Sanders Organizing Grassroots Push Against TPP for DNC Platform Meeting

[portlander23]

Sanders Organizing Grassroots Push Against TPP for DNC Platform Meeting
Deirdre Fulton
Common Dreams

Environmentalists oppose it. So do labor unions, medical professionals, and major religious groups, as well as every leading presidential candidate.

Noting that the deal "is opposed by virtually the entire grassroots base of the Democratic Party," Sanders said Sunday he will reintroduce an amendment rejecting the TPP at next weekend's full Democratic Platform Committee meeting in Orlando, Florida.

"The platform calls for a historic expansion of Social Security, closes loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying taxes, creates millions of jobs rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, makes it easier for workers to join unions, takes on the greed of the pharmaceutical companies, ends disastrous deportation raids, bans private prisons and detention centers, abolishes the death penalty, moves to automatic voter registration and the public financing of elections, eliminates super PACs, and urges passage of a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, among many other initiatives," he continued—all provisions where Sanders' influence was in evidence.

However, Sanders wrote, "there were a number of vitally important proposals brought forth by the delegates from our campaign that were not adopted." These included a national ban on fracking, a carbon tax, and clear language on corporate-friendly "free trade" agreements like the TPP.

To that end, Sanders said he will offer an amendment in Florida "to make it clear that the Democratic Party is strongly opposed to the Trans-Pacific Partnership" and to ensure the deal doesn't come up for a vote during the lame-duck session of Congress.

Platforms don't mean a whole lot, but Mr. Sanders has found a way to turn a platform fight into a media event to extract promises out of the party. Go Bernie!

[rateyes]

1. We need every Dem Senator on record right now

on whether or not they will take Sanders' and Clinton's advice to block the TPP. Let them know that their vote will affect our vote.

[Arizona Roadrunner]

2. TPP ISDS and the Democrats

As a person who has served on a local government’s Board of Directors, I am VERY concerned about the TPP ISDS court process with results being the surrendering of governmental sovereignty to corporate interests, foreign and domestic.
Basically due to secretive deliberations, this “judicial” process is designed to favor corporate over governmental concerns and interests. This agreement should not allow corporations to use this judicial process, but should demand they use our existing judicial process as it relates to governmental entities. How many state and local governments can afford to be involved in such a process? Just by the threat of suits through ISDS, a climate where governmental units cave in will be created. Look at what has happened under NAFTA and the WTO as it relates to our right to know where our food comes from. Look at how a Canadian corporation is using NAFTA to sue the U.S. on the Keystone project.
This will mean that political topics such as minimum wage increases and housing and zoning laws may be pre-empted by just the threat of a suit through the ISDS process. Look at what happened with Egypt when a corporation tried to use a process analogous to the ISDS to prevent Egypt from raising their minimum wage laws. (Veolia v. Egypt)
Therefore, I recommend, in the national interest, this agreement not be approved. When people find out how this can be used to prevent them from finding out things such as where products are made, etc., there will be charges of treason and the political process will never recover the trust of the American citizens.

By not voting against the TPP outright, the Democrats have given Trump a great opportunity to tie the Democrats to the "establishment" and "corporate America". He can also use this position to raise questions about the Democrats "really caring about you and your job". This is a loser position for the Democrats for the "down ticket" candidates too. By the way, the US Chamber of Commerce is not worried about Clinton being "currently" against TPP. They figure after she gets into office, she will find a way for her to be "currently" in favor of it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/chamber-of-commerce-lobby_b_9104096.html

[Else You Are Mad]

3. Well put.

This is a very well thought out reply thank you for taking the time to post it.

I suggest that you post this reply as an independent post because I am sure there are many on DU that would appreciate it.

[randome]

4. There is no 'surrendering of sovereignty' to corporate interests.

There is an umbrella, legal structure based on public law instead of backroom deals that actually shines more of a light on corporate maneuverings. I doubt you understand how judges are chosen for ISDS tribunals.

We also subjugate ourselves at the 'altar' of the U.N. with various treaties and such. Should we withdraw from that, too?

