The Trans-Pacific-Pact Free Trade Agreement (TPP-FTA) has been shrouded in secrecy, with negotiations conducted behind closed doors and paramilitary teams providing security at each round. The Obama administration and its corporate backers have sought to keep the public in the dark about the agreement, which would surrender US sovereignty to corporate interests. The TPP is backed by some 600 corporations, including Halliburton, Chevron, PhaRMA, Comcast and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).
In response to the secrecy surrounding the negotiations, Congressman Alan Grayson’s office released a statement saying, “The American people deserve to know what is in this agreement and what it means for their lives. We cannot allow our government to negotiate away our rights and our future behind closed doors.”
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) has been shrouded in secrecy since its inception in 2008, with the 17th round of negotiations now nearing completion. President Obama has allowed his US Trade Representatives, Ron Kirk and Mike Froman, to use the veil of ‘national security’ to exclude the public and Congress from the negotiations. However, the facts of the TPP have recently emerged due to a leak, exposing the agreement to keep all draft and contributing documents secret until four years after the final ratification or when negotiations collapse, with the exception of the final text. This has allowed over 600 corporate advisors to have a major influence on the document, while Congress has been excluded from meaningful discussion or investigation. Despite the attempts of President Obama to sell the deal, it appears to be a ‘weapon of mass deception’ designed to surrender representative democracy to corporate rule.
As negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) progressed, Congress was barred from the process. Despite the US Trade Representative (USTR) allowing limited access to the texts, members of Congress were not permitted to have expert staff in the various areas of concern, nor were recording devices allowed. This agreement, which would surrender national, state and local sovereignty to a secret tribunal of three corporate attorneys, was made without Congressional input. Those who leaked information were threatened with punishment as ‘enemies of the state’, including members of Congress.
In response to this ‘corporate coup’, Senator Ron Wyden (D) Oregon, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) Massachusetts and Congressman Alan Grayson (D) Florida spoke out against the agreement. They were forthright in their criticism of the lack of Congressional oversight.
Senator Ron Wyden denied access to the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement, and when he was finally allowed to see it, he blew the whistle on secrecy surrounding the treaty. In a speech on the floor of the Senate, Wyden stated how the TPP would give multinational corporations the power
.”the majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations, while representatives of U.S. corporations–like Halliburton, Chevron, PhaRMA, Comcast and the Motion Picture Association of America–are being consulted and made privy to details of the agreement.”
Senator Wyden reiterated the duty of Congress to review, regulate and ratify international trade negotiations. Wyden also countered the specious claim made by the US Trade Representative that providing access to negotiation documents would endanger national security by instructing his staff to cooperate with security needs. To quote Senator Wyden, “The American people have a right to know what their government is doing in their name.”
As the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee’s Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness, my office is responsible for conducting oversight over the USTR and trade negotiations. To do that, I asked that my staff obtain the proper security credentials to view the information that USTR keeps confidential and secret. This is material that fully describes what the USTR is seeking in the TPP talks on behalf of the American people and on behalf of Congress. More than two months after receiving the proper security credentials, my staff is still barred from viewing the details of the proposals that USTR is advancing.”
Senator Wyden further reminded the president the authority granted Congress on the regulation of international trade.
”It may be the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) current job to negotiate trade agreements on behalf of the United States, but Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress – not the USTR or any other member of the Executive Branch – the responsibility of regulating foreign commerce. It was our Founding Fathers’ intention to ensure that the laws and policies that govern the American people take into account the interests of all the American people, not just a privileged few.”
And yet to date, only a few members of Congress have gained access to the very treaty they are constitutionally assigned to regulate. Consistent with Senator Wyden’s criticism, the privileged few (namely corporate lobbyists) are granted unfettered input to the very treaty which would deliver a final death blow to our economy and surrender our democracy to the whims of corporate heads.
Why the secrecy?
If the TPP-FTA is a legitimate deal, why this unprecedented level of secrecy? Why is the US Trade Representative refusing to answer congressional inquiries? Why are US Congressmen such as Darrell Issa and Alan Grayson or Senator Ron Wyden being locked out of negotiations? As usual with this president, the facts are buried in legal jargon and double-talk. Additionally, the now historic abuse of the national security ‘classification system’ has reached ludicrous levels which would make Karl Rove blush like a schoolgirl in a whorehouse.
Congressman Grayson spoke to the secrecy and the most egregious elements in the TPP itself, in a telephone interview with this reporter.
”They (USTR) set out to do it this way, knowing full well that if they shed any light on what they were doing there would be a lot of hell to pay.” (phone interview 06/21/13)
Grayson was allowed ‘limited’ access after some six weeks of official requests–access to negotiation texts that any member of Congress by law–had a right to review. After reviewing some very limited text Grayson spoke to the outrageous and unlawful giveaways in the TPP, and the cover-up maintained by the USTR.
