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
WillyT
WillyT's Journal
WillyT's Journal
December 11, 2013
Alex Leary - Tampa Bay Times
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 6:59pm
<snip>
One of Obamacare's biggest critics is now officially covered under the federal health care exchange: Sen. Marco Rubio.
"Senator Rubio spent time looking at all the options and decided to enroll through the D.C. exchange for coverage for him and his family," spokeswoman Brooke Sammon told the Tampa Bay Times.
Rubio, a father of four, also took the federal subsidy afforded to lawmakers and staff — a perk worth up to 75 percent of monthly premium costs — that some Republicans wanted to kill off. Even some lawmakers who have enrolled in the exchange have rejected the taxpayer-funded employer contribution.
Sammon did not say what led Rubio to decide the health care plan was better than what he could have gotten on his own, and Rubio could not be reached Tuesday. But those who wanted to keep their employer coverage — and that generous subsidy — were directed to use the exchange, called DC Health Link.
In addition to the subsidy, Rubio and other federal employees got to pick from far more plans than ordinary people and had access to special customer service to ease their sign ups.
"Senator Rubio is following the law, even though he opposes it," Sammon said.
That Rubio even had to switch from the existing federal plan to the exchange is thanks to Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who amended the Affordable Care Act to require members of Congress and staff join the exchange. It was viewed as a way to needle Democrats, but Democrats accepted the change.
<snip>
Link: http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/rubio-enrolls-in-obamacare-takes-federal-subsidy/2156529
Rubio Enrolls In Obamacare, Takes Federal Subsidy - TampaBayTimes
Rubio enrolls in Obamacare, takes federal subsidyAlex Leary - Tampa Bay Times
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 6:59pm
<snip>
One of Obamacare's biggest critics is now officially covered under the federal health care exchange: Sen. Marco Rubio.
"Senator Rubio spent time looking at all the options and decided to enroll through the D.C. exchange for coverage for him and his family," spokeswoman Brooke Sammon told the Tampa Bay Times.
Rubio, a father of four, also took the federal subsidy afforded to lawmakers and staff — a perk worth up to 75 percent of monthly premium costs — that some Republicans wanted to kill off. Even some lawmakers who have enrolled in the exchange have rejected the taxpayer-funded employer contribution.
Sammon did not say what led Rubio to decide the health care plan was better than what he could have gotten on his own, and Rubio could not be reached Tuesday. But those who wanted to keep their employer coverage — and that generous subsidy — were directed to use the exchange, called DC Health Link.
In addition to the subsidy, Rubio and other federal employees got to pick from far more plans than ordinary people and had access to special customer service to ease their sign ups.
"Senator Rubio is following the law, even though he opposes it," Sammon said.
That Rubio even had to switch from the existing federal plan to the exchange is thanks to Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who amended the Affordable Care Act to require members of Congress and staff join the exchange. It was viewed as a way to needle Democrats, but Democrats accepted the change.
<snip>
Link: http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/rubio-enrolls-in-obamacare-takes-federal-subsidy/2156529
December 11, 2013
By Steve Benen - MSNBC
12/11/13 08:40 AM—Updated 12/11/13 09:05 AM
<snip>
Federal emergency unemployment benefits will expire for 1.3 million struggling Americans in just two weeks. President Obama used his weekly address a few days ago to raise the visibility of the issue and urge Congress to act before it’s too late.
And while many have wondered whether congressional Republicans are actually prepared to follow through on this, cutting off jobless aid for Christmas, we apparently have our answer.
The prospect for 11th-hour heroics is remote, at best. House members are planning to wrap up their work for the year on Friday, and the chamber won’t return until January – well after the Dec. 28 deadline. Democratic proponents of extending unemployment benefits in the budget agreement came up empty.
There’s still some talk of attaching an extension to some other must-pass bill – the farm bill, the “doc fix,” etc. – but Democrats are running into fierce resistance from Republicans, who simply do not want to act before the deadline.
The question, then, isn’t whether success is still possible, but what the consequences of failure will be.
