads of everyone but the 3 dimensional chess players in the Oval Office.

Trust. I'm seeing that more and more at DU. Like politics is a religion and the President is Jesus or the Pope. But, don't mention "cult of personality." That's offensive. Just shut up and trust.

[Art_from_Ark]

83. Does this sound like someone who opposes TPP?

"We are working to ensure that the TPP is the first trade pact designed specifically to reduce barriers for small and medium-sized enterprises. After all, these are the companies that create most of the world’s jobs, but they often face significant challenges to engaging in international trade. So, the TPP aims to ensure fair competition, including competitive neutrality among the state-owned and private enterprises."

http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2011/07/169012.htm

[Ichingcarpenter]

13. I'm sure you love her after calling her a liar and a cheap politician. n/t

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

14. Obama's read it, Warren's read it, Sander's read it, DUers have not, Your son (cough cough)

I'm picking, in this order

1 tie Warren-Sanders
3 DUers who support Warren-Sander's position
4 Obama
5 Your son


And what's with your claim that Hillary is against it? She was one of the cooks in the kitchen.

[JEB]

40. That's how I see it too.

I trust those who have a proven track record of actually representing the working people.

[daleanime]

15. Which is why we can't see it....

don't want to have the nice surprise ruined.

[Art_from_Ark]

66. Yeah, it's just like shaking the present before Christmas

and realizing you're getting a lump of coal.

[Cha]

17. Hillary hasn't said either way. I do think Warren is Grandstanding.

[cali]

19. bullshit

So are all the 100+ congressional dems just posturing? The Sierra Club? all the labor unions? Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz?

I've read the 3 leaked chapters and I know there's solid reason to oppose the tpp

[Ichingcarpenter]

22. but her child worked 4 years on this

and she finally talked to him about it.

thank of the children!!!!!!!

[arcane1]

26. And the question is: posturing for what?

If it's so great on domestic jobs and environmental issues, wouldn't they get more political points out of praising it instead of trying to stop it?

[Depaysement]

37. It's true

Release the treaty in its entirety so we can all read all of it.

I don't want to read USTR press releases.

[Auggie]

20. "The TPP enshrines capitalization as a principle of jurisprudence"

This is what scares the crap out of me:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/04/tpp-toward-absolutist-capitalism.html

[Oilwellian]

23. Hillary isn't against it

She and Henry Kissy Face Kissinger, along with Obama, drafted the damn thing.

[Ichingcarpenter]

24. but the OP said that

so it must be true

thank of her child for god's sake............

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. White House Says Enviros Love This Trade Pact, But Enviros Say Otherwise

The White House hasn't technically lied about anything. In a March 31 White House blog post reprinted by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Obama advisers Brian Deese and Christy Goldfuss accurately quoted a handful of environmental groups offering praise for parts of the TPP pact. But Deese and Goldfuss didn't quote any of the objections or concerns that those groups also presented, and they ignored the general alarm that other environmental groups have been sounding on the pact for years. (They did link to full versions of the groups' statements, however.) USTR reiterated the green-friendly framing in a tweet linking to the post:
...
"The White House took some of their statements and spun them out," said Jake Schmidt, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's international program. "There are a large number of environmental groups that came out pretty clearly and said ... 'What we've seen on TPP doesn't look good.'"

Officials from Oceana, the Humane Society, the World Wildlife Fund and World Animal Protection all told HuffPost they had not endorsed the TPP pact and are waiting to see the final agreement before rendering a verdict, although the White House quoted all of these groups praising elements of it.
...
"Any potential benefits of the environment chapter would be overwhelmed by the destructive effects of other parts of the deal," said Ilana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club's Responsible Trade Program. Solomon warned of "broad new rights to big polluters and (increasing) our dependence on dangerous fossil fuels."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/03/environmentalists-tpp-trade-pact_n_7001184.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

It would be interesting to know your son's response to that article, and what those major groups say.

[Hoyt]

35. You don't build membership by supporting Obama, the NRA learned that lesson too.

Used to work for very political organization. Lesson learned, build fear among potential members. When it passes and is not so bad, you claim your protesting was successful.