…”I’ve seen an element of the current rounds..they are binding …I will tell you that they have every reason to be concerned about them…the backlash…there would be a public backlash”…”what they said uh.. indicated was classified and they stick to appear to—-the classification system by calling the shots in secret, and by threatening people with every nightmare discomfort …including imprisonment…except for the 500 corporate lobbyists..”
Grayson was allowed access to negotiation texts after some six weeks of official requests. Any member of Congress by law has a right to review these texts. After reviewing the texts, Grayson spoke to the outrageous and unlawful giveaways in the TPP, and the cover-up maintained by the USTR.
Alan Grayson may be blunt–but he’s honest. When asked about the effects of the TPP on our country if pushed into law–he stated frankly that
…”TPP establishes what are called … procedures that are essentially” abrogating our democracy’…
Grayson explained further that…
“…they (TPP international tribunal) replace our five step established court systems for claims against the government with an alternative system that is wired for the benefit of multinational corporations”
Adding to the concerns, the TPP negotiations have been shrouded in secrecy, with even members of Congress not allowed to see the text of the agreement.
Grayson added that the TPP extends into matters which are not under the purview of trade relations. He added that the TPP …”goes far beyond anything even remotely resembling trade and systematically interferes in areas such as finance, that most people would regard as having no connection ….to matters of trade.” The agreement….” extends well beyond trade in a manner that systematically benefits multinational corporations to the detriment of health, safety, the right to organize, and other fundamental human rights and progressive values.
Ironically, Grayson and the others couldn’t explain why the TPP poses these dangers, as this information has been ‘classified’ by the USTR.
Adding to the concerns, the TPP negotiations have been shrouded in secrecy, with even members of Congress not allowed to see the text of the agreement. The administration wants to finalize the TPP ‘agreement’ this October, pushing Congress to a simple up and down vote, consistent with corporate demands.
“…The TPP is poised to become the largest Free Trade Agreement in U.S. history. The twelve countries currently involved — the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam — already cover approximately 40% of the global economy, and the TPP also includes a “docking mechanism” that could enable other countries to join over time. The TPP’s seventeenth major round of negotiations concluded in Lima, Peru last month, and negotiators are racing to complete their work by an October deadline set by President Barack Obama and others.”
Fast Track is a process by which the president can push through Congress a simple up or down vote on a finished document, without any substantive investigation or debate. Dating back to the Nixon administration, it denies Congress the right to study, debate or otherwise amend any piece of legislation pushed and signed off by any president. In essence, the Obama administration is abusing the Fast Track idea to demand a blank check from Congress.
So, what specific powers does the proposed TPP take away from our democratically elected government and grant to multinational corporations? The TPP, if approved by the Senate and signed by Obama, will nullify multiple areas of US law. It is the concrete realization of “corporate personhood”, providing the “corporate person” in discussion- is an absolute monarch or emperor. The TPP, negotiated by corporate lobbyists and minus any substantive congressional and public oversight, grants multinational corporations a final veto over a country’s laws, in multiple areas not necessarily limited to trade issues. No country, including the US will be able to enforce laws or regulations in many areas that “impede” corporate rights. This is “corporate personhood” writ large, abusive and sociopathic.
The highlights of the leaked TPP drafts include a triad of powers that collectively enable any nation or state to be enslaved. The triad begins with the alleged corporate ‘right’ to challenge any law and demand taxpayer compensation for any policy which hypothetically could undermine estimated or expected future profits. This could extend to any area of law, environmental, labor, public health, food sovereignity, currency standards, financial regulations, consumer standards and even civil liberties.
Leaked draft texts further describe ‘investor protections’ that incentivize additional offshoring of jobs with undisclosed ‘benefits.’ Any regulation of finance capital (aka Wall Street) such as banning derivatives, currency manipulation, and other ‘financial weapons of mass destruction’; would be prohibited. Any member nation’s ability to mitigate financial warfare via currency manipulation and deliver financial stability is neutered. ‘Shock and awe’ globalization is delivered to our door, in a plain, pornographic brown wrapper, courtesy of the TPP.
The TPP grants the rights of a conquering army to foreign investors and multinational corporations. The leaked text contains 26 chapters, yet only two chapters cover actual ‘trade’ issues, such as tariffs and quotas.
The US would be conquered, minus a single fired shot, as the USTR and Obama sign away our rights. The TPP text obligates the federal government to serve as the bully club, forcing states and local communities into conforming with this unmitigated surrender of our sovereignity.
