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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Akamai

(1,779 posts)
16. Don't you remember the secrecy of the TPP? with Senators, Congress Persons
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 04:57 PM
Jan 2017

unable to view the treaty until shortly before it was to be voted on? They were not even allowed to take notes of the treaty so they could ask experts what the treaty stated.

Take a look at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/09/24/do-trade-negotiations-have-to-be-done-in-secret-heres-what-experts-think/?utm_term=.ccd99aab00f9

These negotiations were conducted in secret until the very end, and in the above 9-24-15 article, this was stated:

"In August, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) announced that he is blocking a trade nominee to protest the Obama administration’s secrecy in the negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal. Even the draft document is classified, which critics find objectionable."

I go with Senator Sherrod Brown on this issue!

This kind of secrecy about this issue almost certainly ramped up mistrust of the current administration.

Since Nixon first came up with the idea of "fast tracking" trade agreements with an up or down vote (and no ability to modify portions of the trade agreements with legislation), our trade agreements have been proposed in secret, have passed with almost entirely Republican votes, and have led to job-loss.

I would imagine these issues would have really motivated people to vote for Trump.

As Thom Hartmann has long been saying, "If a candidate opposed international trade treaties like the TPP, then that candidate may well win the general election."

From the AFL-CIO comes this comment:

"Labor's So-Called "Seat at the Table" at TPP Negotiations

"For the average citizen, the negotiating process for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is anything but transparent. The negotiators for the United States and the other 11 TPP countries (Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Japan, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam) meet in private. The negotiating texts are not public. Even Members of Congress do not have unlimited access and cannot seek advice from outside experts.

"The TPP, like many of the failed trade agreements that came before it, will cover issues including health, food safety, conservation and environmental protections, Wall Street regulations, labor rights, and a whole host of other issues that, under our system of government, would have to be debated publicly in Congress before becoming law. But because the U.S. government treats trade deals differently than all other policies—it is allowed to negotiate rules that affect our lives in these areas behind closed doors. This is undemocratic.

"I’ve heard “labor” has a seat at the table and gets to see the TPP texts. Is this true?
No. Under U.S. law, there are several trade advisers—private citizens appointed by the President—who advise on trade policies. Of these advisers, the vast majority
(85% according to the Washington Post) represent businesses. About 5% of the advisers represent labor. The other 10% represent local and state government officials, academics, think tanks and non-governmental organizations. Labor advisers are allowed to review and advise on draft U.S. proposals—advice that the United States Trade Representative (USTR) can freely ignore. But we are locked out of the negotiating room and cannot see the actual negotiating texts, which combine the proposals from all 12 countries and evolve over time as negotiations progress. Nor can we share what we learn with members without violating national security laws."

http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Fast-Track-Legislation/Labor-s-So-Called-Seat-at-the-Table-at-TPP-Negotiations

With the above concerns, it is not too difficult to think of reasons why union members voted for Trump.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

It didn't register high w voters in the polls I saw, so nope. bettyellen Jan 2017 #1
And major proponents of the TPP outperformed Trump in their respective states... Garrett78 Jan 2017 #33
Russia harmed the election. Period. Nuff said. shraby Jan 2017 #2
Sure didn't help. Schema Thing Jan 2017 #3
I'm betting down-the-road we'll appreciate Obama's support for trade. Canada's Trudea likes TPP. Hoyt Jan 2017 #4
Agreed. I think we'll learn to appreciate a lot about his vision in the next couple years. JHan Jan 2017 #8
I think it was Hillary's past support for TPP that harmed Hillary NobodyHere Jan 2017 #5
She called it the gold standard while she was Secretary of State... JHan Jan 2017 #6
They may be true NobodyHere Jan 2017 #7
Well to be fair, some provisions changed. JHan Jan 2017 #9
What provisions in TPP changed? NobodyHere Jan 2017 #10
I'm not sure, tbh I'm just guessing. JHan Jan 2017 #11
I don't see any indications of important changes in the TPP. At the same time, Akamai Jan 2017 #12
Actually, if you look there were unions, environmentalists, universities, economists, and many more Hoyt Jan 2017 #13
It wasn't all held in secret. JHan Jan 2017 #14
Don't you remember the secrecy of the TPP? with Senators, Congress Persons Akamai Jan 2017 #16
Regarding fast track: JHan Jan 2017 #19
Every major trade agreement since Nixon was negotiated in secrecy, was opposed Akamai Jan 2017 #22
Our representatitives do know: JHan Jan 2017 #23
Senators Brown, Merkley, Warren and Sanders Akamai Jan 2017 #24
And some economists do support it. JHan Jan 2017 #25
no. her suppoet for blm undocumented immigrants and refugees hurt her JI7 Jan 2017 #15
HRC and Obama should have been strong on how they felt about the TPP Rex Jan 2017 #17
Obama was very, very clear all along -- he was hugely for it although when Akamai Jan 2017 #18
The polling and interview I've seen mcar Jan 2017 #20
Look at the dislike of TPP with Trump supporters... Akamai Jan 2017 #21
thats nice, but they still voted for Kasich , johnson over feingold and portman over strickland JI7 Jan 2017 #26
Things are cumulative -- maybe they would have been more likely to vote for Hillary (I think so) if Akamai Jan 2017 #27
Hillary did better than dems who were anti trade and worst than dems who were pro trade JI7 Jan 2017 #28
I thought Hillary was a perfectly fine candidate but I Akamai Jan 2017 #32
I sent Feingold a fair amount of money but Johnson got more and more and more... snowy owl Jan 2017 #29
Wisconsin continually has elected Scott Walker for Governor JI7 Jan 2017 #30
Their hatred of Obama encompasses everything he did or supported ... bettyellen Jan 2017 #37
Now it's Obama's fault. Is there anyone else we need to blame before we get to HIllary? Exilednight Jan 2017 #31
No one's fault but seems okay to try to understand Akamai Jan 2017 #35
It helped cost her the election no doubt taught_me_patience Jan 2017 #34
I guess you are right that coastal dems were not as anti-TPP Akamai Jan 2017 #36
Right, Comey... voter suppression and Russia had NOTHING to do with why she lost :rolleyes: uponit7771 Jan 2017 #38
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Did Obama's strong suppor...»Reply #16