[cali]

72. boy, did you just discredit yourself

Comparing the Nora to traditional dems allies is spurious. The membership of groups like the Sierra club and the nra is as different as could be

[Hoyt]

74. But on this, they are using the same tactics.

[joshcryer]

79. Odious, but true.

[muriel_volestrangler]

90. It's complete nonsense. As cali said, the organisations are totally different

and so are their members and potential members.

If you think they are opposing it because Obama is for it, then you know nothing about environmental organisations or liberal people. Perhaps you and Hoyt are projecting your own feelings and tactics onto them - you think purely in terms of 'can I make myself look special'?

If you want to defend yourself against this charge, I suggest you actually talk about the environmental 'benefits' that you see, and address Solomon's point about the rights granted to big polluters, rather than parroting 'they just do it to get new members'.

Threat to Forests, Wildlife, and Fish. On January 15, 2014, WikiLeaks published a draft environment chapter of the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). TPP governments have billed the agreement as an "ambitious, 21st-century trade agreement." However, a joint analysis by Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and World Wildlife Fund (WWF) reveals that the current TPP environment chapter text does not meet that goal. In its current state, in fact, the TPP could lead to increased stress on natural resources and species including trees, fish, and wildlife. To read our analysis, click here.

Unfettered Rights to Corporations. The TPP will include provisions that give corporations the right to sue a government for unlimited cash compensation -- in private and non-transparent tribunals -- over nearly any law or policy that a corporation alleges will reduce its profits. Using similar rules in other free trade agreements, corporations such as Exxon Mobil and Dow Chemical have launched nearly 600 cases against nearly 100 governments. Dozens of cases attack common-sense environmental laws and regulations, such as regulations to protect communities and the environment from harmful chemicals or mining practices. Read more here about how harmful investment rules included in other trade pacts have led to the attack of climate and environmental policies.

Increase in Dirty Fracking. The TPP may allow for significantly increased exports of liquefied natural gas without the careful study or adequate protections necessary to safeguard the American public. This would mean an increase of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, the dirty and violent process that dislodges gas deposits from shale rock formations. It would also likely cause an increase in natural gas and electricity prices, impacting consumers, manufacturers, workers, and increasing the use of dirty coal power. Read our factsheet on the TPP and natural gas exports here!

http://www.sierraclub.org/trade/trans-pacific-partnership

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Yesterday, WikiLeaks released draft text of the all-important investment chapter of the Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement. A Friends of the Earth analysis of the leaked TPP investment chapter text shows that the U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman and the White House have been misrepresenting the implications of TPP investment provisions, saying that the TPP provisions for investor-state dispute resolution are similar to U.S. constitutional standards (as when the state highway department takes a family’s backyard for a road expansion and must pay them just compensation). In fact, the TPP investment chapter text exposed by WikiLeaks departs significantly from U.S. constitutional standards.

As the Friends of the Earth analysis shows, foreign investors’ substantive and procedural rights in the leaked TPP investment chapter text are sweeping when compared to U.S. constitutional law or the general legal practice of nations around the world. Under existing U.S. trade and investment agreements, which are very similar to the text released yesterday, many international investment tribunals have already offered wildly expansive interpretations of investor rights under “expropriation” and “minimum standards of treatment” provisions. In addition, the investor-state dispute resolution procedural rights and the arbitrators who sit on these tribunals tend to be pro-plaintiff/ pro-corporate.

Friends of the Earth President Erich Pica had this to say about the TPP investment chapter text released by WikiLeaks:

Politely speaking, the release of the Trans Pacific Partnership investment chapter leaked through WikiLeaks demonstrated that the Obama administration is guilty of spreading false information about the potential implications of TPP on our ability to protect people and environmental from foreign investors. A more blunt assessment would be that the Obama administration is deliberately misleading Congress and the American people on the far reaching implications of this pro-corporate, pro-foreign investor, anti-environmental trade deal.

Read Friends of the Earth’s analysis of leaked TPP investment chapter here.

http://www.foe.org/news/news-releases/2015-03-wikileaks-exposes-white-house-misinformation-on-tpp

[joshcryer]

91. That's not what I think at all.

Read what the poster said.

[muriel_volestrangler]

92. The poster said they're doing it to build their membership

He said they're building fear by opposing Obama. He didn't address what they say is wrong; he said it would turn out to be 'not so bad'.