It's rather sad that a treaty that unites the planet more is given a knee-jerk response that stems more from nationalistic fervor than consideration of the larger picture.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[cosmicone]

6. People who blindly oppose the TPP should study it first

and not use it as a political football selfishly.

[think]

17. The top House Dem on trade, the unions, the environmental groups, & doctors without borders

all oppose it.

The Democratic law maker and these groups aren't opposing the TPP "blindly". They have laid out very good reasons for their opposition.

[Sunlei]

30. It's been in public for months, I've read some of it. What part are they against? They need to QUOTE

Quote the part they're against? The other large countries signers of TPP trade agreements like Australia/Canada

don't seem to have a political problem with their TPP trade agreements?

[Arizona Roadrunner]

7. Designed and run by corporations for corporations

Sorry, but they should and could use the existing US structure. Take a look at WTO and NAFTA decisions. Also, if you want to make any "improvements" it will take the authorization of ALL member nations. Good luck!!!! The so called "labor improvements" look good on paper but have very weak enforcement incentives. Corporations last forever and we (people) have a limited life span.

[randome]

8. What do you mean using the existing US structure?

You mean with judges and such? Or do you mean with juries? The entire world should do things our way and that's the end of it?

First, a jury is not typically going to understand complex trade issues. And juries typically do NOT adjudicate such things on U.S. soil. There are suits and hearings and a judge and rulings by our own trade commissions, which sometimes includes hefty fines.

In the case of the ISDS, both opponents in a dispute choose one judge and agree on a third. Do you think that a government will deliberately choose judges that will help it lose?

So where does this idea that corporations are controlling everything in the TPP come from? Corporations cannot make back-room deals with the TPP. Every move they make needs to be based on public law.

As for the difficulties of getting all member nations to agree on changes, that occurs with every single treaty ever signed. The solution, imo, is to start somewhere, not simply give up because of difficulties we might encounter in the future.

The TPP is not perfect. Far from it. But it's another attempt to unite us all and it's done with the input and intellectual heft of President Obama. I'm good with it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Arizona Roadrunner]

10. You got to be kidding!!!

This whole process was done in secret without open input especially by consumers organizations etc. The pool is controlled by corporations in the way it is set up and the options you have. You will be surprised what juries can understand. I would rather have that than a politically correct judge. It isn't perfect. Therefore, it should start over in the open with all sides having access to the process and product. If you think TPP is so great, why did it have to be done in secret? Whose interest is protected by a secret process and product? Sorry but that alone makes it unworthy. I don't care if a few people see some benefit. That is the point, only a few people or entities will see and have some benefit. Most of us won't and in fact will suffer when a corporations use the process to limit our options because we can't afford to get involved in this off shore process. Sorry, I vote for America and not some corporate and multi national world domination. By the way, isn't this the Fourth of July!!!!!!

[randome]

15. You may as well ask why the Iran arms deal was conducted in secret.

Sorry, but the people we elect to make these treaties are not required to be micro-managed by us. It's a trade treaty so it deals with trade issues and very little else. Yet some worker provisions managed to find their way in.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/tpp-mexico-labor-rights/426501/

Most everyone agrees the agreement is an improvement over NAFTA, signed in 1995. Labor advocates have many complaints about that decades-old agreement, one being that many of the provisions meant to improve life for workers were unenforceable. In response to complaints about the lack of labor rights in NAFTA and other trade agreements, Congress came up in 2007 with the May 10th agreement, a bipartisan compromise aimed at ensuring that trade partners were actually working to improve labor conditions. It required that member countries adopt and enforce the basic labor standards set in the 1988 Declaration of the International Labor Organization. It also made labor disputes subject to the same settlement procedures as commercial trade disputes, meaning that countries that violated labor rules could be subject to sanctions. May 10th required the U.S. to hold countries more accountable for labor standards—Congress did not vote on trade agreements negotiated with Peru, Colombia, and Panama until those countries had changed their labor laws.

