TPP negotiators to announce deal 'in principle'

[villager]

Source: AFP

Officials negotiating an ambitious Pacific trade pact could announce a deal "in principle" Sunday after days of grueling talks, Japan's Economy Minister Akira Amari said.

Amari told Japanese journalists that there had been "major progress" Sunday morning and that a solution had been found to the main roadblock to a deal, how to protect developers of biologic drugs, which saw the United States and Australia sharply divided on the issue.
"We are making preparations now to announce a deal in principle this afternoon," he said, according to a translation of his remarks supplied by Japanese journalists.

That suggested there would still be some loose ends to wrap up after five days of ministerial talks in Atlanta on what will be the world's largest free trade zone, the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

The talks between representatives of 12 countries comprising 40 percent of the global economy -- including Canada, New Zealand, Mexico and others -- have gone three days past the scheduled ending and Amari made clear he was not willing to extend another day.

The administration of President Barack Obama, the prime driver behind the TPP...

Read more: http://www.globalpost.com/article/6662333/2015/10/04/tpp-negotiators-announce-deal-principle

[djean111]

1. I don't believe there are any "principles" involved. n/t

[daleanime]

27. Well, there is one....

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$moveasidepeon$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[PatrickforO]

32. LOL, yep absolutely right on.

Trouble is, the peons don't wanna move aside any more. Enough is enough!

[cpompilo]

2. Hillary will be pleased.

[jalan48]

11. She's very happy it has wrapped up before the first debate.

Now she can do the "good things/bad things" routine and cover all bases.

[cpompilo]

14. And particularly before her coronation.

[Jim Lane]

33. I'm not so sure. Her ability to triangulate and evade will go down.

Earlier this year, for example, she alluded to the question of what the TPP would say about currency manipulation. This was a transparent dodge. The U.S. Trade Representative and the Secretary of the Treasury both said that it wasn't in the agreement at all and wouldn't be, because there was so much resistance that the US wasn't even trying to get it included.

Nevertheless, this was an example of how Hillary avoided commenting on the real agreement. Her boosters on DU solemnly praised her for being so statesmanlike by not saying anything until the agreement was finalized -- when the undenied leaks were very damning, even aside from whatever extra info she had as a former Secretary of State.

If they wrap a deal this week, that dodge is gone. There will be an actual specific agreement, on which members of Congress will have to vote Yea or Nay. Even candidates who aren't now in office will be asked to comment on it. If Hillary dithers too long, she'll only reinforce one of her big weaknesses, the perception that she doesn't fight for principle but just calculates political advantage. But an end to evasiveness will have its own problems. Support for TPP will give a big opening to her progressive opponents, O'Malley and Sanders (who both opposed fast track). Opposing TPP will put her at odds with Obama, which she won't want if she can avoid it, and upset many of the 1%ers who are bankrolling her.

A deal that wraps now will be an issue in Congress into at least the early part of the primary season. My guess is that Clinton would be happier if the negotiations drag on, so that she can continue to refuse to comment until final text is released.

[pampango]

37. Agreed. An agreement that is "under negotiation" is easier to ignore than a finished one that

has specific provisions and is before congress.

It will be an issue in both parties during the early primary season if Trump, Carson and Cruz are still around. If not, it won't be much of an issue in the GOP primaries.

[jalan48]

43. Good point. I guess it comes down to whether or not she can drag her feet until elected.

If it passes she can talk about changes she would like to see in the agreement and it doesn't pass she can play the stateswoman and not take a side.

[NCjack]

3. Life for the poor just became substantially more difficult, unless

Senate DEMs step up and kill it.

[djean111]

5. My criteria for DEM is simple - vote for it, or shill for it - not a DEM.

And I will proceed accordingly with support and votes.

[restorefreedom]

10. well said. nt

[jeff47]

17. Senate Dems can't kill it.

The TPA bill removed the filibuster from TPP consideration. So it's an up-or-down vote. While it's nominally a treaty, Obama and the Republicans could pass it as "regular" laws instead of a treaty.

Not to mention, there's plenty of corporate Democrats who will happily fuck over the rest of us.

