Congratulations, President Obama. Looks like you've got your trade agreements for

[cali]

your corporate friends.

Not a surprise. As much as anything in politics, it's written in stone that "trade" agreements that benefit Wall Street and the corporate world, will pass.

President Obama stuffed his administration and the USTR Office specifically with banksters, lobbyists and corporate executives. The corporate dominated USTR shut other interests out of the advisory and negotiating process. And corporations and Wall Street are thrilled with the access and power they exerted over the process and with the end result.

But this is going to be a big issue in the democratic primary and beyond. The current model for ftas, which extends corporate influence and power and under the rubric "corporate rights", has lit a fire with the TPP.

Anyone who thinks that this is going to fade as an issue, couldn't be more mistaken.

[djean111]

1. Agree with you wholeheartedly.

No more votes from me for DINOs, and Obama's endorsement for anyone counts against them, as far as I am concerned.
No vote for anyone who worked on or shilled for this stuff either.

[rbnyc]

132. ...

[billhicks76]

189. Sick Of These Jerks

Liars and arrogant hypocrites. Makes you wonder if they were forced to sell their souls this way. What kind of dirt NSA extracted on them to force compliance.

[daleanime]

2. Hell yes....

[Angry Dragon]

3. One more step to a global economy and government

where the corporations and the wealthy rule
not much different from kings and serfs

[jeff47]

4. Not quite yet.

The House changed the bill. So it has to go back to the Senate.

TAA was necessary to stop Democrats from filibustering the bill in the Senate, and TAA is not in the House bill. Cutting Medicare to fund TAA was necessary to stop Republicans from filibustering the bill in the Senate.

So there is more work for Obama and company to do.

[cali]

10. yeah, I know. I'm not exactly going out on a limb by predicting that

there won't be enough votes for a filibuster.

President Obama had Dem Senators and Reps to the WH last night. I suspect the work Obama needed to do was done then.

[jwirr]

31. And more work for us. I already emailed my Senators.

[Cleita]

5. Bernie Sanders just said, it still has to go to the Senate and they can stop

it with sixty NO votes. He asks that everyone call their senators to ask them not to vote for it.

[Flying Squirrel]

47. 41. nt

[AZ Progressive]

6. Obama makes Bush look like an amateur in terms of being able to con the people

Last edited Thu Jun 18, 2015, 01:47 PM - Edit history (1)

Hillary at least is fake enough to easily see through. Bush was good to a degree but Obama blows Bush away in the ability to look like he was good and noble when really he was just another corporate shill.

[840high]

26. You got it right.

[JDPriestly]

90. Obama -- another corporate shill.

[CorporatistNation]

154. Nothing New... I Called Him For THE Corporatist Lackey That He IS... in 2007!!!

[Rockyj]

204. It makes Obama more evil...

It really does because he is so two faced and he FOOLED so many of us!

[fasttense]

205. It's almost as if Obama wants to set up the United States for total failure

When these different Obama "trade" deals pass, they will pave the road to fascism and totalitarianism in and outside the United States. We are all going down the drain. Can Obama be so blind as NOT able to see it? I bet he has plans to move out of the US with his family while we are left to clean up the mess he created. It's as if he really does hate America but not the way RepubliCONS say it.

[Jumpin Jack Flash]

7. Clinton is now officially trapped in a Catch-22 situation

And that helps nobody but Bernie.

[cali]

12. No she's not. All she has to do is continue with the vague talking out of both

side of her mouth stuff. She'll talk about how she'll improve it and other deals, blah fucking blah blah blah

[Jack Rabbit]

67. I disagree, Cali

Saying nothing about the Iraq War in 250 words or more at a time was how she let the nomination slip through her fingers in 2008. She could let it slip in 2016 the same way.

This is not a popular trade deal. This vote is just further evidence that American democracy is broken. Hillary Clinton is perceived, rightly, as the oligarchs' great hope in the Democratic Party.

[delrem]

166. But look what happened, instead. An Obama cabinet stuffed by Clinton.

Wars started by Clinton and Bush, accelerated by Obama.
Total Clinton/Bush corporatism at all levels. War profiteering gone insane.
Pandering to the Republicans at all levels in the name of "bipartisanship", all the while Republicans revelled in stopping cold every sign of progressive reasoning. And oh, did they ever succeed! The USA and the world has never seen such a radical swing to the right - that the very notion of "the left" has become almost non-existent at executive level.

[Doctor_J]

82. her worshippers think that saying nothing is bold leadership

And besides, she's a woman so everyone who doesn't vote for her is a misogynist.

[CorporatistNation]

157. Perfectly Delivered...

[cantbeserious]

164. ^^^ THIS ^^^

eom

[AngryOldDem]

190. And get ready for more of the same if she wins.

After all, we can't understand these things and have to trust that our best interests are being looked out for.

[geek tragedy]

8. Are there 60 votes for it in the Senate? nt

[Cleita]

16. I think so unless you call your senators and beg them to vote NO.

[jeff47]

19. There were not on the previous attempt to pass a TPA-only bill.

TAA was necessary to get Democrats to stop the filibuster. Which resulted in Republicans not willing to pass the bill.

Paying for TAA with Medicare cuts was necessary to get those Republicans to relent.

So, unless some Senators have changed their mind from last month (or had it changed for them), then there will need to be some work to get it to pass the Senate.

[geek tragedy]

20. they'll probably tie it the Africa trade agreements to squeeze the CBC nt

[jeff47]

24. That would require another TPA vote in the House.

Since it changes the bill the House passed.

ETA: They may be able to claim a separate vote on the African deal is the same as a combined Senate bill, but the House would have to vote to treat it as such.

[cascadiance]

46. They should be reminded that the Africa Trade agreement perhaps can be done at a later date...

If we vote to approvate TPA, there IS NO TOMORROW! They need to understand that there are some votes you simply don't negotiate, no matter who is holding out money or other SMALL favors to you to get their way in a BIG way! You have the power to stop their efforts to bring corporate fascism to this country, and the future you will be known for in this country will be whether you stood for protecting our democracy from fascism in this country or voted to bring down this country from democracy to fascism. It is as simple as that.

