Exposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership For What it Really Is Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PRESIDENT OBAMAS APPROACH TO ASIA-PACIFIC Trans-Pacific Partnership Betsy Barrientos March 5, 2012.
Advertisements

Trans-Pacific Partnership by: Eric Florence. Contents Overview U.S. National Interest, Policy, Politics Issue: TPP Policy Recommendation Conclusion and.
U.S.-CHINA RELATIONS Trade, Human Rights & Global Influence.
TPP impact on domestic regulation: consumer rights and public health Angela McDougall, Policy Advisor.
Labor Provisions in U.S. Free Trade Agreements Aaron Rosenberg Director for Labor Affairs Office of the United States Trade Representative July 2007.
Trade Implications of the Trans-Pacific Partnership for ASEAN and Other Asian Countries Alan V. Deardorff University of Michigan.
©2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved ©2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved Chapter 6 International Business McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Voters’ View of Fast Track Authority for TPP Pact – January 2014 – Hart Research/Chesapeake Beach Consulting National survey among 816 US registered voters.
~ TTIP ~ A CHARTER FOR DEREGULATION AN ATTACK ON JOBS AN END TO DEMOCRACY.
Robert E. Scott Director of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Research Economic Policy Institute TRADE, JOBS AND U.S. MANUFACTURING The Effects of U.S. Trade.
The Korus FTA Will Lead to Higher Drug Prices in Korea
© 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
REGIONAL ECONOMIC INTEGRATION
Map of TPP negotiating countries:
Exposing the TPP For What it Really Is Lacey Kohlmoos Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch Liz Moran Western Organization of Resource Councils.
Under Threat: New Trade Deals and Construction Workers (June 2003) Prepared for the By the Resource Center of the Americas & Labor Education Service, University.
American Politics & Foreign Policy Trade & Foreign Economic Policy Hoa Nguyen I
AUSTRALIA’S DOHA ROUND AGENDA. TODAY’S DISCUSSION  briefly, the WTO and Australia  what was decided at Doha  what has happened since Doha  Australia’s.
Globalization and International Linkages
The Way Forward: Maximizing Growth for SMEs in the China- ASEAN Economies Anthony Amunategui Abad.
Why all the Fuss? The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement Professor Jane Kelsey, School of Law, The University of Auckland.
September 28, 2012 Expanding Market Opportunities Through Trade Policy: Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Sushan Demirjian Deputy Assistant U.S.
Economic Policymaking Chapter 17. Economic Systems Market Economy: An economic system in which individuals and corporations, not the government, own the.
TRADING BLOCKS.
Business-Government Trade Relations. © Prentice Hall, 2006International Business 3e Chapter Chapter Preview Describe the political, economic and.
© 2013 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 8 GLOBAL2  PENG © iStockphoto.com/Baris Onal.
Japan’s FTAs/EPAs with APEC Economies Nobuhiko Sasaki Deputy Director-General APEC Senior Official METI Japan March 2006.
One law firm around the world One law firm around the world Status of GATS Negotiations David Hartridge Hanoi, Vietnam August 5, 2003.
 Began in 1986 in Uruguay, so it is sometimes called the Uruguay round  Concluded with an agreement 8 years later in  Agreement signed in Marrakech,
Chapter 9: The Executive Branch
An Introduction to Fast Track The Oregon Fair Trade Campaign OR-FTC.
(early 1990s to present day). It’s not mainly about trade, but a rather system of (undemocratic) global governance “Each Member shall ensure the conformity.
Globalization and Recent Economic Developments Chapter 1.
The Move to Freer Trade Trade Agreements. A Move to Freer Trade Post-war Re-building (1946). A international financial structure was needed to deal re-building.
CONSUMERS AND TPP CHILE Pablo Rodríguez Arias Egresado de Derecho FOJUCC - Chile.
Are free trade agreements harmful to the U.S economy?
What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership and why should I care? Photo Credits: Occupy Bellingham, Stop FastTrack/flickr/ccStop FastTrack.
Aiia : voice of the digital economy ASR: voice of services in Australia Presented by Kaaren Koomen Director, Australian Services Roundtable Director (Alternate),
The Changing Landscape of Trade Negotiations Alan V. Deardorff University of Michigan For presentation at 2015 Seoul Conference.
PRIORITIZING HEALTH IN U.S. TRADE POLICY: A CASE EXAMPLE.
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)
Overview of State of Play on TPPA Jane Kelsey TPPA Workshop Wellington, 20 December 2011.
International Trade - Basics. Why trade? All trade is voluntary People trade because they believe that they will be better off by trading Allows for Specialization.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership: A Threat To America’s Retirees.
1 Regional Integration Regional trade agreements (RTAs) References Hill, C W “International Business” (6th edit., 2007), Chapter 9 Ball, D et al. “International.
What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership and why should I care? Photo Credits: Occupy Bellingham, Stop FastTrack/flickr/ccStop FastTrack.
1 An Introduction to International Economics Second Edition Economic Integration Dominick Salvatore John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CHAPTER S E V E N.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership An example of global governance David Redfern Philip Allan Publishers © 2016.
February 9, 2016 The Pike Law Firm, P.C..  The Trans-Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) is a trade agreement among 12 Pacific Rim countries  The TPP agreement.
WHAT IS THE TRANS- PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP (TPP)? UE POLITICAL ACTION PRESENTS.
Trans-Pacific Partnership. Free trade agreements.
Trans-Pacific Partnership February 18, 2016 IR 213 Lecture 8: A Little Trade History Benjamin Graham Guest Lecture: TPPCyrus Mohammadian.
OUTSOURCING & OFFSHORING
EU-Indonesia Trade Cooperation Facility Module 2: EU as a negotiating partner Trends of EC trade negotiations 29 September
THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP: OVERVIEW March 17, 2016Cielito F. Habito.
THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP An overview. History 2005: Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement, a free trade agreement, signed by Brunei,
International Business Lecture No,40 By Dr.Shahzad Ansar.
Two Ways forward – a crossroad in the global economy -
2016 ILS Retreat September 30- October 2, 2016 Boca Raton Resort & Club “Thoughts on the Trans Pacific Partnership, The Election, and the Future of Trade”
Our Debt-Money System: Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership (TTIP)     Session 5: SUN 10:00 am – 11:50 am.
Trade Update and Outlook: A View from Washington
IMPI’s Role in the International Arena
Will membership in TPP really help Japan?
Chapter 6 Study Guide Answers.
Class 1 Introduction to Trade and Trade Policy
NS3040 Fall Term 2018 TPP: Arguments Against
Chapter 6 Study Guide Answers.
NS3040 Fall Term 2018 USMCA Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Strong Dollar Weak Dollar.
NS4540 Winter Term 2019 Pacific Alliance
Presentation transcript:

Exposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership For What it Really Is Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch

To ensure that all citizens are represented in the halls of power. Congress WatchEnergy Program Global Trade Watch Health Research Group Litigation Group

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?

Meet the Trans-Pacific Partnership “Free Trade Agreement” A Corporate Power Tool of Unprecedented Power

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…

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 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 Today, 16 rounds of TPP negotiations have been held. The U.S. and 11 other countries are now involved. Deadline for Completion: October 2013

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

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.

Trans-Pacific Partnership: Negotiating Countries Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, U.S., Vietnam THE TPP IS A “DOCKING” AGREEMENT OPEN TO ANY COUNRTY THAT AGREES TO ITS TERMS

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.

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

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.

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

Epidemic of Corporate Bandits Raiding our Treasuries Using Investor-State

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

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.

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.”

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.

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.

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 contro ls. The same global financial firms that crashed the global economy in 2009 are at it again with the Trans-Pacific Partnership…

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.

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.

“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?

The 99% Must Fight Back Against the TPP and Fast Track

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

The Global Resistance has Begun…

The Global 99% TPP Fight-Back Is On AIDS Activists in Malaysia Speak Out

The Global 99% TPP Fight-Back Is On Japan: TPP-Opponents Deliver Thousands of Petitions

The Global 99% TPP Fight-Back Is On Australia: Occupy Melbourne Hounds Negotiators

American 99% Fight-Back is Growing Protests in Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, San Diego and San Francisco

Protests at TPP Negotiations in Leesburg, VA

What You Don’t Know Will Hurt You Education Campaign

Check Us Out on Social Media

In-District Meetings

Bird-Dogging

and Call Your Representative

Organize a Rally or Demonstration

Contact Global Trade Watch Website: Facebook: Ttumblr:ExposeTheTPP.tumblr.com Pinterest:Pinterest.com/ExposeTheTPP Blog: YouTube: #ExposeTheTPP