2. To ensure that all citizens are represented in the
halls of power.
Congress WatchEnergy Program
Global Trade Watch Health Research Group
Litigation Group
3. A) Transferring Production Plan – Offshoring U.S. manufacturing jobs and
production to Vietnam and China
B) Taking People’s Power – Establishing corporate tribunals to raid our tax dollars
if environmental and health laws undermine "expected future profits"
C) Totally Poisonous Provisions – Importing food that does not meet U.S. safety
standards
D) Terribly Pricy Pharmaceuticals – Allowing Big Pharma to increase drug prices
even more
E) Trashing Procurement Preferences – Banning “Buy America”
F) Trans-Pacific Partnership – All of the above
Let’s Take a Poll
What does TPP Stand for?
4. Meet the Trans-Pacific Partnership
“Free Trade Agreement”
A Corporate Power Tool of Unprecedented
Power
5. Brief History of the Trans Pacific Partnership’s
Origins
Shortly after passage of NAFTA (1993), the Clinton administration initiated talks for
NAFTA-style “free trade” blocs in the Asian-Pacific and Western hemisphere:
- Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) FTA
- Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)
APEC FTA and FTAA unravel as major countries in each region came to
loggerheads over the pacts’ scope and model (NAFTA’s results reveal problems,
U.S. insists on expanding NAFTA model).
“Coalitions of the willing” in each region ink NAFTA-style pacts.
- “Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement” (Brunei,
Chile, New Zealand and Singapore)
- Central America Free Trade Agreement
(CAFTA)
U.S. corporations – chronic job offshorers,
agribusiness monopolists, Big Pharma, Wall Street
push for U.S. to join the Asian Pacific NAFTA…
6. How the U.S. Became Engaged in the Trans-Pacific
Partnership
• Sept. 2008, Bush notified Congress U.S. will join the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic
Partnership Agreement (Australia, Peru and Vietnam join).
• In 2009, Obama pledged inclusive review, but real review never done.
Nov. 2009, Obama surprised Congress by announcing U.S. will “engage” in TPP.
• The TPP missed December 2011 and end-of-2012 negotiating deadlines.
• Oct. 2012, Mexico & Canada join.
• In an October 2012 presidential debate, Obama described the TPP as part of a strategy to
counter China, exert U.S. influence in Asia.
• Jan. 2013 State of the Union: Obama declared the TPP and a new trade agreement with
the European Union as priorities for his 2013 trade agenda.
• Japan joins in July 2013.
• Today, 16 rounds of TPP negotiations have
been held. The U.S. and 11 other countries
are now involved.
Deadline for Completion:
October 2013
7. NAFTA, WTO, CAFTA, KORUS, Now TPP -
WTF!!??
Not Really About “Trade”
Rather, a system of Enforceable
Global Governance
By, For and Of Large Corporations
Corporate coup d’etat by trade agreement…
“Each Member shall ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations and
administrative procedures with its obligations as provided in the annexed
Agreements.”
– Agreement Establishing the WTO
• Most of the rules have nothing to do with trade - but rather reach behind the border
to impose constraints on a vast array of domestic non-trade policies.
• Binding Dispute Resolution: Rules enforced in foreign tribunals. Countries must gut
their laws. Trade sanctions imposed. U.S. taxpayers must compensate foreign
corporations. No due process. No outside appeals.
“We are writing the constitution for a single global economy."
-Renato Ruggerio, first Director General of WTO
8. 20 Years of NAFTA, WTO
Corporate-Managed Trade Agreements
Over 5 million U.S. manufacturing jobs gone, as well as electrical,
retooling, and other jobs that supported them.
45,000 U.S. manufacturing facilities gone.
Millions of service sector jobs offshored – call centers, computer
programming, engineering jobs.
Real median wages at 1972 levels.
Tax bases shrink: schools, infrastructure cut.
Construction unemployment high.
Floods of unsafe imported food, products.
Environmental, health, zoning laws attacked
in foreign trade tribunals & dumped. Millions
paid to corporations in fines.
Medicine prices up.
Displacement, migration, hunger in developing country trade
partners.
10. Trans-Pacific Partnership is Not a Trade
Agreement, but a Binding International
Governance System…
And Those Living with the Results Have No Say
• Unlike domestic legislation, the
Trans-Pacific Partnership would
have no expiration date.
• If the Trans-Pacific Partnership is
implemented, the rules can only be
changed if all parties agree.
• Each signatory government must
conform its domestic policies to the
terms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Thus, the TPP would impose
permanent boundaries on domestic
federal and state policymaking.