<snip>
More: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/going-over-the-unemployment-cliff
Going Over The ‘Unemployment Cliff’ - MSNBC
Going over the ‘unemployment cliff’By Steve Benen - MSNBC
12/11/13 08:40 AM—Updated 12/11/13 09:05 AM
<snip>
Federal emergency unemployment benefits will expire for 1.3 million struggling Americans in just two weeks. President Obama used his weekly address a few days ago to raise the visibility of the issue and urge Congress to act before it’s too late.
And while many have wondered whether congressional Republicans are actually prepared to follow through on this, cutting off jobless aid for Christmas, we apparently have our answer.
The bipartisan budget deal announced last night doesn’t include any extension of unemployment insurance – and no such extension is forthcoming. During the negotiations, Republicans proved hostile even to limited extensions in unemployment insurance. Right now, the House is expected to vote on Friday to pass the budget deal…. They’re expected to let unemployment benefits for 1.3 million long-term unemployed expire.
The prospect for 11th-hour heroics is remote, at best. House members are planning to wrap up their work for the year on Friday, and the chamber won’t return until January – well after the Dec. 28 deadline. Democratic proponents of extending unemployment benefits in the budget agreement came up empty.
There’s still some talk of attaching an extension to some other must-pass bill – the farm bill, the “doc fix,” etc. – but Democrats are running into fierce resistance from Republicans, who simply do not want to act before the deadline.
The question, then, isn’t whether success is still possible, but what the consequences of failure will be.
<snip>
More: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/going-over-the-unemployment-cliff
December 11, 2013
From: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024061704
For ANYBODY Of ANY Party/Ideology/Income Class... Trying To Steal OUR Retirements For Their Own Gain
I Post This Again.Dryly 41
11/18/2013 8:04 AM PST
On December 7, 1941 the Japanese Empire attacked U.S. naval and air bases at Pearl Harbor. Thereafter sixteen million young men wore the uniform, and, after 3 years and 8 months secured the unconditional surrender of Italy, Germany, and, Japan, Then, except for 405,399, they came home, went to school of the G.I. Bill or got jobs and entered into delayed marriages. The delayed marriages created the "demographic bubble" known as the Baby Boom generation and the children of WW II vets began to turn 65 in 2011.
In 1946 the Gross Federal Debt amounted to 121.7% of GDP. the Truman administration reduced it to 71.4% of GDP; Eisenhower to 55.2%; Kennedy/Johnson to 38.6%; Nixon/Ford to 35.8%; and, Carter to 32.5%.
Then came Ronald Reagan with massive "supply side" tax cuts primarily for the wealthy and budget deficits in each of eight years increasing the Gross Federal Debt from 32.5% to 53.1% of GDP. Bush I had four more years of budget deficits increasing the debt to 66.1%.
Clinton raised taxes, had 4% unemployment, balanced budgets and reduced the debt to 56.4%.
Bush II instituted two rounds of "supply side" tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, had eight more years of deficits and increased the Gross Federal Debt from 56.4% of GDP to 85.1% with a crippled economy.
In 1983 Reagan signed a regressive FICA payroll increase so as to create a surplus in the Social Security Trust Fund which has a $2.6 trillion dollar reserve as of December 2012.
Social Security did not contribute one thin dime to the massive Federal Debt.
This massive Federal Debt was caused by borrowing all these trillions to fund "supply side" tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens most able to pay taxes.
The massive Federal Debt was not for any great national purpose such as the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WW I, or, WW II. It was for "supply side" tax cuts for the wealthy.
Start with eliminating "supply side" economics and return to traditional Republican tax and fiscal policy.
Do this first.
11/18/2013 8:04 AM PST
On December 7, 1941 the Japanese Empire attacked U.S. naval and air bases at Pearl Harbor. Thereafter sixteen million young men wore the uniform, and, after 3 years and 8 months secured the unconditional surrender of Italy, Germany, and, Japan, Then, except for 405,399, they came home, went to school of the G.I. Bill or got jobs and entered into delayed marriages. The delayed marriages created the "demographic bubble" known as the Baby Boom generation and the children of WW II vets began to turn 65 in 2011.