[Mnpaul]

158. They already did

Lee and Ellison told McConnell to go fly a kite. They aren't buying it.

[rpannier]

180. But how does that shift votes in the Senate

The CBC doesn't hold balance in the senate.
They barely cleared filibuster last time.
And several said they wouldn't vote for it without TAA

[geek tragedy]

203. I dunno. nt

[delrem]

171. Thanks for the clear explanation of this. n/t

[kentuck]

9. And people wonder how Walmart is able to hide $76 billion in overseas tax havens?

It is exactly because of free trade agreements like this that Walmart sets up shops overseas and looks to hide all their profits and we do not have enough revenue to function as a 1st world country...

[Octafish]

89. Planet Sweatshop

Serfs Up.

[Sunlei]

128. Walmart expanded to other countries. Over 2,200 retail locs in Mexico alone & even Walmart Banks.

The USA can't expect 'revenue' from other countries retail stores or banks.

[delrem]

172. Nor from other countries sweatshops and slave labor supplies. n/t

[kentuck]

193. But the USA should expect "revenue" from products brought back and sold in this country...

...even if made by slave labor in a Third World country. There should be a tariff on each and every product sold in this country by these tax evaders.

[Sunlei]

201. a tariff? The state collects revenue in sales tax, property tax and employee taxes.

The USA can't even collect a tariff on washing machines and refrigerators, today made in mexico by $7.00 a day workers and intended for sale to American consumers.

a lot of cheap products come in by shipping container full and are packaged in the usa. for example this is common for dog treats.

The USA has its own prison slave labor, 50 cents an hour is what prisoners are paid by the 'for profit' prisons. They use the made in America label.

One thing that could be done is remove the local regulations that ban/prevent/over regulate, small businesses. Small businesses used to be the backbone of America.

[JaneyVee]

11. He deserves the same authority granted to every president before him.

[Romeo.lima333]

13. sorry i didnt see that in the constitution - where is that written?

[cali]

15. so do repuke presidents, right? And there may be a repuke in the WH after him

in any case, that's just shallow. No, he doesn't deserve and neither does the next president. It's time to stop ftas that give corporations more "rights" and power and that crush people. The U.S. does NOT enforce labor and environmental provisions in these agreements. The combination of corporations with huge power and corrupt governments is lethal. That can be seen in Columbia and other Central and South American countries with which the U.S. has ftas.

[JaneyVee]

17. No, Republicans no longer have that privilege.

They've proven incompetent. Obama on the other hand very much deserves the authority to negotiate a trade deal.

[whatchamacallit]

23. Lol

Yeah that's how we should determine what to make law...

[Autumn]

40. Yeah because when Republicans are proven incompetent they

never get elected President.

[Art_from_Ark]

134. Hell, "incompetence" is one of the *requirements* for being a Republican president

[JaneyVee]

54. Guess what....

Republicans will pass trade deals with zero labor and environmental standards.

[cali]

75. that has not been true in the past

The Colombian fta, for instance, negotiated by the bush admin, was and still is touted as having very high environmental and labor standards. Over 100 labor leaders, with the collusion of the government have been murdered following the agreement. Environmental harm by corporations has been documented. The administration has done vanishingly little about it.

[Buns_of_Fire]

97. Standards that are not enforced are pretty-much the same as NO standards, yes?

WASHINGTON, DC – United States Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) today released a report highlighting more than two decades of failed enforcement by the United States of labor and environmental standards included in past free trade agreements (FTAs), including the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and agreements with Peru, Colombia, and Panama. The report follows recent statements by President Obama that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will be “the most progressive trade bill in history” and that it will have “higher labor standards, higher environmental standards,” and “new tools to hold countries accountable.” Similar statements were made by previous Presidents of both parties about every major U.S. trade agreement, from NAFTA forward.

“Supporters of past trade agreements have said again and again that these deals would include strong protections for workers, but assurances without strong enforcement are just empty promises,” Senator Warren said. "The facts show that, despite all the promises, these trade deals were just another tool to tilt the playing field in further of multinational corporations and against working families.”

Today’s 15-page report, Broken Promises: Decades of Failure to Enforce Labor Standards in Free Trade Agreements, shows that the United States pursues very few enforcement actions to uphold the labor protections in its trade agreements. Analysis of a series of reports by government auditors and other experts - combined with case-by-case analyses of labor, environment, and human rights problems in countries that are partners in free trade agreements with the United States - reveals that despite promises made by Presidents from both parties, free trade agreements have often failed to resolve or prevent abuses in countries that are parties to the agreements.

http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=819

[hatrack]

151. As opposed to existing, but unenforced labor and environmental standards

Or should I say "gold standards", since TPP is The Gold Standard, per Mrs. Clinton.

See also: "Ecuador, Chevron, Texaco"

[rhett o rick]

145. You celebrating the victory of Boehner and McConnell? This is a huge blow for

our poor, American workers and our seniors. Those that support this have no empathy.

[cali]

25. Do you grasp that TPA extends his presidency? and with his record of betraying

labor and unions he sure as hell has not earned that right. His behavior about this has been reprehensible from the get go. why am I not in the least surprised that you don't care about the issues that negatively impact people and the environment, but are basing this entirely on your personal feelings about the President?

[JaneyVee]

52. I don't care?

I'm a union member and co-founder of an environmental group that was infiltrated and dismantled by federal agents in 2006, but what do I know? And I'm still on the frontlines of activism, despite most of my life being dominated by career and parenting. Yes, Obama deserves the same damn authority to negotiate as all presidents before him. You are basing this entirely on your personal feelings about the president, not me.

[cali]

69. you clearly care more for giving the president what he wants

than for anything else.

and your union? which one? what is their official position?

Again, the current administration has done a flat out terrible job when it comes to enforcing labor and environmental provisions in existing ftas.

I think it's shameful that you ignore that.

[JaneyVee]

74. Republicans will pass future trade deals without labor/enviro standards....

But it's cool, you'll probably just be here whining about that as well.

