The TPP: A Corporate Bill of Rights

[monicaangela]

One common definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.


Governments from around the world are gathering in New Zealand on Thursday to sign the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the TPP. People around the world are mobilizing to make sure that the agreement, even if signed, does not get ratified.

Why? It’s just another in a long line of trade deals that are aimed at growing our economies by increasing trade between our countries, right? At least that’s what we’re told.

What we aren’t told by our governments is that these so-called trade deals are really not very much about trade at all. They are international corporate constitutions, aimed at limiting the ability of our governments to control transnational corporate behavior: an international Corporate Bill of Rights.
*******************************************************************

As we place our interest in the primaries this is going on behind the scenes. I feel this is as important if not more important than the election. Please read this article and let me know what you think.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinion/The-Trans-Pacific-Partnership--A-Corporate-Bill-of-Rights--20160203-0006.html

[Hoyt]

1. Yep, all 12 governments party to TPP, and 50 something party to Tsatlantic are just corporate tools.

Actually, they want to attract the investment that brings jobs, tax revenue, etc. But they are all wrong, at least according to lay observers.

[monicaangela]

6. Actually,

What they are doing is trying to fix the laws in these nations so that the people have no recourse against their actions. If you will notice, more and more lately corporations are trying to get their patrons to agree to contracts that deny them the right to take them to court if they have a grievance. They are trying to get everyone to use arbitration to settle disputes. Arbitration is usually conducted by corporate lawyers.

[Hoyt]

10. Actually TPP arbitration is handled by one arbiter chosen by country, one by corporation, and one

by mutual agreement. Often they are college professors with expertise in area in dispute.

If you had a company, would you move to a country that might nationalize your assets with no recourse but suing in Their courts. Countries know that would not attract investment in country, so they agree to dispute mechanism.

Then people like Sanders and Warren make a big deal out of it because either they don't care about the truth, or believe enough people won't look it up and will just believe the BS.

[pampango]

12. The key to these arbitration panels is their makeup. FDR originated the idea of arbitration in trade

disputes in his International Trade Organization. So the concept is not inherently unfair or pro-corporate. For arbitration to be fair, as FDR envisioned, the rules to be enforced and the makeup of the panel have to be fair.

[monicaangela]

15. This is true

pampango. that is why I feel utilizing arbitration in this manner could be detrimental for the citizens of the nations participating in this agreement. The parties that make up the panels for the arbitration are appointed, not elected. I fear many of us will never know who these people are, we will most likely just be informed of a win or loss and in the case of a loss, how much of our taxes will be allocated to the injured party.

In regular arbitration, citizen against corporation for instance you give up your right to have a judge or jury decide your case in court, and you give up the right to file a lawsuit on behalf of other consumers who may have the same problem with the business. "To illustrate how losing your right to pursue claims on others’ behalf might affect you, let’s say Consumer Bank issued you a credit card. The bank consistently charges a $.50 handling fee for each statement. Even though this is illegal and you have asked the bank to stop, the charges continue. It would be too expensive to sue the bank over such a small amount of money, but if you could represent other Consumer Bank credit card customers as a class, then it would be feasible to file such a “class action” lawsuit. You would not be able to do this under a binding arbitration clause."

https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/Resources/LawYouCanUse/Pages/Understanding-Mandatory-Binding-Arbitration-in-Consumer-Contracts.aspx

[pampango]

16. I see your point. I am not sure that electing (on a 12-country level?) members of arbitration panels

is a good way to handle it. OTOH, the idea of candidates in 12 countries running for those positions makes for some interesting possibilities and speculation. Would you have some candidate running on a platform of "I will always rule in favor of my home country" and others saying "I will try to be objective and promote cooperation"?

Of course, we do not normally know who the arbitrators are on WTO, NAFTA and the thousands of other arbitration panels that adjudicate international disputes. The best way to handle disputes between nations is the way we do it with disputes between our states - with some form of formal judicial body with authority over the disputing parties.

That, of course, smacks of the dreaded One World Government - a favorite conspiracy theory of the right and some on the left. The right sees a future OWG evolving out of the UN while the left sees it more evolving out of the WTO, I think. Both institutions are FDR creations - the UN directly, of course, and the WTO by way of his ITO and Truman's GATT.

[monicaangela]

17. I really admire your knowledge regarding FDR

I agree with your assessment of the situation, electing these members in the manner we elect members of congress or the president, I don't think would be a good idea, however; I believe those who become members of these panels should be nominated as Supreme Court Justices are, scrutinized by the representatives of the people and the people themselves, and then be given a limited term if they pass that scrutiny, and we should have a clause that would allow us to impeach that person if we are dissatisfied with their actions while serving. The same should be true for any other nation involved in the agreement, and should be guaranteed in the contract for countries like Vietnam and others that do not have the same democratic system we do.

As far as the conspiracy theories go, I believe if we continue down this road of allowing corporations control over the citizens of nations, creating in effect, a borderless world for corporations and a life within borders for the rest of us, One World Government of by and for Corporations isn't too far fetched.

[monicaangela]

13. How about a case study...

This Is What Happened In El Salvador

As the Latin Times’ Susmita Baral explained last September:

"[Oceana Gold subsidiary] Oceana Gold subsidary Pacific Rim filed a complaint against El Salvador in 2009. In 2012, the ICSID ruled that the case could proceed under El Salvador’s foreign investment laws—laws which have since been amended to prevent international companies from bypassing Salvadoran courts.

