Shouldn't there be a parallel to the ISDS for Environmental and Public Interest Groups?

[cali]

The Investment Chapter in the TPP- and this isn't novel- is a bill of rights for corporations including giving corporations a separate mechanism for disputes with governments, shouldn't there be either a parallel or access to the ISDS for Environmental and Public Interest Organizations?

One of the problems with FTAs is that they're weighted toward the rights of corporations. That couldn't be clearer. The ISDS is solid proof of that, but it isn't the only evidence.

Environmental, Public Interest Orgs and NGOs do yeoman's work and their bottom line in not profit, but protecting the environment, health, internet freedom, etc. They start out at a disadvantage in FTAs- not just a financial one but a disadvantage legally. The ISDS is solely available for corporations to use to bring complaints that their business interests are being harmed. There is nothing within FTAs that gives the public, through organizations that work on their behalf the same rights.

[think]

1. Yes. Labor should be represented prominently as well. union organizers are still murdered

In developing countries on an alarming level.

The USTR took five years to act in Guatemala while 68 union activists were murdered and the issue is still unresolved with no action taken. The whole process is a complete sham and an insult to the people of Guatemala.

The poor people of the world are ignored and murdered under trade agreements.

How America can be part of this reprehensible shell game is beyond words.....

[HereSince1628]

2. With regard to TPP you know that's not even close to in-play

What corporations want isn't freedom from trade barriers, or even fair monetary policy, fungible asymmetry is what they live for.

What they want is a dodge around regulatory power...at all levels.

Reducing the US to a non-manufacturing economy means emphasizing extreme exports those with great intellectual inputs (film/music, GMO seed, pharmaceuticals/chemicals, military aircraft) and those with the very lowest possible added-value (grain, crude oil, mature logs, fracking sand, etc). That low added value stuff depends heavily on cheap labor and resource-extraction which must be done with cheapest exploitation costs.

Interference from local tree-hugging, fish petting, snail kissing GMOphobes is the opposite of what these agreements seek. What they want is to be able to come into your city-park and extract gas without your city, township, county or state having the right to exclude such a land-use. What they want is to able to have barefooted lowest waged workers pouring steel. Interference from advocates for labor and health isn't in their sights.


https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/XfoiiSwYVCeFNHs42zylVg--/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9MzUwO3E9OTU7dz02MDA-/