[cali]

79. Wong again. for political reasons, they incorporate high standards. Have in the past

will in the future. Why? Optics and they need dem votes.

Anyone can put wonderful environmental and labor standards in trade agreements. It's fucking meaningless unless there are not only mechanisms of enforcement but the willingness to do so. It's just window dressing without enforcement.

President Obama's administration has been just as weak on enforcement as bush was.

Not that you'll ever face facts. You run from them.

[delrem]

179. Correct, as far as I've read. I see protections for investment capital.

I don't see any protections for workers, for the environment, for the larger body politic.

If those protections were there, they would've at least been "leaked".
So they aren't there.

This is a purist dream for investment capital, and nothing for the rest of us.

[turbinetree]

127. Free Trade

started under Richard Nixon, one the most vile, corrupt politician running around during that time frame and was given a pardon before he went to trial-------------by a republican.
And Ronald Reagan said that he was the finest man he ever met---------------he's a scum bag also---------------he fired air traffic controllers--------Scott Walkers hero.

He ( Nixon) said that he "under the Constitution" had the authority to fast track any treaty without any Congressional amendments or any attachments to change the "deal",
which he made with China-----------and yet this guy had a slush fund set up in Mexico for and used by his re-election committee-----------and now to today this country was given the green light by a corrupt U.S,. Supreme Court that says such funds are now legal.

As a Union member for over 40 years I have seen from that auspices time the decline of Unions and the continued decline in Union membership---the back bone of the working poor and the middle class.

But I have seen scabs come in and take over the housing industry when I was in construction, making $14.50 with benefits (retirement, health care, ect.....) and they would park there cars and trucks with there headlights on and working in the dark with the so called "lead" making $9.50 without benefits.

And now in the industry I have worked in for over 35 years the aviation industry, they are outsourcing heavy maintenance to third rate states and countries, because all you need under the FAA Regs and the manufacturer requirements, is one person that can read and understand the English language and sign off the log book, comforting
This is what is called NAFTA, CAFTA, and TPP-------

http://citizen.typepad.com/eyesontrade/2014/06/nixon-hatched-fast-track-not-fdr.html


That is my rant

[Sunlei]

202. a good and on the mark rant it is :P. you didn't mention airline parts made in china

I remember reading a couple years ago the industry had problems with foreign made airline parts. They complained to congress & congress didn't even demand refund or replacement parts.

My uncles small plane engine failed, he almost made it back to land but clipped trees, Aunt, Uncle, 2 kids lost. The investigation was inconclusive, probably a part failure.

I've seen the 'night workers' you mentioned. A couple years ago my small town got several million federal stimulus money to build a new 4 lane road. On Sundays & weekend nights is when 50 or 60 workers were brought in to do the shovel work & laying rebarb?, very dusty hard work, no masks. By day it was totally different 'legal' crew.

you made very good points. I don't think America can change back to a robust middle class until we drop the barriers to bring back 'real' small businesses.

[cascadiance]

28. Do you think Republicans are going to let him be president for six years rather than two years?

This TPA covers SIX years, which means the complete term of the NEXT president, not Obama! Now, are YOU wanting to give a Republican president and potentially a Republican congress this kind of "authority" to basically finish off our democracy and complete the process of installing a FASCIST government answering only to the likes of the Koch brothers where these ISDS courts are the fall back if the Supreme Court doesn't rule in their favor (even with its 5 right wing majority)?

Voters that support TPA and those that want to make it law are proof that our education system is incompetent!

[JaneyVee]

56. That's why we should pass deals with labor and enviro standards.....

Because Repubs sure as hell won't.

[cascadiance]

66. You want these "standards" to be drawn up in secret primarily by corporate leaders?

... and those trade representatives that are used to the "revolving door" that Citizen's United and McCutcheon have given them and those who appoint them now? Why do you think it is mostly Republicans that support this crap? Why do you support what Republicans want?

If you do then you are CRAZY! I don't care how much of a salesman Obamma is, he's not selling people like me or others with a brain.

If you want to pass deals with labor and environmental standards that are put there by negotiating in CONGRESS and with entities other than corporate leaders the way TPA and TPP have been negotiated, then TPA needs to be voted DOWN!

[JaneyVee]

71. This isn't a vote for the trade deal.

[cascadiance]

76. You are right, it is a vote for tthe TPP before the vote is taken...

... by putting in place rules that keep us from having a good process for allowing our congressional reps to have enough time to review it, amend it, and share it with and get feedback from their constituents. It is what will make TPP ultimately a bad deal!

Why do you want a bill passed that destroys the Democratic process just because a president that is siding with Republicans that you happen to personally like wants it?

[rhett o rick]

208. Essentially it is. It makes it harder to stop it from being ram-rodded thru Congress.

All the Conservatives favor this so-called trade agreement (it's only about 10% about trade and 90% about corp power grabbing). The unions and environmentalists are against this. Looks like Medicare might be raided because of this crap.

Billionaires, Conservatives, Corporation favor the TPP

Unions, Environmentalists, Doctors Without Borders, a coalition of progressive economists are against.

Which side are you on?

[bvar22]

88. Why don't you reassure us, Janey.

Please post a couple of links where the USA has enforced Labor, Human Rights, or environmental protections in a foreign country that has one of our "Free Trade" deals.

I can't think of any,
but you must know of a few since you are basing your whole argument on the enforcement of these "protections".

Just 3 or 4 links will do.
Thanks.

[rhett o rick]

142. By the way, the labor unions are against this POS. Also environmentalists and Doctors Without

Borders. The only people that favor this are the Corporations and their conservative henchmen. Big Pharma is dancing in the streets, but our seniors took a big hit. Not that conservatives care. They have no empathy for the poor, our vets and seniors.

Yeah TPP a big one for the 1% and their supporters.

[bvar22]

207. TPP may be the biggest gift ever handed to the 1% by our politicians.

It will certainly accelerate the Race to the Bottom for the Working Class & Poor.

