Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Patty and Maria-TPP
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 9, 2015 at 6:18 pm #817387
JTBParticipantIt appears Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell are in line with others supporting fast track treatment of the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement. Darn, and that’s after I voiced my opposition to abdicating their duty on this deal in conversations with their office staff :-( . I find the way Obama has gamed this discussion pretty disturbing insofar as he has ducked the real issues (sovereignty mostly) and misrepresented the ease of review (elected officials have to schedule a time to go read the draft agreement without staff and can’t have a copy or make notes to review later). Some review.
I’m not siding with the protectionists on this. Unskilled jobs are not going to be the foundation for economic growth in this country, so yes, the point about needing to drive trade and promote skilled jobs is on target.
But I’m very concerned about the murkiness surrounding the issues of how much authority foreign corporations have to by-pass American courts in seeking compensation for presumed economic damages due to our regulations and get a hearing from an unelected commission comprised of lawyers from industry and whose ruling can’t be appealed. There are even indications (from leaked material) that foreign corporation may be able to reject local and state zoning requirements if they deem the financial burden to be onerous. That, or else seek restitution for loss of profits.
Lest anyone think that sort of concern is exaggerated, there is a case before the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes that reveal how the TPP disputes could play out. The ICSID is an arbitration panel set up under the World Bank and is actually more representative of the interested parties than would be the case under TPP. But Philip Morris has filed a claim against the government of Uruguay for $25,000,000 in alleged losses due to government requirements for health warnings on packaging and limitations to the number of brands the company can put on the market.
The provincial government of Newfoundland pulled the plug on a plan to offer low cost health insurance after several private, for-profit insurance companies threatened to file a claim under provisions of NAFTA which also address loss of profits.
I do appreciate that opening TPP to debate and amendments by Congress would undoubtedly tie it up and likely result in provision that would be unacceptable to other countries. But at the same time, I’m hearing the provisions concerning currency manipulation and compliance with labor and environmental standards are largely unenforceable. I can appreciate a trade agreement could be a good thing, but it could also be a scam that benefits international corporations while screwing taxpayers, something I know has never happened before in our history but I nevertheless have some degree of apprehension about taking place without a full, open look at the provisions.
Patty’s got a fundraiser in West Seattle on June 7, but I’m not inclined to pay the minimum $150 for the opportunity to speak with her about this. Perhaps I can get a word in as she enters the residence if I position myself well. I can’t imagine there would be security or handlers that would shoosh me away just for saying “do your job.”
May 9, 2015 at 7:40 pm #824118
JanSParticipantthere are many of us who can’t afford to throw away $150 to just hear a politician speak. Again, politicians only go where the money is, and forget about ALL their constituents. It gets old after awhile
May 10, 2015 at 7:50 am #824119
JeannieParticipantAt the very least, call Patty’s office, or see if there are any online petitions. They may not do any good (JanS’s cynicism is entirely justified), but it’s a step in the right direction.
And, thank you, JTP, for your intelligent and reasoned post.
May 10, 2015 at 2:46 pm #824120
JoBParticipanti am not inclined to pay $150 either because there is no guaranteed i would get the opportunity to speak with her.
but there are other ways to make our voices heard the least we can do is try.
May 10, 2015 at 4:02 pm #824121
JTBParticipantI agree JoB. I did speak with aids for Murray and Cantwell on this topic several weeks ago when I couldn’t obtain any details on the websites or press about their positions. I couldn’t get a statement about the views so simply indicated I opposed fast track and believe the agreement needs better review. Since then Maria voted in committee to move forward with the request for fast track and both have been reported in a number of articles to support it.
I do intend to follow up early in the week with specific questions about whether or not they have even reviewed the draft agreement, when they did so if they did and what makes them think the labor and environmental policies are enforceable.
Depending on how that goes, perhaps there should be a curbside welcoming committee at the West Seattle fundraiser for Patty.
Yes, I was wondering how they’d handle the tier of contributors at a private event; whether those who only put up $150 would get close enough to even pose a question.
May 10, 2015 at 9:27 pm #824122
JanSParticipantwe shouldn’t have to pay to have their ear, period.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.