The TPP’s Labour chapter reiterates that all members should adopt and maintain the labor rights of the ILO. It also calls for all participants to end child labor and forced labor, and to allow workers to form unions and collectively bargain. It requires a minimum-wage, and safety and health standards meant to prevent common abuses like overcrowding, fire hazards, and overwork. But the document does not specify how any of those measures should work. And that’s a big shortcoming, according to John Sifton, the Asia advocacy director with Human Rights Watch. The minimum wage, for example, could be set at a penny an hour—which wouldn’t do much to help workers.

Countries such as Vietnam would have to completely revolutionize their legal systems to comply with the labor-union requirements, which doesn’t seem likely, Sifton said. That’s why the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) negotiated the real teeth of the improvements on labor rights in consistency plans with some of the countries with the most serious human-rights violation records: Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei, he said. A consistency plan outlines changes a country needs to make before the trade agreement comes into force—and then relies on the U.S. to enforce those changes.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Arizona Roadrunner]

20. The problem is Enforcement!!!!

These so called "agreements" can have all of the "correct" language in them you want. The problem is enforcement. Yes the Iranian National State to National State agreement should be in secret. In this case it is Corporations in and for Corporations setting up an off shore judicial process that can try to impose it's will on governmental units not just other corporations. Take their ability to sue governmental units out of it and I have no problem with it.

[randome]

29. They can't "impose their will" on government.

So long as government does not discriminate between corporations. That's the entire premise of the TPP. A signatory cannot pass a law that shows favoritism to its own businesses. If it does, that's where an ISDS dispute arises. In other words, public law, not backroom deals, are front and center now. That means more transparency.

If a country passes a law that says all corporations must abide by a new environmental law, including domestic corporations, there is no dispute. None. Case closed.

Do you think trade wars are good? If all the signatories to the TPP are abiding by the same set of rules, then we are just a little more united than we were before.

And such trade dispute arrangements have been the norm for more than 50 years. The ISDS is just another version of the same.

Since the TPP relies on the U.S. to enforce minimum labor requirements, I think we're on safer ground than we were before -and workers in Vietnam, Malaysia, etc. are definitely on safer ground because before this there was nothing regarding them.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Arizona Roadrunner]

34. Minimum is the problem

Minimum standards is the problem Due to the so called "judicial" process, the incentive will be to go to the lowest level of labor protection. After all, raising the minimum wage will effect a corporations profits and therefore be off the table.

[randome]

41. It's better than what they have now. Our ability to force our way in should be limited.

I mean come on, America pretty much controls the world already. A treaty like the TPP brings us a little closer to being a "United States" Of Earth. It's a long haul and the quality of life in these other countries won't transform overnight but if we demanded that they do, we would be the rampaging bully some want to see us as, and nothing would get done.

We apply measured pressure here and there and change will occur. It takes time.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Arizona Roadrunner]

68. The problem for Americans is in the USA

Forty percent of American jobs are now "gigs". This will only expand in this country with the "help" of TPP and the way corporations will be able to use it against American Labor and labor standards. There is a reason why so many Americans do not see these trade agreements helping them. The current phrase of importance is "America First" and don't give me all of this nonsense about trade wars. Maybe it's about time we have a few trade wars. As to leading to military engagement, so what. Do we really need these days an excuse for military involvement? It's going to happen anyway. Maybe it might be better for a reason the American voters understand........

[think]

21. You Can’t Read the TPP, But These Huge Corporations Can.

Why did corporate lobbyists get to read the TPP when even our congress had very limited access to the text?

You Can’t Read the TPP, But These Huge Corporations Can

Alleen Brown
May 12 2015, 1:36 p.m.

The Senate today is holding a key procedural vote that would allow the Trans-Pacific Partnership to be “fast-tracked.”

So who can read the text of the TPP? Not you, it’s classified. Even members of Congress can only look at it one section at a time in the Capitol’s basement, without most of their staff or the ability to keep notes.

But there’s an exception: if you’re part of one of 28 U.S. government-appointed trade advisory committees providing advice to the U.S. negotiators. The committees with the most access to what’s going on in the negotiations are 16 “Industry Trade Advisory Committees,” whose members include AT&T, General Electric, Apple, Dow Chemical, Nike, Walmart and the American Petroleum Institute....

