Letter from Over 130 Members of the House Seeking Greater Transparency in Trans-Pacific Partnership

[BrendaBrick]

Last edited Sun Aug 19, 2012, 10:33 AM - Edit history (1)

Letter from Over 130 Members of the House of Representatives to USTR Seeking for Greater Transparency in the TPP
June 27, 2012 By REPOST

Dear Ambassador Kirk:

We write with regard to the ongoing negotiations over a potential Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Free Trade Agreement (FTA), an agreement that continues to grow in scope. Specifically, we write to urge you and your staff to engage in broader and deeper consultations with members of the full range of committees of Congress whose jurisdiction touches on the wide-ranging issues involved, and to ensure there is ample opportunity for Congress to have input on critical policies that will have broad ramifications for years to come.

As the President noted in his remarks at the November Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, those involved in the TPP FTA negotiations are seeking “a high-level trade agreement that could potentially be a model, not just for countries in the Pacific region, but for the world generally.” In doing so, this pact would establish rules that extend far beyond traditional trade matters to include “a whole range of new trade issues that are going to be coming up in the future – innovation, regulatory convergence, how we’re thinking about the Internet and intellectual property.”

The TPP FTA represents an opportunity to create a new, sustainable model that respects domestic policy choices and promotes economic development with shared prosperity. Unfortunately, reports indicate the agreement is likely to repeat, rather than improve upon, the existing trade template—including the weakening of Buy America provisions, providing extraordinary investor-state privileges, and restricting access to lifesaving medicines in developing nations, to name a few.

Since the United States will be obliged to bring existing and future U.S. policies into compliance with the norms established in the TPP FTA, the negotiations USTR is pursuing will create binding policies on future Congresses in numerous areas. These could include those related to labor, patent and copyright, land use, food, agriculture and product standards, natural resources, the environment, professional licensing, state-owned enterprises and government procurement policies, as well as financial, healthcare, energy, telecommunications and other service sector regulations...

<snip>

We share your goal of making any TPP FTA a high-level agreement that serves as a model for the world. We believe reaching that standard requires transparency and sustained, ongoing consultations with the many impacted congressional committees and the public. We look forward to working with your administration to ensure we meet our shared goals.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,



Rosa L. DeLauro

George Miller

Barney Frank

José E. Serrano

Nydia M. Velazquez

Henry A. Waxman

John Conyers, Jr.

Chaka Fattah

Peter Visclosky

Bennie G. Thompson

David E. Price

Edward J. Markey

Nick J. Rahall, II

John Olver

Collin C. Peterson

Sam Farr

Elijah E. Cummings

Nita Lowey

C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger

Chris Van Hollen

Bob Filner

Sanford D. Bishop, Jr.

Michael M. Honda

Louise M. Slaughter

Linda T. Sanchez

Robert A. Brady

Earl Blumenauer

Jesse L. Jackson, Jr.

Peter A. DeFazio

William R. Keating

Maurice D. Hinchey

Gene Green

Marcy Kaptur

Keith Ellison

Wm. Lacy Clay

Tim Ryan

Laura Richardson

Raul M. Grijalva

Mark S. Critz

Betty Sutton

Dennis J. Kucinich

Zoe Lofgren

Tim Holden

Cedric L. Richmond

Alcee L. Hastings

John D. Dingell

James P. McGovern

Gwen Moore

Eleanor Holmes Norton

Paul D. Tonko

Suzanne Bonamici

John P. Sarbanes

Lois Capps

Betty McCollum

Emanuel Cleaver

John F. Tierney

Bruce L. Braley

John A. Yarmuth

Brian Higgins

Peter Welch

Chellie Pingree

Steve Cohen

Luis V. Gutierrez

Michael H. Michaud

Donna F. Edwards

Mazie K. Hirono

Michael E. Capuano

Hansen Clarke

Joe Baca

Daniel Lipinski

Rush D. Holt

David N. Cicilline

David Loebsack

Martin Heinrich

Janice D. Schakowsky

Gary C. Peters

Kurt Schrader

Brad Sherman

Russ Carnahan

Michael F. Doyle

Larry Kissell

Jerrold Nadler

Brad Miller

Lynn C. Woolsey

Rick Larsen

Anna G. Eshoo

Fortney Pete Stark

Jerry Costello

Timothy H. Bishop

Leonard L. Boswell

Melvin L. Watt

John Garamendi

Frank Pallone, Jr.