In 1946 the Gross Federal Debt amounted to 121.7% of GDP. the Truman administration reduced it to 71.4% of GDP; Eisenhower to 55.2%; Kennedy/Johnson to 38.6%; Nixon/Ford to 35.8%; and, Carter to 32.5%.
Then came Ronald Reagan with massive "supply side" tax cuts primarily for the wealthy and budget deficits in each of eight years increasing the Gross Federal Debt from 32.5% to 53.1% of GDP. Bush I had four more years of budget deficits increasing the debt to 66.1%.
Clinton raised taxes, had 4% unemployment, balanced budgets and reduced the debt to 56.4%.
Bush II instituted two rounds of "supply side" tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, had eight more years of deficits and increased the Gross Federal Debt from 56.4% of GDP to 85.1% with a crippled economy.
In 1983 Reagan signed a regressive FICA payroll increase so as to create a surplus in the Social Security Trust Fund which has a $2.6 trillion dollar reserve as of December 2012.
Social Security did not contribute one thin dime to the massive Federal Debt.
This massive Federal Debt was caused by borrowing all these trillions to fund "supply side" tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens most able to pay taxes.
The massive Federal Debt was not for any great national purpose such as the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WW I, or, WW II. It was for "supply side" tax cuts for the wealthy.
Start with eliminating "supply side" economics and return to traditional Republican tax and fiscal policy.
Do this first.
From: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024061704
December 11, 2013
DULink: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024157976
"It Wasn’t Just About Race. It Was About Controlling People As Labor...
As A Labor Force In South Africa."DULink: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024157976
December 11, 2013
More: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002623564
Thank You Madiba... We Might Have Never Known...
More: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002623564
December 10, 2013
By Michael O'Brien, Kasie Hunt and Frank Thorp, NBC News
12/10/13
<snip>
Bipartisan negotiators inched toward unveiling a budget framework to fund the government past mid-January and stabilize the government's finances into the near future.
Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan and Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray, the top lawmakers on budgetary issues in their respective chambers, planned a 6 p.m. ET news conference to detail a fiscal framework that would help eliminate the constant threat of a government shutdown under which lawmakers have worked for the better part of the last three years.
..........
The framework under consideration by Murray and Ryan would reportedly set spending levels above the $967 billion cap established by the sequester, in part through offsetting cuts and reforms and in part by raising revenue, perhaps through airline fees or selling off part of the broadcast spectrum.
Though the tentative agreement falls far short of a "grand bargain" that solves overarching fiscal issues through a combination of new taxes and entitlement reforms, the agreement would offer some stability to government funding after several years of governing characterized by stopgap spending measures.
<snip>
More: http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/10/21851499-lawmakers-to-announce-budget-deal?lite
Breaking: (And Hold On To Your Wallets)... 'Lawmakers To Announce Budget Deal' - MSNBC
Lawmakers to announce budget dealBy Michael O'Brien, Kasie Hunt and Frank Thorp, NBC News
12/10/13
<snip>
Bipartisan negotiators inched toward unveiling a budget framework to fund the government past mid-January and stabilize the government's finances into the near future.
Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan and Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray, the top lawmakers on budgetary issues in their respective chambers, planned a 6 p.m. ET news conference to detail a fiscal framework that would help eliminate the constant threat of a government shutdown under which lawmakers have worked for the better part of the last three years.
..........
The framework under consideration by Murray and Ryan would reportedly set spending levels above the $967 billion cap established by the sequester, in part through offsetting cuts and reforms and in part by raising revenue, perhaps through airline fees or selling off part of the broadcast spectrum.
Though the tentative agreement falls far short of a "grand bargain" that solves overarching fiscal issues through a combination of new taxes and entitlement reforms, the agreement would offer some stability to government funding after several years of governing characterized by stopgap spending measures.
<snip>
More: http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/10/21851499-lawmakers-to-announce-budget-deal?lite
December 10, 2013
The prime minister cited finances and security, but some Israelis say the decision gives fodder to those who say Israel runs an apartheid state.