11. Most of Trans-Pacific Partnership is not about
“Trade” but Covers Many Matters Under State
Authority
Non-Trade Chapters
-Government Procurement
-Investment
-Services
-Financial Services
-Telecommunications
-E-commerce
-Intellectual Property
-Visas/Temporary Movement of Natural
Persons
-Regulatory Coherence
-Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards
(food standards, animal disease, invasive
species)
-Technical Barriers (product safety
standards, toxics, labeling)
-Competition Policy
-State Owned Enterprises
-Supply Chains
-Labor
-Environment
-"Transparency" (drug formularies)
Trade Chapters
-Market Access for Goods
-Customs
-Trade Facilitation and Capacity
Building
-Trade Remedies (Anti-dumping/CVD)
-Subsidies
Administrative Chapters
-Initial Provisions
-Exceptions
-Dispute Settlement
-Final Provisions
12. Trans-Pacific Partnership is a Trojan Horse for non-trade
policies, many of which were rejected in state legislatures
and Congress
• Limits on our Internet freedom
Congress rejected in 2011 with SOPA.
• Greater property rights for foreign
investors than domestic firms.
• State laws subject to direct challenge
in foreign tribunals by foreign
investors.
• Limits on financial, liquefied natural
gas and other service sector
regulations. • U.S. must import food that does not
meet U.S. standards, undermining
U.S. producers.
• “Buy American”, “Buy Local”
procurement preferences forbidden.
• “Transparency” chapter would allow
pharmaceutical firms to challenge
drug-price decisions by Medicare,
Medicaid, VA formularies.
13. More Power to Corporations:
“Investor-State Dispute Resolution”
Directly attack governments before foreign tribunals demanding our tax
dollars to compensate loss of “expected future profits” from labor,
environmental, health, safety, land use, and zoning laws.
Skirt domestic courts. Cases are decided by 3 corporate lawyers who
rotate between suing governments for corporations & being “judges.”
The Trans-Pacific Partnership would empower corporations to:
- There is no outside
appeal! If a country
loses they must pay our
tax dollars to foreign
corporations.
- Over $365 million in
public funds paid under
NAFTA alone - $13
billion in pending
corporate claims.
Investor-State Dispute Resolution: A threat to our sovereignty and solvency
15. Most Secretive Trade Negotiation, Ever…
• Over 600-plus corporate advisors have access to and
influence over the draft text.
• Congress just got “access” to the Trans-Pacific
Partnership draft text, but they cannot talk about what
they read, take notes or have any of their staff
present.
• State legislators, governors, press and public are
locked out.
• Other countries know U.S. government positions, just
not us.
• What we know about the Trans-Pacific Partnership is
from texts that were leaked to the public.
• Negotiating texts won’t be released until 4 years after TPP takes effect or talks
collapse.
• Growing congressional anger about extreme secrecy.
- GOP House Oversight Chair Darrell Issa denied observer status to San
Diego round.
- Democratic Chair of Senate Finance Committee denied access to draft texts.
“This is the least transparent trade negotiation I have ever seen.”
-Former U.S. trade official Gary Horlick, a TPP supporter
16. Incentives to Offshore American
Jobs
• Leaked text shows that the Trans-
Pacific Partnership would provide
special rights, protections for firms to
offshore investments and jobs
(“guaranteed minimum standard of
treatment”, government compensation
for regulatory costs).
• The Trans-Pacific Partnership would
remove the risks associated with
offshoring to low-wage countries.
Corporations would not have to rely on
domestic courts, but enforce their new
privileges in international tribunals.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership includes Vietnam, the low wage alternative to China,
and would be open to other extremely low wage offshoring venues.
- China’s average wage rate = $4.11 per day. Manufacturing wage in
Vietnam is $2.75 PER DAY, in Indonesia $2.81 and $1.84 in Cambodia.
The U.S. has lost 5 million manufacturing jobs (1 of every 4) since NAFTA
and WTO. Real wages down, costing the average household $2,135 / year.
17. Bye “Buy American” and “Buy Local”
The Trans-Pacific Partnership would:
• Ban “Buy American” policies now used to
reinvest our tax dollars in buying U.S. goods.
• Firms in Trans-Pacific Partnership countries
would get same access to U.S. government
contracts as U.S. firms (e.g. construction
projects). Sends our tax dollars offshore.
• U.S. procurement market is 3 times larger
than size of the total combined procurement
market gained under the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, even with Japan.
• Labor and environmental conditions on
government contracts subject to challenge
(e.g. prevailing wage conditions, renewable
energy and “sweat-free” standards).