[CorporatistNation]

155. Well Said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[840high]

29. Oh please...

[Autumn]

34. If this passes the senate Republicans WILL have that privilege

And should Jeb be elected in 2016 even though he's incompetent Jeb will have the authority to negotiate a trade deal. Do you really think Obama will be president after 2016? OMFG

[cali]

38. a demonstration of the politics of personality

It's beyond partisanship, this really does illustrate total allegiance and hero worship. It's antithetical to democracy.

[Autumn]

42. That statement blew my mind

[onecaliberal]

94. ^^^THAT^^^

When it comes to backing the corporate bosses, dems and reps are all the same. There is no difference, with very few exceptions.

[JaneyVee]

58. Do you really think Repubs will include labor and enviro standards?

[Autumn]

60. Do you really think Obama is the only President who will use this ?

Your statement stands. I will not discuss this with you.

[JaneyVee]

64. Which is exactly why we need labor /enviro standards.

[pampango]

110. You think a republican congress will not approve fast track for Jeb

whether Obama ever has it or not?

[cali]

194. I think dems have a solid chance of taking back the Senate, don't you?

[pampango]

210. Sure. But not in a scenario in which Jeb is elected president.

That would make it unlikely.

[cali]

65. Obama has been proven incompetent. His administration has done a horrible job

enforcing labor and environmental provisions in existing agreements.

[JaneyVee]

68. Write him a letter. Go ahead.

[markpkessinger]

195. Mocking us because you know he won't listen to anything we have to say , , ,

, , , how classy. No, really.

[cali]

199. It's a variation on a theme: "My President, right or.... more right"

[AgingAmerican]

183. He has done an even worse job at negotiating deals

That's the scary part.

[Oilwellian]

98. You mean the Republicans that Obama is relying on to pass this piece of shit? n/t

[arcane1]

104. This has to be a parody n/t

[mindem]

105. Where is your sarcasm thingy.

You should go on tour with your act, you're a real hoot.

[grahamhgreen]

106. What do you do for a living?

[Doctor_J]

120. writes comedy, obviously

[stillwaiting]

85. No he doesn't. And, the other Presidents shouldn't have had it either.

They are making "trade" bills in to something that encompasses so much more. They are getting legislation passed through "trade" bills that they could never get passed through traditional methods.

Just because something has been done a certain way for awhile doesn't mean that it should have been, and it doesn't mean that things shouldn't change (ESPECIALLY with what they are doing within these "trade" agreements).

[rbnyc]

138. + 1

I cannot figure out how anyone who understands what is happening here can defend it.

[DhhD]

153. Paul Ryan already tacked on a rider to the TPP to deregulate Air Quality Standards even more. This

was about 2:30 am about a week ago. The GOP would give and keep on giving to a GOP President. It has already started just like you said.

[Sunlei]

126. I agree with you 100%.

[rhett o rick]

146. You agree with this decision that the Republicons supported? This decision that will have

a direct impact on our poor, American jobs and our seniors? This decision that will give big corporations tremendous powers at the expense of taxpayers? This is another nail in our coffins. The Republicons love it and so apparently do you.

[rbnyc]

136. None of them deserved the authority!

When you're in a hole...

[rhett o rick]

141. He is abusing that authority, that's the problem. The corporations love it and

our poverty levels will increase. How can a Democrat approve that?

[magical thyme]

14. I thought I read yesterday that Obama had said w/out TAA he would veto it.

I'll try and find the article...

[stevenleser]

27. Change that... my bad...

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-18/obama-s-fast-track-trade-bill-passes-house-in-second-attempt

Looks like what happened is that there are guarantees for full up and down votes for both TPA and TAA. The separation is not good.

[kentuck]

30. They got the whole enchilada...

And we got the refried beans...

[stevenleser]

33. Yeah. It's not hard to see what is going to happen here.

Repugs are going to vote for TPA and allow a full up/down vote on TAA, sure, but all Republicans will vote against it.

I hope I'm wrong.

[kentuck]

39. Republicans love this bill...

They will see that it passes in its entirety, with or without the Democrats. This is the type of "bipartisan" legislation they can work with the President on.

[cascadiance]

36. NO! The article did NOT say that the TAA was passed here...

It is still a separate vote LATER that hasn't been taken yet! And that is why as this article knows that the House is pushing the TPA bill back to the Senate, coupled with another bill as noted here.

The fast-track provision was added to a popular public-safety retirement bill, H.R. 2146, that passed the House 407-5 on May 12 and the Senate by voice vote on June 4. It now returns to the Senate for a final vote before it can be sent to Obama for his signature.

If this were a vote of the TPA with the TAA as the original Senate bill had it, then it wouldn't need to go back to the Senate.

I'm hoping we can talk to many of the Democrats that broke ranks from the earlier filibuster to stay with the filibuster this time and stop it in the Senate without the TAA being a part of this bill.

[stevenleser]

43. Right, I changed the post. Agreed on all counts. nt

[Broward]

18. I wonder what this self-described Republican has in store for us next.

[Fred Sanders]

49. Terrible terrible things He has planned, the fascist GOP plans pale by comparison.....!?

Look, Obama is threatening to veto a grossly inflated GOP military spending bill and is expanding protections for federal workers and the environment, 12 million newly insured with regulated health plans, promoting voter registration, not to mention infrastructure spending and closing corporate off shore tax loopholes, oh, and world peace with Iran, no war in Iraq, forgot that, maybe other stuff not worth mentioning in comparison to the terror of exercising the same trade authority as done by every modern day President ....the horror!

[rhett o rick]

144. What a day for Pres Obama, John Boehner, and Corp-America.

Bad day for the poor, the workers, and our seniors. Big Pharma is ready to dance in the streets, higher prices for drugs. Medicare cuts. Obama and Boehner and McConnell are probably having martini's right now celebrating how they have screwed the lower classes. The conservatives that support this have no empathy.

[rhett o rick]

147. By the way, you know the Republicons are working hand in hand with him on the TPP?

But conservatives don't give a crap about our seniors that will be hit especially hard when drug prices go up and Medicare is raided.

A win for Obama, a win for Boehner, a win for McConnell, a win for Corporate-America and a loss for the 99%. Explain how a Democrat can support that?