He's accusing them of cynical opposition for the sake of membership size, rather than actually having objections. And, worst of all, he puts them in the same category as the NRA - the front for the gun corporations.

If you don't think that, why reply 'true'?

[joshcryer]

93. "build fear among potential members"

I think that is exclusive with whether you support Obama or not. You can be against fear mongering and Obama and vice versa. To me it has nothing to do with Obama.

The NRA doesn't get membership by saying "everything is fine and dandy" they get it by saying "they're going to take your guns!"

By the same token, Greenpeace doesn't get membership by saying "hey, the US environmental roadmap is to be fully renewable by 2030-2050!" they get it by saying "the earth is fucked!"

Fear is a driving force between many associations. I don't think it's wrong to point this out. I'm not making some overarching statement about motivations. I'm sure a lot of those organizations oppose it for truly sincere reasons. And I'm not saying that they sit around boardroom tables saying "fear sells!"

It's just a reaction to what gins up the most support.

[muriel_volestrangler]

94. The title you replied 'true' to: "You don't build membership by supporting Obama, the NRA learned"

and they followed it up with "but on this, they are using the same tactics."

That member's posts are saying this is about fear of Obama. Hoyt is making some overarching statement about motivations.

And they are not just saying "the earth is fucked!"; they are pointing out they don't like large sections of the TPP.

And remember, this is Hoyt; to him, invoking the NRA is like invoking Nazis for other people.

[Thinkingabout]

27. Because the final version has not been presented I would hope the decision to back it or not

Should wait to see what is happening. This is likened to preparing a meal, give a chance for the ingredients to come together before declaring the meal isn't edible.

[tularetom]

29. I want to believe it but if it's so great you'd think they'd want to pat themselves on the back

And explain to us all about the wonderful details instead of constantly telling us to trust them.

You can call me cynical but I have to think that if they don't divulge the details of the agreement, it's because they know the citizens would raise enough hell about it to sink the thing. And they don't want that to happen, because some very influential people want this to go through.

All of a sudden, no republican is bitching about one of Obama's proposals. And it's Democrats who are speaking out. Maybe some promises were made, maybe some people were threatened, I don't know. But something doesn't smell right about this whole thing.

[HereSince1628]

30. Well, maybe HE will share a copy of the draft on that.

So we don't have to take all this third-hand

[randome]

31. As soon as it's ready.

[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]

[procon]

32. I don't understand why you were attacked,

but I wanted to thank you. It makes me ashamed to I see my fellow Democrats launch these personal assassinations simply because you shared a different POV doesn't match the heady status quo of the moment. Your son must have a very interesting job, and I appreciate your efforts in trying to provide us with a fresh outlook shared from an insider's perspective.

[seabeyond]

34. this pettiness i am seeing with the whole "secret" crap, i am waiting until it comes out and will

decide.

i had always been pretty against it. not trusting our trade deals and trusting warren.

now i do not trust warren so much, and certainly not those on du. so.... i am stopping on this one and waiting for it to come out and listen and learn.

[Depaysement]

36. If it's so great why can't we all read it

No offense to you or your son but I can do my own reading and thinking. So can everyone else here.

[seabeyond]

38. we will. when it is done. like always. then we argue it. then it is voted on. again. like always

[Depaysement]

41. So then why does it have to be fast-tracked before it's done? nt

[ucrdem]

42. So Congress can't wreck it.

And if you're really curious there are hundreds if not thousands of State Dept transcripts and documents explaining the TPP and other trade agreements and showing their progress as they're negotiated.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/pl/2013/214166.htm

https://ustr.gov/tpp

[Depaysement]

44. You've already posted this at least once

The actual text would be good enough. It's not the end of the world but I don't much like what I've read so far.

[ucrdem]

45. Yes, also a couple of threads back in January,

which are in my journal, but here's the last, from Jan. 30:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026159076

They don't seem to have had much effect but hope springs eternal.

[ucrdem]

39. THANK YOU

I've been trying to explain that here for months . . .

[Logical]

55. lol, i'm not sure you know what explaining means. Nt

[Doctor_J]

49. so a Bill that all of the republicans including Paul Ryan and Obama are for is great for us?

[neverforget]

50. Who knew that multi-national corporations and Republicans are now pro-worker and pro-environment?

[Kelvin Mace]

51. Hmmm...

Who do I trust? The president who seems aligns himself with the GOP, billionaires and Wall Street, or the Harvard Law professor hand-picked by the president to safeguard consumers?