[NealK]

19. +1

[NCjack]

23. The 1% can't be satiated. /nt

[PatrickforO]

34. Yeah, but let's all make them PAY by losing their next election.

We can do this. I'm sure as hell keeping track of how my senators and representative vote.

[pampango]

39. Losing their next PRIMARY election - yes. The idea of a 60-republican senate would be a large price

to pay to teach a Democrat a lesson.

[jeff47]

40. Yeah, those Republicans might do something like pass the TPP. (nt)

[pampango]

41. I think the damage to the country that a 60-republican senate could do goes well beyond that.

Given all that has happened over the last 6 1/2 years if the only damage you think republicans can do is TPP, I envy your tranquillity.

The tea party does not wield its power in the republican party by voting for Democrats in the general election when they are not happy with the impure republican - they call then RINO's - but by running and often winning primary challenges against republicans they consider too moderate.

Tea party folks are generally not perceived to be the brightest bulbs in the pack but even they know electing Democrats out of spite does their cause no good. They prefer to elect impure republicans, if forced to, over a Democratic challenger then make him or her govern to the right by constantly threatening a primary challenge against the politician the next election. The same strategy should work for us in a liberal direction.

[jeff47]

42. Yeah, they might pass a health plan from the heritage foundation.

Or they might pass tax cuts instead of actually stimulating the economy during a recession. Then slash what little spending does manage to pass in order to pretend they are "serious".

Or they might start bombing countries in the middle east while saying brilliant strategy like, "We came, we saw, he died".

Or they might bury a SCOTUS candidate's history of sexual harassment in order to put a massively "conservative" radical on the SCOTUS.

The tea party does not wield its power in the republican party by voting for Democrats in the general election when they are not happy with the impure republican - they call then RINO's - but by running and often winning primary challenges against republicans they consider too moderate.

That's step 1.

Step 2 is not turning out in the general election for the "RINO". Not voting for a Democrat.

Believe it or not, you are not actually required to cast a vote for one of the major parties in every election.

[pampango]

44. That was based on bill passed by a liberal Democratic Massachusetts legislature, vetoed by Romney

then passed by Massachusetts Democrats over that veto. I would have preferred a UK-style National Health Service but I will take Obamacare over the status quo that existed for decades.

Step 2 is not turning out in the general election for the "RINO".

What makes you think that tea party voters don't turn out to vote for RINO's which helps Democrats win elections?

Believe it or not, you are not actually required to cast a vote for one of the major parties in every election.

As I posted elsewhere today, I voted 3rd party once and later I regretted not voting for the Democrat when the worst candidate won. You are free vote for any 3rd party you want. There are many issues on which every Democratic candidate is better than every republican one.

[jeff47]

45. Yet that still doesn't change where the plan came from

or the motivation of the plan - to keep health care for profit, just for a while longer.

What makes you think that tea party voters don't turn out to vote for RINO's which helps Democrats win elections?

Polling. Republican turnout goes down in the general when the teabagger loses the primary.

There are many issues on which every Democratic candidate is better than every republican one.

Name one.

And keep in mind, by saying "Every Democratic candidate", I get to talk about the positions of some very "interesting" Democrats.

[pampango]

46. Certainly does not change the origin only the destination.

The EPA had its origin in the republican party but its 'destination' is truly Democratic. republicans hate it now. Sometimes the destination is more important than the origin.

There are many issues on which every Democratic candidate is better than every republican one.

Name one.

If you can't think of one that satisfies me.

[jeff47]

47. No, it delays the destination with a band-aid fix on a horrific system

It is an example of making people continue to suffer in order to "compromise" with the insane...who then voted against it anyway.

The fact that it's better than the hell we had before demonstrates just how bad the hell we had before was.

If you can't think of one that satisfies me.

"Every Democratic candidate" included Kim Davis in the 2014 election. You still want to claim every Democratic candidate is better, in all elections?

[nationalize the fed]

4. The Transformation of

the Democratic Party to Republican Light is complete.

The administration of President Barack Obama, the prime driver behind the TPP...

The 2 biggest "accomplishments" of this Admin are

1. Ramming a Heritage Foundation Health Insurance Ripoff law through Congress that requires every citizen in the US to pay Corporate Insurance Companies monthly for the rest of their lives- and most of these "customers" will never use the policy they will pay for because of high deductibles and co-pays.