The thousand plus page document of detailed restraints forced on federal, state and local governments is not restricted to trade. Everything from intellectual property rights, to labor issues, to public health, to environmental regulations is forced into subjugation under this legal excuse for corporate rule. Our own federal government is reduced to a mercenary force, pointing the gun to our heads. Nothing is safe. This includes public lands and resources.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a tool that could be used to steal public resources, as revealed by leaked documents of the draft TPP texts. These documents show that US property rights protections have been eradicated in favor of international standards, which have yet to be articulated. These standards would be relegated to the whims of the unelected international tribunal, for which there is no right of appeal. In theory, public lands in the US could be summarily handed over to international corporate interests.
This could translate into foreign interests using the unelected tribunal to ‘legally’ steal US public resources such as potable water, reducing the US to a colony or vassal state. Natural resource battles over resources like water have begun in Michigan, thanks to the predecessor ‘Emergency Manager’ law.
Nestle vs. Ice Mountain is a case in point. Concerned with excessive water diversion by the corporate titan, a grassroots group named Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation (MCWC) defeated Nestle in court. Nestle appealed and the appeals court ruled that MCWC won on concerns of environmental harm, but the corporate water interests of Nestle had to balance with the landowner’s interests.
This was the beginning of the end, as corporate forces realized they needed a stacked deck in the face of growing citizen grassroots/netroots mobilization. Not content to abide by a legitimate process, corporate forces pushed the Emergency Manager Act.
Michigan’s ‘Emergency Manager Law’ is the predecessor to the TPP.
In March of 2011, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder signed into law the ‘Emergency Manager Law.’ The law authorized the shredding of labor contracts, privatization of public services and the consolidation and DISSOLUTION of locally elected governments. It has been touted as ‘financial martial law.’
It does not escape my attention that this ‘law’ would have serviced Nestle’s needs quite handily. Though several thousand protesters marched against this bill; the corporate owned media ignored the uprising. The Michigan ‘Emergency Manager Law’ is a mini-me version of the TPP. It is …’democracy under siege.’
The heart of this agreement is the international corporate tribunal, which will have the authority to make the final decision in any disputes that may arise. The tribunal will be staffed by the same corporate attorneys who service the multinational corporations. This creates a clear conflict of interest, and it is just the beginning of the problems with TPP.
Under TPP, any law that a foreign corporation finds irritating can be taken to the tribunal. This includes some of the most egregious crimes against humanity, such as forced or slave labor, child labor, massive dumping of toxic pollutants, and murders committed by subcontractors. The tribunal will be made up of three corporate attorneys, and the “economic royalists” will be in the driver’s seat.
TPP also grants the tribunal the right to set aside previous court decisions or the results of public elections. This means that the will of the people will no longer matter, and corporate personhood will be elevated to emperor. The concept of “consent of the governed” will be reduced to a trite joke.
Lori Wallach of Public Citizen has raised serious concerns about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). She has warned that the foreign tribunals set up to enforce the agreement would be staffed by private sector lawyers with potential conflicts of interest, as they would rotate between acting as ‘judges’ and representing corporations suing governments.
In response, the Citizens Trade Campaign, along with over 400 activist groups, sent a letter to every member of Congress in March 2013. The letter criticized the Obama administration’s use of the national security classification system and the Fast Track Authority to push through the TPP, and outlined conditions that must be met for the agreement to be legitimate. It was signed by a wide range of organisations, including the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Food and Water Watch and the Holy Cross International Justice Office. These groups are working to counter the global trend of reducing standards and regulations, and should not be dismissed as ‘special interest groups’.
The UK government must prioritize human and labor rights in future trade policies. There must be no tolerance for forced or slave labor, child labor, dangerous working conditions or political violence used to suppress collective bargaining. Environmental degradation should be prohibited to prevent resource wars. The rights of indigenous peoples to self-determined governance must be respected. These measures will ensure a fair negotiation and approval process for future trade policies.
Trade agreements must ensure respect for local development goals and the procurement policies that deliver on them. This includes upholding the rights of local governments to promote development that reflects the needs and preferences of their environmental, social and political goals. All trade agreements must also respect and maintain prevailing requirements for wages, environmental, labor and human rights standards, and provide policies addressing long-standing inequalities worldwide. In the case of the United States, such trade procurement policies must maintain existing “Buy American” clauses.
In addition, trade agreements must protect food sovereignty. Farmers must receive fair compensation for their produce, while consumers must have access to affordable and safe foods. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) must not be allowed to cross-pollute organic crops, and any GMO products on grocery shelves must be clearly labeled with their associated health risks. Nations must also have the right to restrict the dumping of crops at below market prices, or any other unfair trade practices that force family farmers off their land.
The Doha Declaration, a global agreement on access to medicine, should be respected in its spirit, and any attempts to extend drug patents with minor formulary tweaks should be deemed fraudulent. In addition, trade agreements should include rigorous ‘rule of origin’ provisions to ensure that only nations in compliance with the agreement benefit from it. This is to safeguard against currency manipulation, which can have trade-distorting effects.
