Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPeople Are Stopping The TPP; Time To Finish Off Corporate Trade
http://www.mintpressnews.com/people-are-stopping-the-tpp-time-to-finish-off-corporate-trade/213620/First, in order to eke out a legislative victory, Obama and his shrinking number of allies in Congress had to compromise and make the TPP public for 90 days before it was signed. Originally, the trade negotiators planned to keep the TPP secret for four years after it was signed. This has been a costly compromise, as people now know what is in the agreement and the U.S. trade representative and the president can no longer deny it.
Second, the Toxic Political Poison of the TPP ended the career of Boehner, a long-time corporate trader. In order to get the agreement through the House he had to twist the arms of dozens of Republicans who opposed fast track. And, after the vote, he sought retribution against the leaders of the revolt against fast track by removing them from committees and leadership positions. This led to a counter-revolt that ultimately ended his political career. When a speaker of the house is defeated over an issue, everyone in Congress will step lightly to avoid that political poison.
<snip>
On Feb. 9, Rep. Ryan told The Racine Journal Times that there is bipartisan skepticism of the agreement. He said that if Obama pushed a vote on the TPP he would lose, adding: There are enough concerns about this agreement, some that I also have, where I dont see enough support for it right now. This was the first time Ryan admitted there was not enough support for the agreement. At the same time, the White House moved from saying Sen. McConnell will not dictate the schedule to saying the administration will not go forward without congressional leadership.
People are calling Congress to urge their representatives not to support the TPP, and protests are being planned for mid-February when representatives are home for the presidents week recess. We all know that Obama and the transnational corporations want these agreements, so we need to continue to build our people power to defeat the TPP.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
7 replies, 973 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (22)
ReplyReply to this post
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
People Are Stopping The TPP; Time To Finish Off Corporate Trade (Original Post)
eridani
Feb 2016
OP
eridani
(51,907 posts)1. The Predators Behind the TPP
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/35156-the-predators-behind-the-tpp
But the TPP agreement, which aims to tie the United States together with close to a dozen countries in Asia, Oceania and a bit of Latin America, is not in the first place about trade, and may hardly be significant at all for stimulating genuine exchanges traditionally labelled that way. The same is true for its TPIP companion, which is meant to create and foster a new American-European business environment.
The TPP and TPIP accords are about power, not trade. More specifically, the agreements are about changed power relations between a collectivity of politically well-connected large corporations and the sovereign states in which these entities want to sink new roots. In particular, these treaties would allow U.S. corporations to engage in conduct unchecked by national rules of the participating countries. In eyes not fogged over through neoliberal dogma, such a thing would be recognized as predation.
Some history will clarify a lot. The first systematic attempt to establish corporate supremacy over national laws and regulations, begun in 1997 by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, was more honest by calling itself the Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI). Under MAI rules, foreign businesses would be guaranteed all the advantages enjoyed by domestic producers and services of the participating countries.
If implemented, the larger foreign investors in these markets could have easily wiped out smaller domestic players with the superior force they can muster and would, once and for all, have made the older standard development methods, known as import substitution industrialization, impossible.
But the TPP agreement, which aims to tie the United States together with close to a dozen countries in Asia, Oceania and a bit of Latin America, is not in the first place about trade, and may hardly be significant at all for stimulating genuine exchanges traditionally labelled that way. The same is true for its TPIP companion, which is meant to create and foster a new American-European business environment.
The TPP and TPIP accords are about power, not trade. More specifically, the agreements are about changed power relations between a collectivity of politically well-connected large corporations and the sovereign states in which these entities want to sink new roots. In particular, these treaties would allow U.S. corporations to engage in conduct unchecked by national rules of the participating countries. In eyes not fogged over through neoliberal dogma, such a thing would be recognized as predation.
Some history will clarify a lot. The first systematic attempt to establish corporate supremacy over national laws and regulations, begun in 1997 by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, was more honest by calling itself the Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI). Under MAI rules, foreign businesses would be guaranteed all the advantages enjoyed by domestic producers and services of the participating countries.
If implemented, the larger foreign investors in these markets could have easily wiped out smaller domestic players with the superior force they can muster and would, once and for all, have made the older standard development methods, known as import substitution industrialization, impossible.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)3. KnR
polly7
(20,582 posts)4. K&R. nt.
earthshine
(1,642 posts)5. Obama has been absolutely disgusting on this issue.
I read a post (wish I had the link) that said he's upset that people don't think he's a progressive.
I read another post (again, no link) that stated Obama said one of his regrets is that he didn't compromise with republicans more.
Without the links, as written, admittedly, this sounds like heresay. But, this was all read on the DU in the last week.
So, when Hillary says she wants to continue his legacy ...
Eridani, have a heart, on me, for speaking truth to power.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)7. The only reason it hasn't passed...
is because Obama supports it. In their mind, so do republicans, but in their heart they must oppose him at all stops. For once, it is working out in our favor.