Easy call.

[still_one]

52. I think the issue is people want to see for themselves. The final agreement will be made public

Before the debate and vote, and we can determine the merits then

[Logical]

53. Well since I know nothing about you or your son I'll stick with Warren! Nt

[Doctor_J]

56. And Grayson and Sanders and Sherrod Brown and Barbara Lee and Warren

and the other hundred dems who are against it

[Logical]

57. +1000 nt

[brentspeak]

58. This thread brought to you courtesy of 270 Strategies. n/t

[neighbor tim]

59. We need to stop this fighting

Support our president, and use this energy to get Hillary Clinton elected. There's alot at stake this next election.

[Cheese Sandwich]

60. No she's horrible. Pick someone better

[neighbor tim]

61. She's a fine lady

and she'll make a great president. She was a senator. We have to have our candidates backs. C'mon, folks, let's get it together! IT'S TIME FOR HILLARY! I'M READY FOR HILLARY! LET'S GO DEMS!

[cherokeeprogressive]

89. Gosh, I hope you won't be offended if I say I think you're a bullshitter.

Lower case "p" for President, and lower case "s" for Senator.

Yain't MY neighbor.

[neighbor tim]

96. I'm not offended.

I thank you for correcting me on that. I'M READY FOR HILLARY! No lowercase there. Hahaha!

[merrily]

67. I can't get enough of posters who insist DU must unite behind them.

Meanwhile, Obama is practically have a street fight with members of his party who are in the Senate.

And the party itself is doing so well. Worst losses since 1928--and that's only Congress.

Yeayyy! No dissent. Plenty more of the same, please. We just can't get enough!

[neighbor tim]

69. We have to trust President Obama.

He's a chess player. Infighting won't help us. The Republicans drove the car into the ditch and now they want the car back. YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN! Remember?

[merrily]

71. Actually, we don't, he isn't and I hope to heaven infighting does help us.

I sure hope something helps us. More of the same is the least likely to help us.

[neighbor tim]

77. We just have to trust him on this one.

He's a chess player. He's playing the Republicans. He always plays the Republicans.

[merrily]

80. Why are you repeating what I just replied to?

[neighbor tim]

81. I don't know . This is all new to me. I'll try and see.

I just have to support President Obama. We have to have his back.

[merrily]

84. You get an extra tuna sandwich for having the last word.

[cali]

75. no we don't. and it's republicans who heavily support this.

[neighbor tim]

76. We have to have President Obama's back.

Remember the last election when he asked us to have his back? I have my president's back.

[Ken Burch]

62. If it's so great...let us SEE it...

We shouldn't be obligated to take that on faith.

[liberal_at_heart]

68. Excuse me if I don't take your son's word on it.

I want to know what's in it. I want to be able to tell my representative what I think about it, and I want my representatives to vote based on what the constituents in my district want. That is how our democracy works.

[Hoyt]

86. I expect our government to do what is the right thing for us, not necessarily what misinformed

people might think they want. Yes the people matter, but not if they can't see down the road and what is good for our society.

[AtomicKitten]

70. My son thinks it's a shit agreement.

I think he's right.

[Rolando]

88. I don't monitor China trade

But I lived there for a year in the early 1980s, after the Cultural Revolution and before the uprising (the one in which they championed the "goddess of democracy." You remember the protester and the tank. But maybe you don't remember the two-currency system. Regular citizens could not buy anything imported (unless they had somehow imported "foreign exchange&quot . In fact, they could not even buy goods manufactured in China for export. Don't tell me that was a hundred years ago. Some things in China never change.

[eridani]

95. If all that were true, then why are Republicans supporting it? n/t

[Scuba]

97. My son is President Obama's personal advisor. He says the deal sucks. So there.

[rurallib]

98. Well then make it public and let people read it and discuss it

easily accessible without all sorts of security clearances.
Then let us have an open debate.
That is all that Warren wants. I believe that to be reasonable.

We have been screwed so badly by recent trade deals and huge promises that something this big should be approached with extreme caution.

[gobears10]

99. Eh

The international tribunal in which corporations can sue nation over burdensome environmental regulations is concerning