90% of Democrats, Republicans and Independents support “Buy American.”
18. New Floods of Unsafe Imported
Food
• The Trans-Pacific Partnership would
force us to import meat and poultry
that does not comply with U.S. safety
standards.
• Some countries involved in the Trans-
Pacific Partnership have serious
shrimp & fish safety issues. High
levels of contaminants found in
Vietnam’s seafood. Yet, the Food and
Drug Administration only inspects less
than 1% of seafood imports.
• Under the Trans-Pacific Partnership,
food corporations can attack domestic
safety standards in foreign tribunals.
• Food labels considered “trade
barriers” in recent trade suits.
19. Higher Medicine Prices for Us, Windfall
Profits for Big Pharma
Extended patent monopolies and
data exclusivity on lifesaving
medications.
Drug firms empowered to
challenge medicine pricing for
Medicaid, Medicare, VA and
national healthcare systems.
Increased costs of drugs for
programs such as PEPFAR
(President’s Emergency Plan for
AIDS Relief).
The Trans-Pacific Partnership would give big drug
companies new rights and powers. Thus, decreasing
access to affordable medicines.
20. TPP Financial Deregulation = Banksters’
Delight
The Trans-Pacific Partnership would:
• Expose our new Wall Street
regulations to challenge and roll
back.
• Prohibit bans on risky financial
products, services.
• Undermine “too big to fail”
regulations.
• Block taxes on Wall Street
speculation (e.g. “Robin Hood tax”)
• Ban capital controls.
The same global financial firms that crashed the global economy
in 2009 are at it again with the Trans-Pacific Partnership…
21. Trans-Pacific Partnership = The Son of
SOPA?
Internet Service Providers
required to “police” user-activity
(i.e. police YOU) and cut people
off from access.
Mandatory fines for individuals’
non-commercial copies - treated
the same as large scale for-
profit copyright violators.
Innovation stifled.
Even temporary “buffer” copies
or breaking digital locks to use
linux could subject users to
fines.
22. How’d We Lose Control & Get Into this
Disaster?
Meet “Fast Track”• U.S. Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority over trade. “Check
and balance” created by Founders (1773 Boston Tea Party hangover…).
• For 200 years, Congress set our trade policy and wrote our laws…
Nixon’s 1973 Fast Track was a stealthy tool to grab BOTH powers: vast new
power to “diplomatically legislate” and preempt state law too
Five major congressional authorities delegated away
• Power to select trade partners.
• Power to set terms, sign deals before Congress votes.
• Power to write legislation and skirt congressional
review and amendment to directly submit it for a vote.
• Power to override congressional leaders’ control of
House and Senate floor schedules and force votes
within 60 days of submission to Congress.
• Legislative luge run: override of normal voting rules -
all amendments banned, limited debate.
23. “Fast Track” Only Needed for Bad Agreements
Of 500+ trade agreements since 1974, Fast Track was only used for 16
of them (Clinton did not have this extreme authority for 6 of his 8
years…).
Fast Track used to force NAFTA, WTO, CAFTA, Korea, Colombia “free
trade” agreements into place.
Last delegation of this extreme authority ended in 2007
Candidate Obama said he would “replace Fast Track
… I will ensure that Congress plays a strong and
informed role in our international economic policy and
in any future agreements we pursue and in our efforts
to amend existing agreements.”
Now he’s seeking trade authority…
Will Democrats who dislike Obama’s trade policy and
GOP who dislike Obama give him this extreme power
few Presidents have had?
24. The 99% Must Fight Back Against the
TPP and Fast Track
25. Historic Civil-Society Victories
Battles Won Against Corporate Power-Grabs via “Trade”
Agreements
STOPPED: Fast Track in 1998
DERAILED: WTO
Expansion: Seattle ‘99 –
today!
DERAILED: FTAA (Free
Trade Area of the
Americas)
DERAILED: MAI
(Multilateral Agreement on
Investment)
DERAILED: AFTA,
Malaysia, SACU, Thailand,
FTAs
BB—For the stats on the relative sizes of the procurement markets, the numbers include both federal and subfederal government contracts. “The market gained under TPP” refers to the total procurement market of those countries with which we do not already have FTAs, since U.S. companies already enjoy access to the procurement markets of existing FTA partners.
Ben suggested that we add a point about how the #1 cause of long-term deficits is rising healthcare costs, but I wasn’t sure how exactly we’d want to frame that.
Note: I changed the caption that LW had because their headbands are saying “Absolutely Against TPP”