The promised Public Option went up in smoke and Obama couldn't even make sure the rollout went to plan.

2. The TPP, a "NAFTA on Steroids"

While campaigning, Obama was against mandated insurance and promised to "renegotiate" NAFTA. The joke is on everyone that believed in "Hope and Change". Har de Har Har. Will this be a lesson in Campaign promises? Not if the past is any indication.

Clinton took a baseball bat to Democrats knees and now this Obama character has come along with a knife to the back

What a disgrace

[JDPriestly]

6. And then they wonder why thousands are coming out to support Bernie, who describes

himself as a democratic socialist?

Stop the TPP.

It is a corporate takeover.

It will surreptitiously destroy what is left of our democracy.

Let's form teams to read the thing (it will be long to prevent careful review) and stop it before it takes hold.

Let's get everybody on the web who knows how to understand and read these agreements to cooperate and analyze what it says and publicize the bad news.

I for one am worried about what it will mean for those of us who oppose fracking and who love our national and state parks.

What will it mean for the environment?

What will it mean for healthcare?

What will it mean for wages? for unions? for culture?

I'm very skeptical about it.

[jwirr]

13. When they finally release it I think you have a good plan.

we more than likely have talented people right here on DU who can read this section by section and help us understand it.

Then we can set out to stop it if we can.

If it cannot be stopped the corporations have won. Good-bye freedom.

[moonscape]

21. I'd like to better understand TPP and what it means,

because I hear people violently for and against it, but am not educated enough to have an opinion. What I know is that in the divide, the people I stand with (except Obama) are against it, but that's not enough for me to go blindly marching in the streets.

And, I'm not confident of my ability to ever fully understand the complexities. Or, can it be accurately dumbed down for people like me (beyond an opinion piece)?

[JDPriestly]

25. The establishment of an international arbitration court in which a corporation can bring a claim

against a country, pick one of three judges and enforce a judgment against a defendant nation means that court can overrule and render null and void an Act of Congress, of your state legislature or on ordinance passed by your city council.

We have been ordered to prohibit identifying the country of origin of meat sold in our country already.

The TPP is a way to establish an authoritarian government by arbitration court that will be able to overrule many of our local laws, laws we want but that corporations object to.

That is just one aspect of the TPP that I am pretty sure will be in it. (That kind of court was established by NAFTA.) We now also have to allow Mexican trucks and drivers on our roads at least in California whether our state wants to allow them or not. Nothing against Mexicans but why should we be required to allow their trucks to drive loads on our roads when Americans could be doing that work. I do not know whether the Mexican-owned trucks have to meet our standards in terms of emissions and safety.

We are slowly being deprived of a lot of the right to self-government that we originally fought for. We need to stop these trade agreements now. We can still trade.

The agreements protect the interests of corporations, not the interests of ordinary people.

[Jim Lane]

26. Dumbing it down will be tough because it's so long and complex

There will be analyses of specific chapters. For example, the Sierra Club on environmental provisions, Electronic Frontier Foundation on copyrights, AFL-CIO on labor, etc.

One thing to bear in mind is that the corporados who'll be pushing it have been in on the negotiations. Thanks to the passage of fast track, the time for consideration of the proposal will be truncated, and the proponents will be able to hit the ground running. The other side has been reduced to relying on sporadic leaks. In the early stages, the "Pro" case will be much better developed. Wait until other experts, such as the NGOs I mentioned, can weigh in.

[Demeter]

7. I'm hoping this is a bluff

because if it isn't, WWIII has just been scheduled. All peoples of the earth will cry out in anguish, and then, they will overturn it all.

This doesn't look like a reputable news source.

[tomg2]

16. It actually is reputable.

The story itself came from the Agence France-Presse which is like Reuters and AP.

[CharlotteVale]

8. "Deal" as in "screwing over the masses."

[jfern]

9. This would be a major defeat for ordinary Earthlings

[rurallib]

12. best most concise analysis

earth dwellers of all species I would add.