[kentuck]

21. Simple rule...

If the vast majority of Republicans support it, it is not good for Democrats.

[pampango]

112. What if the majority of republicans (in the base) oppose it and the majority of Democrats

(in the base) support it? Who does that favor?

[dreamnightwind]

121. That's why our corporate masters love to have their policies pushed by Dems

We don't hold our own reps accountable, it can't be evil if Obama supports it! And Hillary will do their work just as well as Obama, perhaps better.

Do you think the Democratic base would support this if a Bush was the POTUS pushing it? I don't.

[pampango]

130. Democrats have historically been more supportive of trade agreements than republicans

in terms of the the respective bases. I suspect that Democratic support is rooted in the legacy of FDR's efforts to create international engagement in trade and diplomacy. Republicans have no such history.

[dreamnightwind]

133. Yes, times have changed

It's a very different world now with software-managed multinational workforces, massive port infrastructures, corporations nimbly taking advantage of whatever deregulated conditions for extraction and laor they can find, and it's about time we all came to terms with that.

Republicans are on Obama's side of this agreement, as are their major donors. What are we the party of, corporate profit?

[demwing]

140. Right v Left is Dead

We live in a brave new, bipartisan 1% v 99% world.

[cascadiance]

22. Obama, your present "friends" leave a lot to be desired!

[840high]

32. They are also his

future "friends".

[olddots]

35. and you wonder why so many people take anti depressants ?

we are in a depression again brought on by a greedy ignorant few .

[delrem]

178. Yah, but antidepressants don't work for this kind of downer. Sorreeeee!

[leveymg]

37. If TPP passes, it means US taxpayers will be paying corporations for environmental laws.

Last edited Thu Jun 18, 2015, 05:31 PM - Edit history (3)

The Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in TPP changes the rules of most international arbitration. As the system works now, most trade disputes go through a state-to-state settlement process, such as the WTO. TPP expands the ability of corporations to pursue private courses of action without going to court or through the state-to-state process.

The TPP virtually guarantees that virtually every law and regulation passed affecting trade among the TPP states will now be challenged directly by corporate attorneys acting on their own. Previously they had to go to federal court or convince the Administration to sponsor their case in state-to-state tribunals.

[cali]

44. It doesn't change the rules, it just considerably expands the number of multinationals

who have access to ISDS. And though every law and regulation won't be challenged, it's likely some significant ones will be. Not to mention that it will have an inhibiting effect on new regs and laws from the municipal level on up.

[leveymg]

99. I understood TPP will now allow investors to go directly to international tribunals

The present ISDS arbitration system handles only state-to-state disputes. Under current ISDS, states are the parties who act on behalf of their investor nationals before international arbitration bodies. The TPP treaty cuts out the role of governments in the process. That effectively opens the dispute process to virtually any company that can hire a lawyer within the TPP area. If my reading of this is wrong, please show me a source that explains the ISDS process change under TPP. Thanks.

[cali]

107. No. That is absolutely incorrect. Within the WTO, it's state to state but in many,many

others- in fact the vast majority of trade agreements, corporations have the ISDS as a venue. That's a major reason why there is so much resistance to it. There have been over 600 cases brought by corporations.

Here is a source. there have been millions of words written about this. I've posted extensively about quite a few3ew of these cases on DU. So have many others.

Investor-State Attacks: Empowering Foreign Corporations to Bypass our Courts, Challenge Basic Protections

Among the most dangerous but least known parts of today's "trade" agreements are extraordinary new rights and privileges granted to foreign corporations and investors that formally prioritize corporate rights over the right of governments to regulate and the sovereign right of nations to govern their own affairs. These terms empower individual foreign corporations to skirt domestic courts and directly challenge any policy or action of a sovereign government before World Bank and UN tribunals.

Comprised of three private attorneys, the extrajudicial tribunals are authorized to order unlimited sums of taxpayer compensation for health, environmental, financial and other public interest policies seen as frustrating the corporations' expectations. The amount is based on the "expected future profits" the tribunal surmises that the corporation would have earned in the absence of the public policy it is attacking. There is no outside appeal. Many of these attorneys rotate between acting as tribunal "judges" and as the lawyers launching cases against the government on behalf of the corporations. Under this system, foreign corporations are provided greater rights
than domestic firms.

This extreme "investor-state" system already has been included in a series of U.S. "trade" deals, forcing taxpayers to hand more than $440 million to corporations for toxics bans, land-use rules, regulatory permits, water and timber policies and more. Under a similar pact, a tribunal recently ordered payment of more than $2 billion to a multinational oil firm. Just under U.S. deals, more than $34 billion remains pending in corporate claims against medicine patent policies, pollution cleanup requirements, climate and energy laws, and other public interest policies

<snip>

http://www.citizen.org/documents/investor-state-chart.pdf
Here is a list of ISDS cases:

http://www.citizen.org/documents/investor-state-chart.pdf

[leveymg]

111. The investor-state chart references NAFTA cases. NAFTA is a state-to-state treaty with disputes

settled among the parties by an arbitration panel.

As I understand it, in order to bring an effective case under NAFTA's environmental sidebar, for instance, a US company has to enlist the Trade Representative to initiate a Dispute. The USTR may or may not decide to pursue the matter on behalf the US national investor. If the USTR opposes the case, in fact, the matter will not go anywhere. Do you know of an ISDS case that's been granted in favor of

As you acknowledge, the WTO Dispute Resolution Body is definitely strictly a state-to-state mechanism.

[cali]

113. oh for pity's sake. read this and get back to me

You are wrong. Investors absolutely are entitled to bring cases against states under NAFTA chapter 11

There are several well known cases. I'll post a link. And investors can directly bring cases through the ISDS system in the vast majority of ftas. Fucking period.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor-state_dispute_settlement


http://www.flushthetpp.org/top-ten-most-pernicious-investor-state-dispute-settlement-lawsuits/

[Hoyt]

108. No, you don't understand. That's part of our problem.

[leveymg]

114. Here's what I understand, and please provide a source that shows this is incorrect:

The Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) in TPP changes the rules of most international arbitration. As the system works now, most trade disputes go through a state-to-state settlement process, such as the WTO. TPP expands the ability of corporations to pursue private courses of action without going to court or through the state-to-state process in there is not already an ISDS mechanism under which they can pursue a private claim that isn't supported by their government's trade office.