Read more:
https://theintercept.com/2015/05/12/cant-read-tpp-heres-huge-corporations-can/

[randome]

31. We should let the GOP insert abortion provisions into a trade treaty?

That's what would have occurred. A treaty negotiated by a couple dozen chefs is better than one negotiated by thousands. (You'd need to include all the legislators of all the other countries, as well.)

And did those other countries complain about this? Maybe, I don't really know, but I do know that nothing would ever get done if we opened the floodgates to every cockamamie amendment some kooky right-winger wanted to put in.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[think]

46. The point was why should corporations be able to have that much access.

Unions and other very concerned parties didn't have access yet these corporations not only had access but had a former banker as the USTR at the helm and was collaborating with them to write the laws.

[randome]

51. Well, it's a trade treaty, not a workers' rights treaty. Should they always be linked?

I'm not sure about that, especially since there is little in the way of unionization in Vietnam, Malaysia, etc. But now, with the TPP, there will be movement in that direction.

What would an American union have to say on a treaty like the TPP? Would it demand that Vietnam adhere to full unionization? Would that be 'fair' to impose our beliefs on another country this way?

I don't know all the answers to the questions you bring up. I'm just theorizing. But one possibility might be that with union involvement, Vietnam might make demands that there be no union mandates, and then we'd have a stalemate.

On balance, I think the TPP is a good treaty. It does not put America above all others but it does have provisions for modest improvements in conditions in the other countries.

I'm in favor of that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[think]

55. Workers rights shouldn't be considered in trade agreements? Union leaders are being murdered in

countries we already have trade agreements with.

There is no way in hell those countries wages will raise in those countries if the union leaders are allowed to be murdered without any effect on trade.

How is that in anyway considered acceptable to ANYONE who values human rights and fair trade?

[randome]

60. Union leaders have been murdered here, too. Abortion providers.

Police officers have murdered citizens. Crooks and terrorists have murdered police officers and innocent people. We have a sick fascination with high powered weaponry.

What other country should dictate our behavior so that we change?

It works the other way, too. We cannot impose wholesale change on another country because they would tell us to go to hell. What we can do is make changes along the margins and gradually, over time, more beneficial change will take place.

Obama not only understands his placement in this particular time in regards to American politics, I think he better understands how to use American influence. I'm not sure any other politician would have been able to get the Iran arms deal concluded.

With that in mind, I don't see him pushing the TPP as a means to further debase the American worker or the environment. I think he knows what he's doing. That doesn't mean blindly trusting him but I think it means we should give him at least the benefit of a doubt and look more closely at what he's trying to accomplish.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[think]

63. When is the last time a union worker was murdered in the US for organizing? And why should

the American workers compete against countries where people are murdered for unionizing?

68 Guatemalan union organizers have been murdered since 2007 in Guatemala alone. Guatemala is right below Mexico and has only 15 million people.

American corporations have a very large presence there and many American jobs have been outsourced there to take advantage of the extremely low wages & lax environmental rules.

Guatemala: 68 Union Leaders Murdered before a Single Arrest
MARCELA ESTRADA - JUNE 3, 2014 AT 2:19 PM

On Saturday, Guatemala’s Ministry of Justice announced the capture of three individuals responsible for the murder of trade unionist Carlos Hernández. Hernández was secretary of culture on the executive committee of the National Union of Health Workers, and one of many in the long list of trade unionists murdered each year in Guatemala.+

~snip~

Since 2007, a total of 68 trade union leaders and representatives have been murdered, and a high number of attempted murders, kidnappings, break-ins, and death threats have been reported, along with torture. Yet, before the capture of these three individuals, not one culprit had been brought to justice.+

The many years of unaccounted murders have “created a culture of fear and violence where the exercise of trade union rights becomes impossible,” according to the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).+

~Snip~

International organizations such as Amnesty International and Going to Work have on several occasions denounced the abuses against Guatemalan unionists and the state’s negligence on the matter. Banana trade unions have been the most heavily affected industry as a result of the escalated violence, according to Going to Work. Large-scale anti-union plantations of the South Pacific coast — now responsible for over 80 percent of exports — remain a place where local banana workers cannot organize. If they do, just as they tried back in 2008, they face harassment, threats, and potentially death...