“Officials said that Oceana Gold’s subsidiary, Pacific Rim] failed to meet three key legal requirements for a mining permit: It failed to get government approval for its Environmental Impact Study (EIS); It did not submit a required feasibility study; and it was not even close to meeting the requirement that it held titles to (or permission to mine in) all the land for which it requested a concession.

“[OceanaGold]Oceana Gold lobbied for a new mining law that it wrote and that would eliminate regulatory requirements it couldn’t meet. Having failed to push the law through, OceanaGold bypassed El Salvador’s democratically-elected government and initiated international arbitration to pressure El Salvador to pay for lost exploration costs and future profits.” Its exactly this kind of dispute that caused concerns for liberal lawmaker Elizabeth Warren because it weakened national sovereignty.

That doesn't sound like Sanders and Warren not telling the truth to me. It sounds more like a corporate takeover, using arbitration to bypass elected governments.

http://www.latintimes.com/el-salvadorian-activists-protest-tpp-lawsuit-how-pacific-rim-arbitration-case-preview-303775

[Hoyt]

14. The dispute has been going on since 2008. Oceana is not getting anywhere fast.

They have abandoned the mining operation. More telling, El Salvador continues to sign these agreements because the political uncertainty will leave them impoverished is foreign corporations go elsewhere. In the unlikely event Oceana prevails, they are still out and El Salvador will continue to sign such agreements because they need the capital. It's a sad situation, but the previous government did encourage Oceana to come to El Salvador for the jobs and tax money. Oceana has already lost one round, so prospects are very good.

[gyroscope]

22. Are you insane? You want to forfeit the sovereignty of your country

to these foreign arbitration panels that operate outside the bounds of your country's laws?
That is what is known as treason and traitors ought to be dealt with accordingly.

[Hoyt]

24. I'm used to hearing that sovereignty stuff from white wingers, like Sovereign Citizens.

No one is taking your sovereignty, so relax.

[gyroscope]

25. The corporation gets to decide who will be judging it?

" TPP arbitration is handled by one arbiter chosen by country, one by corporation, and one by mutual agreement."

Unelected officials who aren't even US citizens (and vulnerable to being bribed by corporations) get to make important decisions that impact the lives of American citizens. If that's not losing your sovereignty I don't know what is. I don't give a crap if they are left or right no American in their right mind would be supportive of that, and would be likely guilty of treason if they did. Which explains why the details of the TPP are being hidden from the public and the corporate media have been almost completely silent about it.

[Hoyt]

26. Most countries sign those agreements to attract investment. Companies aren't

going to invest in countries that can take their property while allowing domestic companies to operate the same way. That's not taking your sovereignty.

No details are hidden. The entire agreement was released months ago. Quit listening to BS from Warren, Sanders, etc.

[Rex]

11. Thanks for admitting it I will quote your title often.

Bout time you fessed up it is just a loaded dice game. Even if you are just a lay observer, thanks for the quote.

[Fast Walker 52]

19. so seriously, you have no problem with the TPP?

Corporations having more rights than countries?

[Kip Humphrey]

2. TPP == Gateway to Corporate Socialism

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

5. In the same way that the world aristocracy were socialists.

[monicaangela]

7. Exactly,

as if they were not getting enough welfare subsidies already. The people of this nation and the world had better wake up to these tactics before it is too late.

[polly7]

3. K&R. These agreements are all sickening corporate coups. The poorest of the poor will suffer

most, as always.

[monicaangela]

8. I agree polly7

Last edited Fri Feb 5, 2016, 11:33 AM - Edit history (1)

I think it is a shame the fact that the government leaders of this country and the other nations involved in this agreement are doing the bidding of the oligarchs.

[djean111]

4. It is a betrayal.

I will never support, in any way, anyone who signs it, shilled for it, voted for Fast Track, or votes yes on it.

[monicaangela]

9. I won't either djean111

I am going to make it a point to keep an eye on those who vote for this travesty, and use as much of my time, energy and finances to organize support to make sure they are voted out of office.

[gyroscope]

23. More than betrayal, it could be considered treason

someone who surrenders the sovereignty of their country to a foreign entity that operates outside the bounds of his or her country's control and laws would be guilty of treason.

[Fast Walker 52]

18. Insanity, a sell-out-- but importantly it can still be stopped in Congress

Last edited Fri Feb 5, 2016, 11:23 AM - Edit history (1)

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/2/4/lori_wallach_signing_of_tpp_marks

[monicaangela]

20. Thanks for the link Fast Walker 52

I watched that program this morning, excellent as always, I really appreciate the programing on Free Speech TV and Amy Goodman's show Democracy Now is one of my favorites. Insanity is correct. I'm not so sure we can count on someone who was for TPP before they were against it. That's why I am voting for Bernie Sanders and not Hillary Clinton.

[Fast Walker 52]

21. yep! Same here.

[Rossjerry52]

27. protest dildo in New Zealand

The govt official in charge of trade in NZ was accused of trying to rape the people of NZ with this agreement and threw a dildo at him. Great visual effect .

[Mike__M]

28. I don't know anything about NZer's rights

But in the U.S. dildo chucking ought to fall within the protections of the 1st Amendment. Whaddaya think, Justice Scalia?