6.) …”Space for robust financial regulations and public services.”
Trade pacts should set floors, not ceilings, when it comes to the regulation of banks, insurance companies, hedge funds and other financial service providers. Language must be ‘clear and specific’ on the terms of any trade agreement. No tortuous arguments using vague language which justifies the nullification of public elections. In other words, laws like the ‘Emergency Manager Act’, promoted by the privatizers at the Mackinac Center–would be rejected as treasonous and anti-democratic.
7.) …”Improved consumer and environmental standards.”
Trade agreements should set floors, rather than ceilings, when it comes to environmental, food and product safety and consumer right-to-know measures. To use the vernacular of the street—DUH.
8.) …No elevation of corporations to equal terms with governments. Trade agreements should never provide corporations or investors ‘special powers’ engineered to circumvent and nullify the domestic judiciary. Corporate challenges of domestic laws or court decisions through the use of nuisance SLAPP suits and tortuous arguments exploiting vague contract language must be outlawed.
The ‘investor-state’ tribunal which empowers rotating teams of three corporate attorneys to demand …unlimited taxpayer compensation for foreign firms’ claiming a signatory nation’s laws …undermine their expected future profits must be eliminated. Legal terms including ‘investment,’ ‘expropriation,’ and ‘minimum standard of treatment,’ must be more narrowly and clearly defined to ensure the rights of governments to legislate in the public interest.
This demand is key. It is a clear repudiation of the ‘investor-state’ and the ‘investor-state’ tribunal. No wiggle room here–the very core of the TPP is denounced in this simple statement. The legally concocted concept of an ‘investor-state’ and the mediation tribunal of corporate attorneys is the head of the TPP snake.
This single element surrenders any nation’s sovereignity and reduces it to a vassal colony.
This ‘investor-state’ device is plantation politics in all its ugliness. The only difference between the Nazi brown-shirted enforcers and the mediation tribunal is the fact that the attorneys for the tribunal probably wear Brooks Brothers.
Citizens Trade Campaign and the allied 400 groups signing on to this appeal are demanding the following rigorous levels of accountability and transparency with regards to the negotiation of trade agreements.
First, all TPP draft texts must be made public. No president, including Obama should possess sole trade policymaking authority.
Secondly, Fast-Track authority must be permanently eradicated. (Fast-Track is a Nixonian relic which relinquishes Congress’ ‘exclusive constitutional authority’ to …”regulate commerce with foreign nations” and transfers this power to executive branch and the USTR). Under Fast-Track the executive can sign the bill or treaty in question and then force a single up-down vote on the issue.
Fast-Track strips Congress of its right to investigate, debate and amend any of the agreement’s provisions. In terms of the TPP–Fast-Track is being pushed to deceive Congress into–signing away our sovereignity.
To quote Congressman Grayson, “The TPP is about a lot more than trade. It’s about the power of large corporations to override the will of the people. It’s about the ability of multinationals to sue countries for passing laws that protect their citizens. It’s about giving corporations the right to challenge any law they don’t like, including environmental and labor laws.”
”there is no other area that is done this way……”I’m not only referring to negotiations but …”no fast-track immigration bill, no fast-track for other legislation …”we don’t fast-track appropriations bills, we don’t fast-track anything else…why should we fast-track the sovereignity
..”the reason why they do it in secret is because our ‘sell-out trade-representatives” met with other ‘sell-out trade representatives” from other countries “
Any trade agreement process must contain…
– Requirements that the USTR (US Trade Representative) consult with all interested stakeholders, on all potential areas theoretically impacted by the proposed agreement, including (but not limited to) pharmaceutical access, food sovereignity, currency manipulation, balance of trade, job creation or loss, expansion opportunities, environmental stewardship and human and labor rights;
– Expansion of the engagement process beginning with the TPP immediately;
-Creation of an unbiased and public process which verifies that objectives negotiated by Congress are actually present and achieved in the final document; and
-Creation of a verification process publicly certifying that any proposed agreement or provisions of the agreement, actually reflects the public interest. A congressional majority is required to certify that the agreement is in the public interest of the US.
– Finally, negotiated objectives must have been publicly witnessed and met, BEFORE the executive is granted authority to sign the agreement, binding the US to its terms.
“I appreciate the willingness of the USTR to make various documents available for review by members of Congress, but I do not believe that is a substitute for more robust public transparency. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States.” – Sen. Elizabeth Warren
When the Congressman was granted access to the TPP, he was viewing a classified document. So when he was speaking with the author about investor-state provisions/tribunals, he was careful not to reveal any specific details about the agreement. He did, however, explain that this provision is in line with similar “free trade” agreements.