~Snip~

http://panampost.com/marcela-estrada/2014/06/03/guatemala-68-union-leaders-murdered-before-a-single-arrest/

2013 Investment Climate Statement - Guatemala

~Snip~

Major U.S. companies present in Guatemala, including investors (representative, but not a complete listing):

3M Company
ACS/BPS
American International Group
Ashmore Energy
Bristol Myers Squibb
Cargill
Chevron Corporation
Chiquita Brands International
Citibank
Duke Energy International
Federal Express
Frito Lay
Kimberly Clark Corp.
Microsoft Corporation
Pepsi-Co Bottling Co.
Pfizer Warner Lambert Co.
Procter & Gamble Co.
Ralston Purina
Sears
Sherwin Williams
WalMart
Westin Hotels and Suites
Xerox Corporation

Source:
http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ics/2013/204651.htm

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-06-27/business/fl-office-depot-outsourcing-20110627_1_office-depot-outsource-jobs-brian-levine

http://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/local-news/how-many-jobs-is-xerox-cutting-in-rochester

http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/corporate/coca-cola-in-brandon-to-outsource-150-jobs/693631

[Sunlei]

57. You can read it now. I doubt any 'stakeholders' (company owners) would have wanted

negotiations in full public on any business deal/treaty.

Our country needs Pacific area countries to buy more American goods, some of those countries have been stuck with china trade for centuries.

China is not a signer country of the TPP trade treaties and would love to have screwed up any trade deals.

[think]

58. The corporations shouldn't be the only stake holders. This agreement affects EVERYONE not just them

[Sunlei]

62. Our elected government is supposed to protect Americans interests in trade treaties.

Kind of scary plenty of those "elected" by 'the people' don't seem to have Americans best interests at heart.

[BobbyDrake]

11. So, in an effort to avoid having something global applied to the US

you think the system the US uses should be imposed on everyone else instead? Do you really not see how hypocritical a position that is?

[cosmicone]

5. TPP is necessary ... blindly railing against it is foolhardy and selfish

If we want the same labor standards applied to labor elsewhere such as working conditions, benefits, working hours, worker safety etc. and if we want to protect the environment by using a universal standard re: energy consumption and emissions, we need agreements like the TPP.

TPP also streamlines the grievance process where no single country can treat another unfairly. This helps corporations - yes, corporations - to export at a fair price creating more and more jobs everywhere without draconian rules and tariffs which hurt everyone.

Some politicians who have never run an international business in their lives are grandstanding on this issue and going against our very smart and worldly president. They should not be using such issues for selfish self-interest.

Will there be some losers due to TPP? Yes - but their market share will continue to decline anyway because they are not efficient. What we need to look at is how many winners it will create.

Artists, musicians, software creators and movie studios will get copyright protection.
All countries will abide by the labor standards elevating them and giving protections to labor everywhere.
All countries will enact environmental standards.

On edit -- look at what happened to the UK economy after losing the EU free trade zone and what is about to happen is even worse.

It is time Mr. Sanders stops using his hatred of corporations and rich people and studies what is at stake. Without free market agreements, there is chaos and the losers lose anyway while winners are thwarted from exporting products or knock-offs severely affect their business.

Tariffs have a history of starting wars and bringing about recessions. The socialist experiment of making everyone poor has failed worldwide creating basket cases like Venezuela and Zimbabwe. Why in the world would we want that for USA in order to satisfy the corporate hatred of a small subset of society? Most of us do work for corporations.

[DemonGoddess]

9. ^^^This!!!

[BobbyDrake]

12. But learning facts is so hard, and being angrily un-educated is so easy... nt

[NorthCarolina]

14. Well, for starters you forgot the part about the

pharmaceutical industry. What does it do for them, and how does that benefit all mankind...or even just American mankind?