By Christa Case Bryant, Staff writer / CSM
December 10, 2013
<snip>
As VIPs gathered in the rain for Nelson Mandela’s memorial in South Africa today, the emcee announced the attendance of world leaders from US President Barack Obama to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Apparently, no one told him that Mr. Netanyahu couldn't make it after all.
While the Israeli leader's absence may have gone relatively unnoticed in South Africa, it has caused consternation in Israel. Detractors argue that missing the memorial of a man who championed freedom and brought down apartheid gives fresh fodder to critics who say Israel, too, has constructed an apartheid system and is insincere about reconciling with Palestinians after decades of conflict
"The anti-Israel lobby could not have wished for a better Christmas present," wrote Times of Israel blogger Neil Lazarus, author of "The 5 Rules of Effective Israel Advocacy." "Today, many of the pro-Israel organizations are having to employ damage control as the government’s shortsightedness has led once again to a self-made public relations mess."
Worse, said Mr. Lazarus and others, was the reason Netanyahu gave: the cost of the flight. This, coming from a man who budgeted 10,000 shekels ($2,850) for his personal ice cream parlor and spent 6,000 shekels ($1,700) of Israeli taxpayers' money on scented candles for his homes.
Netanyahu may well have learned his lesson on unnecessary spending, especially after a report last week revealed it costs Israeli taxpayers 3.3 million shekels ($940,000) to maintain his three residences. The trip to Mandela's memorial indeed would have been expensive; the Israeli government estimated it would have cost about 7 million shekels ($1.9 million) for the flight as well as the security necessary – far more than if Netanyahu had been able to attend the smaller ceremony in Mandela's home village this weekend, as originally planned. That reasoning sat particularly badly with South Africa’s Jewish community, which long donated more per capita to support Israel than Jews in America, Britain, and Canada.
<snip>
Link: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2013/1210/Netanyahu-skips-Mandela-memorial.-Israelis-say-are-you-kidding
Netanyahu skips Mandela memorial. Israelis say 'are you kidding?' - CSM
Netanyahu skips Mandela memorial. Israelis say 'are you kidding?'The prime minister cited finances and security, but some Israelis say the decision gives fodder to those who say Israel runs an apartheid state.
By Christa Case Bryant, Staff writer / CSM
December 10, 2013
<snip>
As VIPs gathered in the rain for Nelson Mandela’s memorial in South Africa today, the emcee announced the attendance of world leaders from US President Barack Obama to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Apparently, no one told him that Mr. Netanyahu couldn't make it after all.
While the Israeli leader's absence may have gone relatively unnoticed in South Africa, it has caused consternation in Israel. Detractors argue that missing the memorial of a man who championed freedom and brought down apartheid gives fresh fodder to critics who say Israel, too, has constructed an apartheid system and is insincere about reconciling with Palestinians after decades of conflict
"The anti-Israel lobby could not have wished for a better Christmas present," wrote Times of Israel blogger Neil Lazarus, author of "The 5 Rules of Effective Israel Advocacy." "Today, many of the pro-Israel organizations are having to employ damage control as the government’s shortsightedness has led once again to a self-made public relations mess."
Worse, said Mr. Lazarus and others, was the reason Netanyahu gave: the cost of the flight. This, coming from a man who budgeted 10,000 shekels ($2,850) for his personal ice cream parlor and spent 6,000 shekels ($1,700) of Israeli taxpayers' money on scented candles for his homes.
Netanyahu may well have learned his lesson on unnecessary spending, especially after a report last week revealed it costs Israeli taxpayers 3.3 million shekels ($940,000) to maintain his three residences. The trip to Mandela's memorial indeed would have been expensive; the Israeli government estimated it would have cost about 7 million shekels ($1.9 million) for the flight as well as the security necessary – far more than if Netanyahu had been able to attend the smaller ceremony in Mandela's home village this weekend, as originally planned. That reasoning sat particularly badly with South Africa’s Jewish community, which long donated more per capita to support Israel than Jews in America, Britain, and Canada.
<snip>
Link: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2013/1210/Netanyahu-skips-Mandela-memorial.-Israelis-say-are-you-kidding
December 10, 2013
Posted on December 6, 2013 by emptywheel
<snip>
In a democracy in which separation of powers still functioned as intended, this would be a deliberate provocation (my transcription):
Where to start?