The TPP virtually guarantees that virtually every law and regulation passed affecting trade among the TPP states will now be challenged directly by corporate attorneys acting on their own. Previously they had to go to federal court, another country's courts, or convince the Administration to sponsor their case in state-to-state tribunals.

[Hoyt]

116. Read Cali's explanation. If you look at the title of past suits, it's XYX Inc. v Mexico.

That ought to tell you something. I'm sure there are, and will be, state to state suits. I guess that is what happened with the recent meat labeling dispute. But there are also investor/company suits, have been for decades.

[cali]

115. oh, I understand.

[Hoyt]

117. Surprised the hell out of me.

[cali]

118. It shouldn't. I've demonstrated repeatedly that I'm better versed in this than you

with your talking points that ignore such salient factors as the history of failure on the part of the U.S. in enforcing environmental and labor standards in ftas.

you just spew pro fta propaganda straight from the USTR and WH.

[Hoyt]

119. There's the junk I expect.

[marble falls]

163. If so goody, goody, goody for investors - the 1%ers, what tribuna evel listens to workers?

[cascadiance]

45. Keystone will either be brought back or American taxpayer will pay HEAVILY for it...

... not to be built if the ISDS court is put in place.

You wonder why Obama delayed doing anything about Keystone Oil pipeline, and net neutrality for that matter until after the election when there is now a Republican majority in the Senate? I think him vetoing Keystone and then pushing the FCC to stand for Net Neutrality were a smoke screen to make him appear liberal, when the TPA was the ace in the hole for corporate power to render these actions useless in effect. This is the deal he made behind closed doors. He knows that if TPA and TPP doesn't pass, then the corporations that he went against with those earlier decisions won't be able to "overturn" them the way the "deal worked" for them.

[leveymg]

101. I agree that TPP potentially impacts future laws and regs re: Keystone and Net Neutrality.

Could well upend the whole system of corporate regulation in much of the world.

[Hoyt]

109. If we allowed/encouraged a foreign company to build the pipeline, and said sorry we changed

our minds and your investment is worthless, the company might have grounds for damages if they can convince the arbitration panel, 50% of which is selected by the country. But, even if they get some payment for their worthless investment, the law still stands.

[CorporatistNation]

156. You Need to Inform Hillary...

As she "is still waiting to "see what is in the TPP... Then she will take a position." I guess she forgot that she was actively involved in structuring the agreement...

[PufPuf23]

41. "But this is going to be a big issue in the democratic primary and beyond." This better be.

What you described , the stuffing, is the problem in USA politics and political parties.

We can't do much about the GOP and it typically seems like pissing upstream upstream within the Democratic Party (which to me is defacto DU).

[fbc]

48. Will Democratic voters learn from this? I guess we'll find out with Bernie vs. Hillary

[truebrit71]

51. I hope so...but I highly doubt it...

...

[lark]

50. Sucks!!

Trojan horse pretend Dem president and the oligarchs win, the rest of us are screwed to the wall. This ensures that the 1% sucks up more of the money by taking it from us. This enables the moving of jobs out of America, greatly increased prescription costs. It gives corporations primacy over national labor and environmental laws. It's so bad, the sections giving corporations power over governments is sealed for 4 years after the treaty is signed.

Damn, I'm depressed. yeah, I knew this was likely, but was still hoping that sanity would win for once. No, big $$ won like usual.

[truebrit71]

53. Should be changed to the same headline from yesterday "Obama and his republican allies"...

...got their trade agreement...

What a fucking sham he has turned out to be....

Hope and Change? Blow it out your ass...

[NRaleighLiberal]

63. watch out - if you post that, you get piled onto by the usual suspects....

[Efilroft Sul]

73. Yeah, the TOS rules lawyers...

[elehhhhna]

55. nouveau 1%ers are the worst.

[Enthusiast]

57. K&R! This post deserves hundreds of recommendations!

Alright Obama!

[tularetom]

59. So after 7 years, Obama finally channels his inner LBJ to twist Dems arms for this stupid deal

How many times have we all expressed our amazement that he wouldn't put pressure on congress to pass bills that we felt really strongly about.

So now, he decides that this piece of crap is the one thing he's willing to start acting like the leader of his party for.

Very sad IMO.

[markpkessinger]

192. We were told we'd see the 'real Obama' in his second term. . .

. . . and indeed we have.

[asiliveandbreathe]

62. TPA Added to

BILL TITLE: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Federal law enforcement officers, firefighters, and air traffic controllers to make penalty-free withdrawals from governmental plans after age 50, and for other purposes -

Nothin' like trying to hide your vote....

Sickening...

[Nye Bevan]

70. Who said that bipartisanship is dead? (nt)

[Dont call me Shirley]

72. Non of my representatives from the entire state voted for fast-track, I will call to thank them

and to voice my opposition to this abomination. Calling WH now!

Whitehouse Comments: 202-456-1111

United States Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121

[Doctor_J]

77. the "defeat" was theatre

It was always going to pass. Corporations always get their way.

This president's been a disaster. Hopefully the history books will emphasize what happened to the party during the Obama era.

[Omaha Steve]

78. So what do we do with a lame duck Republican POTUS in control of both houses?

He will not leave the legacy he wants. He will have a Hoover legacy!!!

[Doctor_J]

124. Hopefully the Sanders coalition in the Senate can hold off the worst of it

My fear is that they will attack social security, which Obama proposed already.

[jtuck004]

80. What would be fascinating is if this rips China a big one, like it is predicted, and then they

decide that they will follow our example of using war to pump up an economy.

That could be fun. What a legacy.

[RiverLover]

81. Traitorous.

Never have I been so wrong about a candidate. Its been 7 years now, being reminded over & over, & now they want my vote for another corporatist "Democrat". I don't think so.

[Jefferson23]

83. It won't be possible to forget about it, the consequences of this will take many forms.

Disgraceful..utterly so.