[cosmicone]

16. They shouldn't have patent protection for their inventions?

[NorthCarolina]

18. You forgot to even mention it though in your sunshine post about the TPP. Wonder why.

Because it's so great for everyone that is goes without mentioning?

[cosmicone]

19. Pharmaceutical trade is a tiny fraction of all trade under TPP n/t

[NorthCarolina]

64. Exactly what effect does that "tiny fraction of TPP" have on access to affordable generic

medications here in America and abroad? Is that also just a "tiny fraction" of concern?

[pampango]

24. Big Pharma is not happy with TPP and Big Tobacco HATES IT with a passion because it exempts tobacco

from using ISDS as it does under existing trade rules. Obama has lost the votes of several North Carolina and Kentucky republican congressmen who voted for fast track because Big Tobacco did not realize at the time what Obama was going to do to them with TPP rules.

[HumanityExperiment]

22. TPP is NOT necessary... blindly advocating for it without knowing the facts is foolhardy

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/12/31/ten-reasons-why-tpp-must-be-defeated

1. TPP will allow corporations to outsource even more jobs overseas.

According to the Economic Policy Institute, if the TPP is agreed to, the U.S. will lose more than 130,000 jobs to Vietnam and Japan alone. But that is just the tip of the iceberg. ·∙ Service Sector Jobs will be lost. At a time when corporations have already outsourced over 3 million service sector jobs in the U.S., TPP includes rules that will make it even easier for corporate America to outsource call centers; computer programming; engineering; accounting; and medical diagnostic jobs.

Manufacturing jobs will be lost. As a result of NAFTA, the U.S. lost nearly 700,000 jobs. As a result of Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China, the U.S. lost over 2.7 million jobs. As a result of the Korea Free Trade Agreement, the U.S. has lost 70,000 jobs. The TPP would make matters worse by providing special benefits to firms that offshore jobs and by reducing the risks associated with operating in low-wage countries.

2. U.S. sovereignty will be undermined by giving corporations the right to challenge our laws before international tribunals.

The TPP creates a special dispute resolution process that allows corporations to challenge any domestic laws that could adversely impact their “expected future profits.” These challenges would be hea rd before UN and World Bank tribunals which could require taxpayer compensation to corporations. This process undermines our sovereignty and subverts democratically passed laws including those dealing with labor, health, and the environment.

3. Wages, benefits, and collective bargaining will be threatened.

NAFTA, CAFTA, PNTR with China, and other free trade agreements have helped drive down the wages and benefits of American workers and have eroded collective bargaining rights. The TPP will make the race to the bottom worse because it forces American workers to compete with desperate workers in Vietnam where the minimum wage is just 56 cents an hour .

4. Our ability to protect the environment will be undermined.

The TPP will allow corporations to challenge any law that would adversely impact their future profits. Pending claims worth over $14 billion have been filed based on similar language in other trade agreements. Most of these claims deal with challenges to environmental laws in a number of countries. The TPP will make matters even worse by giving corporations the right to sue any of the nations that sign onto the TPP. These lawsuits would be heard in international tribunals bypassing domestic courts.

5. Food Safety Standards will be threatened.

The TPP would make it easier for countries like Vietnam to export contaminated fish and seafood into the U.S. The FDA has already prevented hundreds of seafood imports from TPP countries because of salmonella, e-coli, methyl-mercury and drug residues. But the FDA only inspects 1-2 percent of food imports and will be overwhelmed by the vast expansion of these imports if the TPP is agreed to.

6. Buy America laws could come to an end.

The U.S. has several laws on the books that require the federal government to buy goods and services that are made in America or mostly made in this country. Under TPP, foreign corporations must be given equal access to compete for these government contracts with companies that make products in America.

Under TPP, the U.S. could not even prevent companies that have horrible human rights records from receiving government contracts paid by U.S. taxpayers.

7. Prescription drug prices will increase, access to life saving drugs will decrease, and the profits of drug companies will go up.