First...
<snip>
And...
<snip>
More importantly, it is false to say even that NSA is not constrained by mere laws overseas. Section 703 of the FISA Amendments Act — a law which Obama played a crucially important role in passing as a Senator — says NSA can’t wiretap Americans overseas without specific authority from FISC. Section 704 limits physical searches, which NSA uses to authorize collection from servers. As far as I know, no one has considered whether the deliberate collection of US person content overseas — albeit in bulk — complies with Section 703 and 704. But it at least lays out some limits on NSA’s overseas spying.
To all this, Obama’s solution is to propose self-restraint on the NSA.
Again, it is the role of the President — and the White House more generally — to oversee activities conducted under Article II authority. The language Obama uses here suggests an NSA unbound by his control, one he “proposes” to rein in rather than “orders” to do so.
That equates to NSA operating beyond the law, both here and abroad.
Link: http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/12/06/obama-my-overseas-spying-not-constrained-by-the-law-i-passed-as-senator/
And even more here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/12/how-president-obama-misled-chris-matthews-about-nsa-surveillance/282179/
Marcy Wheeler... Folks...
Obama: My Overseas Spying Not Constrained by the Law I Passed as SenatorPosted on December 6, 2013 by emptywheel
<snip>
In a democracy in which separation of powers still functioned as intended, this would be a deliberate provocation (my transcription):
The Snowden disclosures have identified areas of legitimate concern. Some of it has also been highly sensationalized and has been painted in a way that’s not accurate. I’ve said before and I will say again: the NSA actually does a very good job about not engaging in domestic surveillance. Not reading people’s emails, not listening to the content of their phone calls. Outside of our borders, the NSA is more aggressive. It’s not constrained by laws. And part of what we’re trying to do over the next month or so is having done an independent review — brought a bunch of folks, civil libertarians, lawyers, and others, to examine what’s being done — I’ll be proposing some self-restraint on the NSA and to initiate some reforms that can give people some more confidence.
Where to start?
First...
<snip>
And...
<snip>
More importantly, it is false to say even that NSA is not constrained by mere laws overseas. Section 703 of the FISA Amendments Act — a law which Obama played a crucially important role in passing as a Senator — says NSA can’t wiretap Americans overseas without specific authority from FISC. Section 704 limits physical searches, which NSA uses to authorize collection from servers. As far as I know, no one has considered whether the deliberate collection of US person content overseas — albeit in bulk — complies with Section 703 and 704. But it at least lays out some limits on NSA’s overseas spying.
To all this, Obama’s solution is to propose self-restraint on the NSA.
Again, it is the role of the President — and the White House more generally — to oversee activities conducted under Article II authority. The language Obama uses here suggests an NSA unbound by his control, one he “proposes” to rein in rather than “orders” to do so.
That equates to NSA operating beyond the law, both here and abroad.
Link: http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/12/06/obama-my-overseas-spying-not-constrained-by-the-law-i-passed-as-senator/
And even more here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/12/how-president-obama-misled-chris-matthews-about-nsa-surveillance/282179/
December 10, 2013
Sahil Kapur - TPM
December 10, 2013, 1:40 PM EST
<snip>
An amendment by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) to remove the prosecution of rape from the military chain of command has been excluded from a negotiated House-Senate deal to renew the defense authorization act.
The decision to drop the amendment from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is a blow to the senator's months-long efforts to build support for the measure. But her office insists it isn't going away and will be brought up separately in the Senate.
"We have been assured by the Majority Leader that we will get a separate vote," Glen Caplin, a spokesman for Gillibrand, told TPM. "The Senator will not go away, she will keep fighting to protect our brave men and women in uniform and to strengthen our military."
Before Thanksgiving, Gillibrand filed her Military Justice Improvement Act as a standalone bill that can bypass committee and be fast-tracked to the floor, her office said, pointing out that "don't ask, don't tell" passed the same way. Her office counts 53 senators in support of the bill.
Even if the legislation passes the Senate, it would be a heavy lift in the House, especially without a vehicle like the NDAA to attach it to.