Dale E. Kildee

Bill Pascrell, Jr.

Colleen Hanabusa

Mike Quigley

Corrine Brown

Lucille Roybal-Allard

Tammy Baldwin

Joe Courtney

Al Green

Lloyd Doggett

Judy Chu

Stephen F. Lynch

Sheila Jackson-Lee

James R. Langevin

Grace F. Napolitano

Kathleen C. Hochul

G. K. Butterfield

David Scott

Christopher S. Murphy

Danny K. Davis

Janice Hahn

Terri A. Sewell

Bobby L. Rush

Barbara Lee

Maxine Waters

Niki Tsongas

Carolyn McCarthy

Albio Sires

André Carson

Eliot L. Engel

Timothy J. Walz

Marcia L. Fudge

Yvette D. Clarke

Jerry McNerney

Susan A. Davis

Joe Donnelly

Ed Pastor

Mike McIntyre

Bobby Scott

Rest: http://infojustice.org/archives/26456

Referencing an earlier post which helps to explain the critical importance of this matter and the lack of access Congress is up against! http://www.democraticunderground.com/101638991

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="

?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

What concerns me is that all these wars of recent have NOT been declared by Congress and the signing of TPP may well follow suit... and we'll find out about it after the fact and then it'll be too late!!!

THIS SHOULD BE MAJOR NEWS!!!!!!!

[limpyhobbler]

1. k/r

You are right. Thanks for posting that.

[pipoman]

2. This should be forced to require the same approval process

as a treaty..the 'trade agreement' model of not being a treaty, thus not requiring approval of congress is a complete side step and bastardization of the law... This letter is a joke. There is no requirement on member nations to improve the rights of workers.

"The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a massive new international trade pact being pushed by the U.S. government at the behest of transnational corporations."

Since when have Dems not opposed, strenuously, legislation, agreements, etc. being pushed through for the sole benefit of transnational corporations? The Labor Party Is Dead.

[BrendaBrick]

3. Point taken

But people should still know about it before it's signed!

[pipoman]

4. Any one or any party who would allow it any other

way should be dismissed IMHO. Ross Perot was ahead of his time. Some opposition is on the verge of arriving and drawing masses of people on the Occupy side and the Teabagger side..this abandonment of labor is a very important and interesting common ground between these 2 groups.

[BrendaBrick]

5. Perot was ahead of his time

alright and correctly predicted the giant sucking sound of American jobs! I clicked on your sig line and got the info about the Sept 9th rally in Leesburg, VA. Currently the buses listed in the areas of DC, Maryland, PA & NY are not in my area, but I did add my closest major metropolitan city. I'm going to check around and see what other local organizations listed as per this flyer http://www.citizenstrade.org/ctc/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/LeesburgTPPFlyer_MainRally.pdf might be going.

I think with so much at stake the two groups are going to have to set aside the differences and concentrate on the bigger-picture commonalities that will affect so many across the board. Incidentally, there was a local referendum (aka slush fund) that was recently defeated by a wide margin and it's interesting to note that both the Tea Party and Sierra Club were vehemently against it.

This is what needs to happen. Enough of this division already...the stakes are just too high and I don't think there is much time left as the citizenstrade link mentions that this is the 14th major round of closed-door negotiations with 600 *Partners* including Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Wal-Mart, Newscorp, GE and Halliburton all of who have access to this and everyone else is shut out.

As much as I would like to believe in Obama, notwithstanding the positive changes which have occurred - I just can't shake off that he signed the NDAA on New Year's Eve last year coupled with his many questionable appointees left over from the Bush years.

[RB TexLa]

13. Not really ahead of anything. There are always demagogues to say you don't have as much because

people who are different than you took and or are taking from you. Usually they are just trying to obtain power or more power.

[BrendaBrick]

14. I respectfully disagree

Would you consider Brooksley Born in this category? While it may be true that there are always demagogues as you stated, there are also others who do not fall into that category as well.