Big pharmaceutical companies are working hard to ensure that the TPP extends the monopolies they have for prescription drugs by extending their patents (which currently can last 20 yea rs or more). This would expand the profits of big drug companies, keep drug prices artificially high, and leave millions of people around the world without access to life saving drugs. Doctors without Borders stated that “the TPP agreement is on track to become the most harmful trade pact ever for access to medicines in developing countries.”

8. Wall Street would benefit at the expense of everyone else.

Under TPP, governments would be barred from imposing “capital controls” that have been successfully used to avoid financial crises. These controls range from establishing a financial speculation tax to limiting the massive flows of speculative capital flowing into and out of countries responsible for the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s. In other words, the TPP would expand the rights and power of the same Wall Street firms that nearly destroyed the world economy just five years ago and would create the conditions for more financial instability in the future. Last year, I co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Harkin to create a Wall Street speculation tax of just 0.03 percent on trades of derivatives, credit default swaps, and large amounts of stock. If TPP were enacted, such a financial speculation tax may be in violation of this trade agreement.

9. The TPP would reward authoritarian regimes like Vietnam that systematically violate human rights.

The State Department, the U.S. Department of Labor, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International have all documented Vietnam’s widespread violations of basic international standards for human rights. Yet, the TPP would reward Vietnam’s bad behavior by giving it duty free access to the U.S. market.

10. The TPP has no expiration date, making it virtually impossible to repeal.

Once TPP is agreed to, it has no sunset date and could only be altered by a consensus of all of the countries that agreed to it.

Other countries, like China, could be allowed to join in the future. For example, Canada and Mexico joined TPP negotiations in 2012 and Japan joined last year.

[cosmicone]

25. commondreams?????????

[HumanityExperiment]

26. feel free to disprove the facts presented...

n/t

[cosmicone]

35. I don't argue with Pravda, Izvestia and common dreams. n/t

[HumanityExperiment]

43. again a reply from you without debating the facts....

n/t

[NorthCarolina]

65. That's all you're likely to get. -nt-

[HumanityExperiment]

70. agreed

always interesting to expose it here on DU for reference though

[HumanityExperiment]

27. Facts...

http://time.com/4065267/trans-pacific-partnership-american-workers/

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/4-reasons-to-reject-the-tpp/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stan-sorscher/how-to-tell-tpp-is-a-bad_b_8914388.html

[cosmicone]

36. Great ... now all I need is an article by HAHAHAHA Goodman

which will completely convince me!

[HumanityExperiment]

44. debate the facts, you have yet to reply concerning those facts

n/t

[cosmicone]

47. They are all conjectures by various think tanks and media

Not "facts"

A fact is something like "The sun rises on the East and sets on the West." Facts are demonstrable and cannot be disputed.

Conjecture is "If TPP passes, the Earth will be upside down and then sun will rise on the West and set on the East."

[HumanityExperiment]

50. the many trade agreements already in play...

the outcomes due to those agreements are well known and documented

the facts on TPP using these same 'knowns' as well as smarter minds diving into the verbiage of the TPP have given us these facts..

feel free to dispute the facts, you continue to deflect from that conversation... funny how that goes

[cosmicone]

52. They only show jobs lost but don't show the jobs gained

It is the net that matters. One sided conjecture.

Where is my link to HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Goodman?

[HumanityExperiment]

54. again without debating the facts in your reply...

the only one laughing is me so far... but please.. you were saying?

[cosmicone]

59. I was saying I need an article by HAHAHAHAHAHA Goodman n/t

[NorthCarolina]

72. The jobs gained are primarily in the service industry though. Not manufacturing.

That's not really much of a "win" for the people.

[cosmicone]

48. Now, where is my link to HAHAHAHAHAHA Goodman? n/t

[giftedgirl77]

33. I'm proud to be part of the reality based community.

[hollowdweller]

37. It's a sad day. I NEVER thought I would see DEMOCRATS defend outsourcing US jobs!

And a republican opposing it?? Wow!

[cosmicone]

45. Jobs in inefficient businesses will get outsourced anyway

TPP won't stop that from happening.

What we want is millions of jobs it will create and save in leading edge technologies.

People opposing TPP are being selfish to prevent their pet ox from getting gored at the expense of far more valuable oxes of others.