[heaven05]

84. what has worried me

is the "secrecy" surrounding this whole deal and it's paperwork of which people, in a democracy, were not allowed to see. Something rotten here.

[JCMach1]

86. Poisoned legacy...

this leaves a bad taste in my mouth...

[SoapBox]

87. He's lost my support.

What a waste.

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. Local reaction from labor was all but unexpected

Fast Track Authority Passes in the House 218-208, Local Labor Reacts Edit


June 18, 2015 (WASHINGTON) The House passed Fast Track Authority (FTA) for the President, making negotiations of the Trans-Pacific Partnership easier (TPP).

This is a bill that was opposed by labor and in San Diego Democrats Scott Peters and Susan Davis voted with the Republicans. Labor is not pleased and they are going to try to primary Scott Peters.

Mickey Kasparian, President of the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 135 released this statement on Facebook.

http://reportingsandiego.com/2015/06/18/fast-track-authority-passes-in-the-house-218-208-local-labor-reacts/

I cannot wait for 2016 primary season. It just got interesting.

[Ed Suspicious]

92. I wash my hands of this President. I'm sorry he got my vote 3 times.

[Ed Suspicious]

93. No more third way votes for me. If a candidate wants my vote you had better earn it.

You cannot scare me with "If Republicans take over . . ." Well then at least they own the shit policy and it doesn't reflect poorly on my party. At least there might be opposition to Republican policies in the future.

The permanent state of acquiescence is done for me.

[turbinetree]

95. Fill in the Blank

but I thought, he was a .. .........................?

[Jack Rabbit]

96. I repeat the call for a mass campaign of civil disobedience against the oligarchs

There can be no free and fair elections under the Citizens United regime.

There are no "corporate rights" other than:

• The right to manufacture a product that is safe and effective when used as directed and sell it on a free and open market at a resonable price
• The right to obey laws passed by democratically constituted assemblies to maintain a free and open market to the benefit of consumers
• The right to obey government regulations aimed at keeping the environment safe and clean in the manufacturing process
• The right to negotiate in good faith with its employees' collective bargaining agent.

We will restore democracy by overturning Citizens United and making unenforceable all free trade agreements featuring investor/state dispute processes biased to corporate interests.

We reserve the right to boycott or litigate into bankruptcy any private business that even thinks out loud of taking any government at any level to an ISDS for any reason.

We reserve the right to boycott or litigate into bankruptcy any private business that works to undermine democracy, including the use of funds to influence the behavior of political candidates, legislators, judges or government administrators that or resists efforts by a freely elected government to regulate industry.

We reserve the right to engage in boycotts, strikes and even general strikes to modify sociopathic behavior of private businesses or corrupt governments.

We find that the use of fossil fuel is a major cause of pollution of the air and water and warming of the oceans that cause severe weather patterns and climate change. Accordingly, we find that fossil fuels are unsafe and should be phased out of the marketplace. We will supplement and eventually supplant the use of fossil fuel as an energy source with clean, renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power.

• We will not fight wars aimed at securing foreign supplies of fossil fuels by force
• We will not pay taxes used to prosecute wars aimed at securing foreign supplies of fossil fuels by force
• We will not pay taxes to subsidize fossil fuel industries
• We will not pay fines levied against homeowners who install renewable energy devices on their property.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

169. +1,000 n/t

n/t

[seafan]

100. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz votes with Republicans, for TPA. Past time to show her the door.

And this is no surprise, looking at her history of placating her Republican friends.


House Sends Trade Bill Back to Senate in Bid to Outflank Foes, June 18, 2015

WASHINGTON — The House on Thursday again approved a measure to give President Obama accelerated negotiating authority to pursue a sweeping, legacy-building trade agreement with 11 Pacific Rim nations, part one of a complex legislative strategy devised by Republicans to get a trade package to Mr. Obama’s desk.

Led by Republicans, with the support of a few Democrats who support the trade deal, the House passed the trade promotion authority measure, 218 to 208. It will now be sent back to the Senate, where a more narrow band of Republicans and Democrats will be asked to approve it after already passing their own bill that included protection for workers, a provision favored by Democrats.

That measure, called trade adjustment assistance, was rejected by the House last week, part of an effort by Democrats there to undermine the overall trade package.

.....

To persuade Senate Democrats to again pass the trade promotion measure, also known as fast-track authority, Republicans have decided to tuck the worker assistance components into a noncontentious trade preference bill related to Africa, and send it back to the House for final passage.

Representative Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic leader in the House, criticized the Republicans’ approach, saying it would hinder the ability to address climate change and its connection to commerce through the broader trade bill. “This has been a longstanding difference within the Democratic Party,” she said.

(bold type added)


Ms. Wasserman-Schultz has not represented the people well, during her extended stay in Washington. And we've watched her for a long time now.


This is an individual who should be sent home next year.

We, as voters, intend to remedy that at the ballot box in 2016.

[djean111]

103. I will be voting against her. If you look at this New Democrat Coalition -

http://newdemocratcoalition-kind.house.gov/about-me

it shows you just what has taken over what used to be the Democratic Party. Not enabling them by voting for them any more. Bad shit seems to happen anyway.

[Trajan]

102. I love you, Cali ...

It's hard to like much of what DU offers ... In fact, it can be downright painful to exist here, in this little, broken up mess of a forum ...

But I can always depend on you to be right and true ...

Thanks for your excellent posts ...

[haikugal]

125. ^^^^^WORD^^^^^!!!!!

So true, so sad.....

We are so fucked!

[cali]

129. embarrassed thank you

[raouldukelives]

198. +1 nt

[dreamnightwind]

122. Damn, this sucks. - eom

[mmonk]

123. No it's pretty much a defining issue . No sleaze bag can sell it us to screw

us by saying they will screw you worse anymore. Those of us with critical thinking ability have had enough.

[YOHABLO]

131. There's NO HOPE NO CHANGE. The OLIGARCH WINS.

[GeorgeGist]

184. Hope and Change played better in focus groups ...

than Bait and Switch.

[rbnyc]

135. it does still go back to the Senate right?

