Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumSen Warren: "Pres.Obama, SAVE Our American JOBS!" NO TPP Fast Track!!! - Ed Schultz
(Above video from Jan. 19th to explain TPP in a nutshell, action this week laid out in article (4/14/15) below.)
http://www.thenation.com/blog/204185/breaking-leading-house-democrat-will-oppose-tpp-fast-track
Breaking: Leading House Democrat Will Oppose TPP Fast Track
As legislation to fast-track Congressional approval of the Trans-Pacific Partnership gets ready to finally make its debut in Congress this week, a top Democratic member of the House announced he would oppose the bill.
Representative Chris Van Hollen, the ranking member of the House Budget Committee, wrote in a letter Representative Sandy Levin, the ranking member of the House Ways & Means Committee, that he would oppose fast-track authority, also known as Trade Promotion Authority or TPA. The letter was obtained by The Nation and its authenticity was confirmed by an aide to Van Hollen.
Van Hollen opposed a previous iteration of fast-track legislation last year, as did most other top Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. But so far, many of those Democrats (including Van Hollen) had not yet announced a position on the new TPA legislation being hammered out by Senators Ron Wyden, Orrin Hatch, and Representative Paul Ryan. (Levin opted out of those talks, and believes Congress should see at least the outline of a trade deal before taking up legislation to fast-track its approval.) Pelosi still remains publicly undecided.
If Van Hollena visible member of the Democratic caucus and ranking member of a major committeeultimately supported the Wyden-Hatch-Ryan bill, it would have been a signal that House Democrats were ready to go along with the Obama administrations trade agenda. But in his letter, Van Hollen wrote it is clear that many [of my concerns] will not be included in a revised TPA.
While the legislation remains behind closed doors for now, Van Hollen said continuing public opposition from Republicans made it clear that the TPA legislation wouldnt include additional currency, labor, and environmental provisions. Moreover, he wrote that since TPA was being unveiled so close to the conclusion of the overall trade talks, it is clearly too late for TPA to have any meaningful impact on the shape of TPP negotiations.
Like virtually all Democrats, Van Hollen cited concerns that enforceable currency manipulation obligations would not be included in the trade deal.
He also said he objects to further entrenching the investor-state dispute settlement process, which according to negotiating documents leaked last month by Wikileaks will be included in the TPP deal. Those provisions set up a process of international tribunals where foreign companies can challenge regulatory actions by sovereign governments, and seek financial damages for any lost profit as a result of regulation. Van Hollen wrote that a TPP that allows for increased investor lawsuits could undermine a governments right to regulate in the public interest and involve the US in costly and detrimental lawsuits covered by American taxpayers.
Van Hollen further cited concerns over labor standards in some of the signatory countries, particularly Vietnam, and said he insists on an agreement that includes strong and enforceable labor protections as well as an action plan to ensure that countries are complying with internationally recognized labor rights.
The next several days will be crucial for the fate of TPA. Many Democrats have so far remained neutral or muted on the ongoing talks, but as the legislation finally proceeds towards a vote, several leading and visible Democrats like Van Hollen will start to take positions. Activists were heartened that Van Hollen dropped an early marker in the fight. This letter lists some good reasons why fast track is in troubleincluding investor lawsuits, currency manipulation, and workers rightsbut this will come down to the growing realization that fast track will make it easier to send American jobs overseas, said Jason Stanford of the Coalition to Stop Fast Track.
Representative Chris Van Hollen, the ranking member of the House Budget Committee, wrote in a letter Representative Sandy Levin, the ranking member of the House Ways & Means Committee, that he would oppose fast-track authority, also known as Trade Promotion Authority or TPA. The letter was obtained by The Nation and its authenticity was confirmed by an aide to Van Hollen.
Van Hollen opposed a previous iteration of fast-track legislation last year, as did most other top Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. But so far, many of those Democrats (including Van Hollen) had not yet announced a position on the new TPA legislation being hammered out by Senators Ron Wyden, Orrin Hatch, and Representative Paul Ryan. (Levin opted out of those talks, and believes Congress should see at least the outline of a trade deal before taking up legislation to fast-track its approval.) Pelosi still remains publicly undecided.
If Van Hollena visible member of the Democratic caucus and ranking member of a major committeeultimately supported the Wyden-Hatch-Ryan bill, it would have been a signal that House Democrats were ready to go along with the Obama administrations trade agenda. But in his letter, Van Hollen wrote it is clear that many [of my concerns] will not be included in a revised TPA.
While the legislation remains behind closed doors for now, Van Hollen said continuing public opposition from Republicans made it clear that the TPA legislation wouldnt include additional currency, labor, and environmental provisions. Moreover, he wrote that since TPA was being unveiled so close to the conclusion of the overall trade talks, it is clearly too late for TPA to have any meaningful impact on the shape of TPP negotiations.
Like virtually all Democrats, Van Hollen cited concerns that enforceable currency manipulation obligations would not be included in the trade deal.
He also said he objects to further entrenching the investor-state dispute settlement process, which according to negotiating documents leaked last month by Wikileaks will be included in the TPP deal. Those provisions set up a process of international tribunals where foreign companies can challenge regulatory actions by sovereign governments, and seek financial damages for any lost profit as a result of regulation. Van Hollen wrote that a TPP that allows for increased investor lawsuits could undermine a governments right to regulate in the public interest and involve the US in costly and detrimental lawsuits covered by American taxpayers.
Van Hollen further cited concerns over labor standards in some of the signatory countries, particularly Vietnam, and said he insists on an agreement that includes strong and enforceable labor protections as well as an action plan to ensure that countries are complying with internationally recognized labor rights.
The next several days will be crucial for the fate of TPA. Many Democrats have so far remained neutral or muted on the ongoing talks, but as the legislation finally proceeds towards a vote, several leading and visible Democrats like Van Hollen will start to take positions. Activists were heartened that Van Hollen dropped an early marker in the fight. This letter lists some good reasons why fast track is in troubleincluding investor lawsuits, currency manipulation, and workers rightsbut this will come down to the growing realization that fast track will make it easier to send American jobs overseas, said Jason Stanford of the Coalition to Stop Fast Track.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 1428 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (19)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sen Warren: "Pres.Obama, SAVE Our American JOBS!" NO TPP Fast Track!!! - Ed Schultz (Original Post)
mother earth
Apr 2015
OP
Excellent. Good for Rep. Chris Van Hollen of MD, bright legislator. A Dutch Democrat too.
appalachiablue
Apr 2015
#1
appalachiablue
(41,175 posts)1. Excellent. Good for Rep. Chris Van Hollen of MD, bright legislator. A Dutch Democrat too.
Thanks for the post.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)2. NO to TPP and NO to similar trade deals.
midnight
(26,624 posts)3. Kick
panfluteman
(2,067 posts)4. I Hate When Obama Tries to Play Two Sides of the Fence!
Like Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde - a political version of schizophrenia, or a split personality. Obama giveth jobs, and Obama taketh them away - but his name is NOT blessed! This is basically an advanced case, or perhaps a complication of, the political schizophrenia that started in his '08 presidential campaign, when he promised all this hope and change, but wound up delivering only spare change. Now, the cognitive dissonance is not sequential, it's simultaneous!
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)5. Thanks. I will e-mail my senators tomorrow.