[lapucelle]

13. Sanders has been in Congress for 26 years.

He knows how things work, and he knows that the platform committee is in a tough spot given the President's support for TPP.

Sanders joined the party a little over a year ago, ostensibly to exploit its resources and organization in a run for higher office. He is not entitled to remake the party in his image; nor should he be so eager to grab credit for left-leaning, but fairly mainstream Democratic planks that make it into the platform.

Sanders needs to stop the grandstanding and let the party handle this in a way that neither embarrasses the President nor burns bridges. Enough.

[Sheepshank]

23. I simply don't understand how this plays in to his plans to defeat Trump

He says all the time that his primary goal is to defeat Trump. Instead he seems to be aiding Trump at several turns. His refusal to endorse the Dem nominee while promoting Trump's positions on TPP and giving Trump campaign arguments against Hillary, and his continued insistence that the DNC Primary process was rigged against him rather than accepting the will of the voters. How does that help the Dems fight Trump?

[LongtimeAZDem]

32. +1 (nt)

[hollowdweller]

39. Remember how Bill Clinton saying "The Era of Big Government is OVER"???

He adopted a popular idea at the time to be able to keep winning.

This is more like taking a democratic idea BACK.

[bklyncowgirl]

53. Sanders was opposed to TPP long before Trump latched onto the issue.

The idea that these trade agreements in the past have been a disaster for American workers is clearly a deeply held belief on the part of Sanders and of many of the people who voted for him in the primaries.

By not opposing TPP in the party platform, Democrats are handing this issue and many of these voters to Trump on a silver platter. Therefore this IS about defeating Trump.

[Sheepshank]

56. You of course are welcome to your opinion on this one matter

I am talking about the whole package of Bernie's actions. TPP is just one item, and the way he is going about it aids Trump and not Hillary.

[bklyncowgirl]

61. I disagree. If Sanders' actions result in a stronger economic platform that is all to the good.

Yes, the Democratic primaries were won by Hillary Clinton primarily on social issues. Fair enough, but the general election will be won on economic issues--with Trump possibly outflanking Clinton and winning over frustrated working class Americans whose lives have been devesatated by these trade deals, Wall Street manipulation and the political elite's percieved indifference to their problems. Hillary Clinton is fairly or unfairly considered part of that political elite. She needs all the help she can get on that front.

[CrowCityDem]

38. Free trade is a lot more complicated than Bernie/Trump claim.

For one thing, free trade deals have lifted the living standards for hundreds of millions around the world. They have reduced the prices of goods for us. They have also intertwined the economies of world powers to a degree that starting wars becomes nearly a death sentence. In that respect, free trade is increasing world peace.

On the other hand, manufacturing jobs have been in decline here. They were in decline before NAFTA anyway, but they are a contributing factor.

Weighing the costs and benefits is a lot harder than simply saying "Americans lost jobs, so they have to be garbage".

Bernie and Trump are both doing us a massive disservice, and hurting their own causes, by reducing these discussions to cartoonish simplicity.

[hollowdweller]

40. Democrat defending outsourcing and Republican opposing it.

I never thought I'd see the day......

Will you be carrying water for the NEXT WAR if a democrat starts it??

[CrowCityDem]

49. And you reduce it all to black and white simplicity, proving my point.

[Hortensis]

67. +1. Simple certainty has a kind of elegance

to it. "We're right and you're wrong." How many "we"s among us don't really secretly agree with that recipe for wisdom?

[liberal from boston]

69. Robert Reich

Robert Reich the former Secretary of Labor in Clinton Administration is opposed to TPP. Suggest you sign his petition:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027976143

[CrowCityDem]

71. I'm not taking a side. I'm just saying it's more complicated than boo/yay, like it's talked about.

[bigwillq]

42. Cool.

[MaggieD]

66. Bernie who?

He can have the floor on trade when he comes up with an actual alternate proposal instead of just non-stop complaining about the reality of a global economy.

Here's my new slogan for him: Bernie Sanders - slouching towards irrelevancy since 1960.