Global Trade Watch says "Path to approval is unclear."

I'm just trying to hold on..

[hifiguy]

137. We were royally had in '08 and this is proof. Here's your legacy sir.

[Phlem]

139. What was the old defense?

"Your a hater"
"you want the republicans to win"

Etc.......

A perfect example of kill the messenger.

I knew shit like this was going to happen when he said he was a "New Democrat" but noooooo.

"he never had a majority"
"Ponies?"
"Skittles shitting flying unicorns?"
"Apparently I don't know how government works"

Etc........

[markpkessinger]

196. And don't forget . . .

"You'll see who he really is in the second term."

Oh, wait . . . so we have.

[world wide wally]

143. Gee,

Why do I feel so betrayed?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

148. Does anyone know whether

this vote was scheduled before or after the Charleston massacre? I would not put it past these traitors to use that blood for their gain.

[Baitball Blogger]

149. Something very drastic is going to happen in the future because of this incredible

special-interest legislation. Who knows. Maybe a socialist will be voted in to balance out all the one-sided logic that seems to even contaminate Democratic presidents.

[Nobel_Twaddle_III]

150. So as our only hope is now his negotiating skills, but he not a good negotiator..

[yourout]

152. What ever good will Obama had with me is now completely gone....In many ways I will loathe...

his Presidency more than Bushes simply because I voted for him(twice).

Sad day for America on many fronts.

[geek tragedy]

159. So the TPP is worse than the Iraq war and destruction

of our economy?

[yourout]

161. I expected destruction when Bush was elected. Did not think Obama would...

stab the folks that voted for him in the back.
Sadly I was wrong.

Yes what Bush did was far worse in the grand scheme of things but that does not excuse Obama.

[geek tragedy]

162. No it doesn't. But we should keep perspective. nt

[Admiral Loinpresser]

168. My perspective includes the surge in Afghanistan.

It includes the maintenance of torture law, the torture and persecution of whistle-blowers. The assault on the planet. The treason at Copenhagen. I'm too tired to go on.

[CorporatistNation]

160. I Cannot Say Sternly Enough... I TOLD YA Soooo!

Now we have ALL been HAD... PERMANENTLY!

[delrem]

165. It proves that Obama knows how to fight, and win, when he wants. n/t

[Admiral Loinpresser]

167. Wish he'd fought for health care. n/t

[delrem]

170. He didn't want universal health care. He wanted something corporate friendly, with a smiley face.

I hear about back-room deals with pharmaceutical companies, pulling the teeth of pharmicare.
Romneycare is just a deal between private medical-insurance companies, written by lawyers for those companies, to ensure their continued profitability. It isn't a "social program" in any sense of the word.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

175. Yep. Plus giving it to Baucus

to sit on in committee for a year was some more of that 3-d chess.

[delrem]

177. It was immediate.

Like getting hit on the head with a frying pan.

[ucrdem]

173. It's still got a long way to go, and he'd already won this round once,

but yeah congrats, nothing but nothing comes easily to this prez.

[delrem]

174. I don't think JaneyVee should've been hidden.

I know this is "meta-something", but still, much as I disagree with some of JaneyVee's posts, I think she was perfectly within her rights to say what she did in her hidden post. The thread had become about her, JaneyVee, and that ought to grant JaneyVee right to exclaim.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

176. Careful, you'll be meta-reamed. n/t

n/t

[Aerows]

181. As a contingency

make sure you keep no personal correspondence, information or items of sentimental value in your desk drawer.

[Gloria]

182. I didn't vote for him the first time

I barely voted for him the second go round..
I had done a lot of research on his ties, etc.and wrote about his ties...
He's been a disappointment. Ok, he's had problems with a sucky GOP and the financial mess, but he seems to cater too much to the GOP...

To me, if you have to propose a bill to "help workers who lose their jobs "as a result of this deal, then the reality is that this deal WILL cause job losses even as we're being told it will add jobs....and which jobs will and where will the gains be? I suspect the pattern we have been seeing will continue...crappy service jobs increase, skilled workers go down the tubes.

[Blue_In_AK]

185. I wish I hadn't been right

when I had so many doubts in 2008.

I'm not saying that some good things haven't happened during this presidency, but there are some aspects that have disappointed me greatly. This is one.

[cascadiance]

186. Obama's showing of his true family seems far worse than Rachel Dolezal revealing hers...

At least she hasn't pushed her hardest to SCREW the nation and SCREW our democratic system of government the way this traitor has! Obama, you've just sealed your "legacy" as something that I don't think most people that aren't crooks will ever want to emulate!

So many of us "hoped" you would be different, but it looks like my fears when you got elected were realized now...

[Jesus Malverde]

187. Du rec

JM

[JackInGreen]

188. My fear is that

this is the last grab, the last chance to raid the economic cookie jar. After this it'll be all out war on the public and the establishment of a totally legal corporate tyranny with the government as the strong arm of the machine they've made of themselves. IF we don't rise as one, throw off our petty differences and concentrate on the real menace.

[cali]

197. I share that fear. We are all well boiled frogs now.

[AngryOldDem]

191. K&R.

Keep speaking out.

[raouldukelives]

200. And it is this slide into the maelstrom that leads to our national tragedies.

To societal breakdowns, to poverty, to the mentally ill wandering the streets and our elders suffering in hunger.

To further ignorance of the climate nightmare we are bequeathing our young and our defenseless animal world.

To raging fires, stifling heat and the loss of fresh water coupled with slashed regulations, safety nets and austerity when those restrictions and programs will be needed more than ever.

There are those who stand for Main St and democracy and those who stand for obfuscating the truth and Wall St.

What investors sow today, the future reaps. More of the same or time for a change?

[closeupready]

206. What I learned on DU today: you are a Nazi if you oppose NAFTA

or the TPP Agreement. LOL

[pampango]

211. Nazis didn't do trade agreements. They were big on autarky. Doesn't make everyone who opposes

trade agreements a Nazi. That is pretty stupid. (Of course, those who support trade agreements aren't necessarily Nazis either.)

[blackspade]

209. yep, Congrats....