Economist Jeffrey Sachs: Vote 'NO' on the TPP
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/11/08/jeffrey-sachs-tpp-too-flawed-for-simple-yes-vote/sZd0nlnCr18RurX1n549GI/story.html#comments
TPP is too flawed for a simple yes vote
By Jeffrey D. Sachs NOVEMBER 08, 2015
snip
The most egregious parts of the agreement are the exorbitant investor powers implicit in the Investor-State Dispute Settlement system as well as the unjustified expansion of copyright and patent coverage. Weve seen this show before. Corporations are already using ISDS provisions in existing trade and investment agreements to harass governments in order to frustrate regulations and judicial decisions that negatively impact the companies interests. The system proposed in the TPP is a dangerous and unnecessary grant of power to investors and a blow to the judicial systems of all the signatory countries. And as in earlier trade agreements, the United States has pushed through overly strong intellectual property rights that strengthen the aggressive pricing practices of big pharma and unnecessarily extend the copyright protections far beyond their social usefulness.
Perhaps most disappointing is the lack of creativity in the development, labor, and environmental chapters. Yes, they rhetorically defend global economic development, labor standards, and environmental sustainability, but they do so without specific enforcement powers. Why is it that companies can force arbitration tribunals to defend their investor rights, but workers have no such power? Why is climate change not even considered in the draft, despite the fact that it represents the most important environmental threat of the 21st century, and may have strong implications for future trade rules?
Congress should vote no on the current TPP, while simultaneously endorsing its trade provisions as well as continuing the work with our counterparts on the other chapters. The current drafts on investor rights, the environment, labor, and intellectual property make extravagant concessions to powerful corporate interests while leaving important social and environmental commitments vague and generally unenforceable. Globalization is indeed so important for our common good that its of overriding significance to get it right.