Is this normal? (Question re TPP comment period.)

[SusanCalvin]

It feels like I just heard about the TPP comment period being open, so in my mind I had plenty of time.

But it says here the last day is January 13, i.e., Wednesday, and that the comment period opened on December 28, i.e., last week.

http://www.flushthetpp.org/your-chance-to-officially-tell-the-ustr-what-you-think-about-the-tpp/

The last time I commented was on net neutrality, and I had though that period was at least a couple of months. Am I remembering correctly there?

Are the PTB trying to hide the TPP comment period? It sure seems like it.

[2naSalit]

1. To answer your question, probably

since it isn't all that popular with we the little people.

When an unpopular/incendiary policy requires a public comment period it usually receives the bare minimum amount of time required for it to be "open". They want this done before the next admin..

I suppose there should be a bunch of OPs to catch everyone's attention.

[SusanCalvin]

2. Thanks.

I find it amazing that, judging by these dates, the "bare minimum" is apparently less than a month. And, in this case, a week of it within a holiday period. That shouldn't even be legal.

[2naSalit]

3. I agree

though it's not like anyone has been interested in playing by the rules anymore. And this would end up being the final nail in the coffin of democracy.

[Hoyt]

4. One can continue commenting/ranting to Congresspeople right up until the vote.

That's really what matters, not comments to the USTR.

[SusanCalvin]

5. Of course, but

I for one would like them to be overwhelmed with negative comments right now as well. Whether it will actually do any good or not.

I was also getting ready to write an LTTE urging people to comment, but I guess it's too late for that.

[Hoyt]

6. Right or wrong, the agreement has been sent to Congress. Complaining to the USTR isn't

going to do much, or overload anyone.

[SusanCalvin]

8. Yeah, that seems real democratic... nt

[Hoyt]

10. The Agreement has been signed by the Prez, it won't change unless Congress forces

Obama to push for changes among the parties. The USTR doesn't really have any say at this point. I suspect that is why the "comment" period is so short -- it makes no difference.

[SusanCalvin]

11. But I take it they were legally required to offer a comment period?

How Orwellian.

[jwirr]

7. I asked about this a couple of days ago and was told that it

did not matter because no matter what the Democrats do the Rs have enough to win.

Even so I am upset that we are not telling the American voter what is happening. I haven't even heard anything from the Unions.

Wonder if there is anything that Bernie could do as president that would stop this from being enacted even if it is passed?

[SusanCalvin]

9. Or what it would take to get back out of it

if the makeup of Congress changes.

[jwirr]

12. It is my understanding that short of a miracle the House is

still going to be in the hands of the Rs.

I wish our President would listen to us. But he will not.

[SusanCalvin]

14. Oh, I didn't necessarily mean

"If the makeup of Congress changes *next cycle*." But you gotta have a dream.

[jwirr]

15. Actually I think you are right - the future is going to look a

lot different - the youth are rising up and they want this to change. If not 2016 then the future.

[Igel]

13. Can't find a prescribed time for the comment period.

https://www.federalregister.gov/uploads/2011/01/the_rulemaking_process.pdf
This says that the comment period is typically 30-60 for government agencies. Longer if the matter is complex, shorter if the shorter time period is justifiable. Notice that this, however, is for government agency rules. The TPP, like other things resulting from trade negotiations, are less "regulations" and more "treaties." In other words, they're less a single-minded executive function as proposed legislation. And when's the last time either the WH or Congress said, "We're proposing legislation, let's have a 60-day comment period on it"? Heck, for some legislation there's barely time for Congressional aides to divide it up and read through the it before it's voted on.


http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=USTR-2014-0020-0001
Some 2014 regs had a deadline of 10/31/14. Useless information by itself. But the posting was from 10/14, so they gave 16 days for the review. That may total the same number of business days as for the TPP call for comments to the deadline for deadlines. Dunno.


The point in the second paragraph is to say that it's not the first time something messy and complicated has been given a comment period of just over 2 weeks.

It's not like here was a horrible outcry over the Indian rulemaking. I remember it as an issue, but it wasn't the hot topic that the TPP is.

[Cerridwen]

16. "Review of Employment Impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership"

The comment period is specific to the "Review of Employment Impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership".

Direct link to information and background: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/12/28/2015-32294/request-for-public-comments-on-review-of-employment-impact-of-the-trans-pacific-partnership#h-4

Some snippets from link:

Action

Notice Of Intent To Conduct An Employment Impact Review Of The Trans Pacific Partnership And Request For Comments.
Summary

The Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) and the Department of Labor (DOL), through the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC), are initiating an employment impact review of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement. USTR is seeking public comments on the impact of the TPP Agreement on U.S. employment, including labor markets.


<snip>

1. Background


On November 5, 2015, consistent with Trade Promotion Authority (Title I of the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114-26) (19 U.S.C. 4201 et seq.) (“the Act”), the President notified Congress of his intent to enter into the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement. Also on November 5, 2015, USTR requested that the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) prepare a report as specified in section 105(c)(2)-(3) of the Act assessing the likely impact of the TPP Agreement on the U.S. economy as a whole and on specific industry sectors and the interests of U.S. consumers. On November 17, 2015, the USITC announced that it was instituting an investigation of the likely impact of the TPP Agreement on the U.S. economy as a whole and on specific industry sectors and the interests of U.S. consumers.

<snip>

2. Employment Impact Review
Back to Top

Section 105(d)(2) of the Act directs the President to “(A) review the impact of future trade agreements on United States employment, including labor markets, modeled after Executive Order No. 13141 (64 FR 63169) to the extent appropriate in establishing procedures and criteria; and (B) submit a report on such reviews to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate at the time the President submits to Congress a copy of the final legal text of an agreement pursuant to section 106(a)(1)(E).” USTR and DOL are conducting the employment impact review through the TPSC.

<snip to a bit more at link>

I've bolded some of the dates and procedures for this review and public comment process.

This looks specific to this piece of the TPP and not the entirety of the TPP. Other pieces would have different procedures, legislations, and/or public comment periods.

[2naSalit]

17. Thanks for the clarification!