Perot was ahead of his time on this one, imo and was the lone voice trying to warn everyone how bad NAFTA would be for this country. I'm not saying he's perfect by any stretch, but in this instance I think he got it right and correctly aligned himself as an Independent.

[RB TexLa]

6. This falls under executive privilege, same as when the republicans trying to do the same

thing to the Attorney General.

[BrendaBrick]

9. Even so

I'm under the impression that it's not unusual for Congress to have access to this according to Melinda St Louis with Public Citizen in the RT video down thread I just posted.

[RB TexLa]

12. They have no need for access to the negotiations. That is an executive branch operation

They will vote on the final treaty.

[hay rick]

7. K&R

[BrendaBrick]

8. Just found this RT Video Clip: Media Blackout as TPP Negotiated in Secret

August 10th, 2012

(RussiaToday) – The corporate media is very persistent on purposefully missing some very important subjects – this time the secretly negotiated Trans-Pacific partnership.

While the Obama administration boasts about the trade benefits that come with a closer partnership with the nations of the Pacific rim, others are not as eager to jump on the TPP bandwagon including American activists and some members of Congress who are concerned over the secrecy surrounding the negotiations.

For tens of millions of Americans the result we be lost jobs and wages as such a deal will just make it easier for Wall Street to ship American jobs and companies overseas where they can be performed by slave laborers at much higher profit margins.

Melinda St Louis, international campaigns director for Public citizen’s Global Trade Watch joins RT’s Kristine Frazao to discuss this.

http://dprogram.net/2012/08/10/media-blackout-as-trans-pacific-partnership-negotiated-in-secret/ About 9 1/2 minutes.

[BrendaBrick]

10. OH. MY. GOD. Democracy Now video with Lori Wallach from Citizen.org

really spells this out!!!!

Breaking ’08 Pledge, Leaked Trade Doc Shows Obama Wants to Help Corporations Avoid Regulations - June 14, 2012

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/6/14/breaking_08_pledge_leaked_trade_doc

I can't figure out how to embed...but this is a must see!

I am by no means an alarmist at all...but this is some really serious stuff here folks. Please K&R and help get this out before it's too late...and spread the word. This really needs to go viral - pronto.

[BrendaBrick]

11. What's Behind Canada's Entry to the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

Michael Geist - June 28, 2012

(I ran across this while searching for *Michael Moore TPP*)

Last week, U.S. President Barack Obama formally extended an invitation to Canada to join the Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations, a proposed trade deal that includes the U.S., Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam (Mexico was also added last week). Supporters have lauded the TPP as potentially the world's most important trade pact and the Canadian government spent months crossing the globe to lobby for an invitation.

Yet dig beneath the heady promises and my weekly technology law column (homepage version, Toronto Star version) notes that the benefits for Canada are hard to identify. The price of admission was very steep - Canada appears to have agreed to conditions that grant it second-tier status - and the economic benefits from improved access to TPP economies are likely to be relatively minor since we already have free trade agreements with four of the ten participants.

Given those conditions, why aggressively pursue entry into the negotiations?

The reason stems less from gaining barrier-free access to a handful of relatively small economies and far more about using the TPP as a backdoor mechanism to promote regulatory changes in Canada.

Given Canada's late entry into the TPP process, the U.S. was able to extract two onerous conditions that Prime Minister Stephen Harper downplayed as the "accession process." First, Canada will not be able to reopen any chapters where agreement has already been reached among the current nine TPP partners. This means Canada has already agreed to be bound by TPP terms without having had any input. Since the TPP remains secret, the government can't even tell us what has been agreed upon. [Scott Sinclair reports that the commitment is even broader, covering any chapter where provisions have been agreed upon]

Second, Canada has second-tier status in the negotiations as the U.S. has stipulated that Canada will not have "veto authority" over any chapter. This means that should the other nine countries agree on terms, Canada would be required to accept them...

Rest: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6567/135/

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 1% are writing their own ticket and I fear severe restrictions of net-neutrality are in the mix to prevent a backlash once all this sh** hits the fan!!!