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
In reply to the discussion: Wyden (D-Ore) revolts over secrecy regarding latest free-trade negotiations [View all]brentspeak
(18,290 posts)17. Obama's trade rep Ron Kirk is a sociopathic liar and corporate tool
Absolutely no different than the worst of Bush's stooges:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120516/01342918937/dear-ron-kirk-transparency-isnt-hearing-critics-its-telling-public-what-youre-doing.shtml
Dear Ron Kirk: Transparency Isn't Hearing From Critics, It's Telling The Public What You're Doing
We've been spending a lot of time talking about just how secretive the USTR (led by its boss Ron Kirk) has been concerning the TPP negotiations. However, what may be even worse isn't just Ron Kirk's stonewalling, it's the fact that he either does not know what transparency means, or is playing dumb when confronted on the issue. Last week, we noted that his response to a letter from legal scholars requesting more transparency insulted the intelligence of those scholars, when he said he was "insulted" himself by the claim that the USTR was not transparent in the TPP negotiations. As evidence of his supposed transparency, he noted: "USTR has conducted in excess of 400 consultations with Congressional and private stakeholders on the TPP, including inviting stakeholders to all of the twelve negotiating rounds."
We already noted that he was playing word games here and being disingenuous, but it's even worse than that. As Sherwyn Siy properly points out, what Kirk is pointing out isn't transparency. All he's talking about is hearing various opinions -- not sharing what the USTR is actually doing. As Siy points out transparency is about information flow in the other direction:
This is a key point that needs to be made about transparencyit's not about whether or not the government has the relevant opinions of the public. Transparency is about the flow of information the other wayinformation about the workings of government being visible to the people it is supposed to represent. That is precisely what is lacking in this process. This should be an obvious point, but it's one that Kirk's response either fundamentally misunderstands or deliberately sidesteps. So long as no actual proposed text comes to light (you know, the way draft laws and international treaties are published), the process remains opaque, and no amount of input from whatever stakeholders into the TPP process makes up for a lack of real information flowing the other way.
Until Ron Kirk is willing to address that point, his disingenuous and insulting claims about how many meetings he's holding are meaningless fluff from someone who is avoiding his official duty as a representative of the American public.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
32 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Wyden (D-Ore) revolts over secrecy regarding latest free-trade negotiations [View all]
AnotherMcIntosh
May 2012
OP
He's really pissed me off recently by giving cover to the Republicans on Medicare
Arugula Latte
May 2012
#5
Are you trying to hijack this thread by changing the subject and using an ad hominem attack?
AnotherMcIntosh
May 2012
#10
The topic is the secrecy over the free-trade negotiations, not which of us has the greatest
AnotherMcIntosh
May 2012
#24
Our "transparent" executive branch is afraid the congress might leak it to (GASP!) the people.
Tierra_y_Libertad
May 2012
#9
So, is "transparency in government" to be replaced by "Opacity in government" as a campaign slogan?
Tierra_y_Libertad
May 2012
#8
nope it's been changed to "you'll see what I choose to show you now stfu and stfd"
leftyohiolib
May 2012
#11
Hm. I've been wondering about the Chinese dissident and the Secret Service parties that...
Peace Patriot
May 2012
#14
Tell that to the German and the Swedes. They have stronger union and more free trade
pampango
May 2012
#20
important - "NAFTA on steroids" does not even *begin* to describe this monstrosity
inna
May 2012
#29
"Cheapest-labor agreements" is the more accurate buzz phrase. I'm going to borrow it.
AnotherMcIntosh
May 2012
#32