<snip>
Link: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gillibrand-sexual-assault-bill-dropped-from-defense-authorization-agreement
Gillibrand Sexual Assault Bill Dropped From Defense Authorization Agreement - TPM
Gillibrand Sexual Assault Bill Dropped From Defense Authorization AgreementSahil Kapur - TPM
December 10, 2013, 1:40 PM EST
<snip>
An amendment by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) to remove the prosecution of rape from the military chain of command has been excluded from a negotiated House-Senate deal to renew the defense authorization act.
The decision to drop the amendment from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is a blow to the senator's months-long efforts to build support for the measure. But her office insists it isn't going away and will be brought up separately in the Senate.
"We have been assured by the Majority Leader that we will get a separate vote," Glen Caplin, a spokesman for Gillibrand, told TPM. "The Senator will not go away, she will keep fighting to protect our brave men and women in uniform and to strengthen our military."
Before Thanksgiving, Gillibrand filed her Military Justice Improvement Act as a standalone bill that can bypass committee and be fast-tracked to the floor, her office said, pointing out that "don't ask, don't tell" passed the same way. Her office counts 53 senators in support of the bill.
Even if the legislation passes the Senate, it would be a heavy lift in the House, especially without a vehicle like the NDAA to attach it to.
<snip>
Link: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/gillibrand-sexual-assault-bill-dropped-from-defense-authorization-agreement
December 10, 2013
By Agence France-Presse-RawStory
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 8:34 EST
<snip>
Talks on forming a huge US-led Pacific free trade area will resume next month after the 12 prospective members Tuesday gave up on meeting Washington’s year-end deadline for a deal.
US Trade Representative Michael Froman and his counterparts said they made “substantial progress” after four days of talks in Singapore on the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) but failed to resolve all issues. “We have decided to continue our intensive work in the coming weeks toward such an agreement,” Froman said, reading a joint statement by the trade ministers.
“Following additional work by negotiators, we intend to meet again next month,” said the statement, which capped secretive talks denounced by activists as a US attempt to railroad a deal.
The TPP is being negotiated by Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam. They make up 40 percent of the global economy and other countries may join the pact later. The ministers had arrived in Singapore from the just-concluded World Trade Organisation talks in the Indonesian island of Bali.
President Barack Obama has hailed the TPP as a centrepiece of renewed US engagement in Asia, saying it contains market-opening commitments that go well beyond those in other free-trade accords.
The TPP talks also cover areas not included in other pacts, such as the environment and labour standards...
<snip>
More: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/10/us-led-pacific-trade-pact-tpp-misses-2013-deadline-for-agreement/
It Ain't Over, But... 'U.S.-Led Pacific Trade Pact (TPP) Misses 2013 Deadline For Agreement'
U.S.-led Pacific trade pact (TPP) misses 2013 deadline for agreementBy Agence France-Presse-RawStory
Tuesday, December 10, 2013 8:34 EST
<snip>
Talks on forming a huge US-led Pacific free trade area will resume next month after the 12 prospective members Tuesday gave up on meeting Washington’s year-end deadline for a deal.
US Trade Representative Michael Froman and his counterparts said they made “substantial progress” after four days of talks in Singapore on the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) but failed to resolve all issues. “We have decided to continue our intensive work in the coming weeks toward such an agreement,” Froman said, reading a joint statement by the trade ministers.
“Following additional work by negotiators, we intend to meet again next month,” said the statement, which capped secretive talks denounced by activists as a US attempt to railroad a deal.
The TPP is being negotiated by Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam. They make up 40 percent of the global economy and other countries may join the pact later. The ministers had arrived in Singapore from the just-concluded World Trade Organisation talks in the Indonesian island of Bali.
President Barack Obama has hailed the TPP as a centrepiece of renewed US engagement in Asia, saying it contains market-opening commitments that go well beyond those in other free-trade accords.
The TPP talks also cover areas not included in other pacts, such as the environment and labour standards...
<snip>
More: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/12/10/us-led-pacific-trade-pact-tpp-misses-2013-deadline-for-agreement/
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 72,631