[madville]

15. I thought I heard a sucking sound

He was right about something

[CONN]

18. +1

[NealK]

20. We are so screwed.

[Doctor_J]

22. This will help the president's legacy. The people who own all of the media will get rich

off of it, like they have from heritage care, Obama's other big achievement. So all of the coverage of this will be glowing.

There is nothing left of the party I've been a member of since I was old enough to have a party.

[PSPS]

24. Obummer

[turbinetree]

28. Principle--------------yeah right, more like sell out...............................

principle (ˈprɪnsɪpəl )


►Definitions


noun
1. a standard or rule of personal conduct ⇒ ■ a man of principle
2.(often plural) a set of such moral rules ⇒ ■ he'd stoop to anything, ⇒ ■ he has no principles
3. adherence to such a moral code; morality ⇒ ■ it's not the money but the principle of the thing, ⇒ ■ torn between principle and expediency
4. a fundamental or general truth or law ⇒ ■ first principles
5. the essence of something ⇒ ■ the male principle
6. a source or fundamental cause; origin ⇒ ■ principle of life
7. a rule or law concerning a natural phenomenon or the behaviour of a system ⇒ ■ the principle of the conservation of mass
8. an underlying or guiding theory or belief ⇒ ■ the hereditary principle, ⇒ ■ socialist principles
9. (chemistry) a constituent of a substance that gives the substance its characteristics and behaviour ⇒ ■ bitter principle

10. See in principle


11. See on principle


USAGE Principle and principal are often confused: the principal (not principle) reason for his departure; the plan was approved in principle (not in principal)


►Word Origin
C14: from Latin principium beginning, basic tenet

►Synonyms
View thesaurus entry

= morals, standards, ideals, honour, virtue, ethics, integrity, conscience, morality, decency, scruples, probity, rectitude, moral standards, sense of duty, moral law, sense of honour, uprightness, kaupapa (New Zealand)

= belief, rule, standard, attitude, code, notion, criterion, ethic, doctrine, canon, creed, maxim, dogma, tenet, dictum, credo, axiom

= rule, idea, law, theory, basis, truth, concept, formula, fundamental, assumption, essence, proposition, verity, golden rule, precept


Quotations including 'principle'
•"It is always easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them" [Alfred Adler]
•"The most useful thing about a principle is that it can always be sacrificed to expediency" [W. Somerset Maugham



Principle (ˈprɪnsɪpəl )


►Definitions


noun
(Christian Science) another word for God


Honk-------------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016

http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/10/03/ttp-is-back-virtually-everyone-is-correctly-opposed-to-it-why-is-obama-still-pushing/

[ancianita]

29. What next. The TPP solidifies globalism over local sovereignty. It might trigger Bernie wins.

I wonder how Bernie's going to handle this in his campaign.

[ancianita]

30. And there are these people to vote against as their terms end. God, I hate the frustration of

not being able to retaliate against them sooner.

[djean111]

36. Also, remember Pelosi is a master of manipulating things so that some Dems can

confidently vote NO on something, for campaign reasons, because it has been determined that there are enough YES votes from in-your-face DINOs to carry a bill. Patrick Murphy, I am looking at you.

So a look at the membership of the New Democrat coalition is very instructive in determining who the DINOs are - this group is advised by members of the Third Way. There is a national group, and a Congressional group. My senator, Bill Nelson (DINO-Fl) is in the Congressional group, but not the national group. Patrick Murphy and Gwen Graham (and some other DINOs) are in the national group, which also has some mayors. Their agenda used to boast of eschewing the ideology thing and working across the aisle to get things done. Which, inevitably, are Koch-approved things. It has been prettied up for the coming elections, but the website reads pretty much like a very flowerly Americans for prosperity (of the Koch brothers).

[ancianita]

38. Man, how many decades did we swallow that crap of corporatism presented as bi-partisanship.

UGH.

[PatrickforO]

31. Ironic, considering their 'deal in principle' is a deal without principle for the 99%

The TPP is the worst thing to come down the pike since NAFTA and the forever war. Millions of Americans will lose jobs because of it. The only beneficiaries will be the oligarchs.

[blackspade]

35. Not the October surprise I was hoping for....

[hughee99]

48. The "main sticking point" was how to protect private corporations from the customers and

countries they'll do business with? Why does this not surprise me?