Why exactly is Obama pushing so hard for TPP?

[newworldafro]

Score one for the good guys

Who are the good guys you speak of?

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

worst part about this is "free trade" exists practically with every country already.

look up how Phillip Morris sued the Australian government (in Hong kong because of the Australian-Hong kong trade agreement) over the way cigarettes were labeled so they didn't appeal to kids. This is what this trade agreement will do. Philip Morris is based in the US but had operations in HK and got to be classified as an investor protecting their investment. They lost but this is the slippery slope you're on with TPP.

 

[Self_Born7]

its an expansion of the NAFTA, signed by Clinton, which saw the massive trade deficit we see today and loss of many manufacturing jobs here... this is the End Game! you think finding a job is hard now... you aint seen shyt yet

 

[blackzeus]

Obama lookin' kind of bad right now

 

[newworldafro]

The TPP hasn't fully passed, only the Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), removing Congressional negotiation authority on the details. It also states that when they bring the final document back to Congress for final approval, no filibuster, only 20 hours of debate, no amendments, and it can be changed by the corporate created commission.

1) Also, American civics class states that a treaty is passed by a 2/3 majority in the Senate, so there's that The vote in Senate was only 60-37, if that is considered approval, which according to Article II of the Constitution, it's not. So from now until the next "vote" comes up if you don't hear anything about a 2/3 majority/supermajority in the Senate then is it really a treaty?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause
Treaty Clause
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, includes the Treaty Clause, which empowers the President of the United States to propose and chiefly negotiate agreements, which must be confirmed by the Senate, between the United States and other countries, which become treaties between the United States and other countries after the advice and consent of a supermajority of the United States Senate.
Full text of the clause[edit]
[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur...

2) It is being said that corporations will be able to sue a government for impacting their profit share, filing a lawsuit in an international type court. Essentially, the corporate controlled board that will be created from TPP will typically side with the corporation.

EX: Company A is selling a product that makes people sick. Country A says to Company A, you can not sell this product in our country b/se there is material in the product that makes people sick. Company A uses this material b/se it is cheaper to use, and anything else will impact their profit margin. So they file a lawsuit in this international court.

Now ^^^ This already is happening in certain agreements, but the TPP will enshrine certain things in this "Treaty".

So there are environmental and health aspects of the TPP too that overstep laws and regulations.

Real Life Example of What to Expect:

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/an...owing-Trade-Under-the-TPP--20150623-0029.html

Analysis OceanaGold vs El Salvador: Foreshadowing 'Trade' Under the TPP?

The Central American country of El Salvador could be forced to pay US$301 million to Canadian-Australian mining multinational OceanaGold as the two face off in a World Bank investor-state tribunal with proven tendency to favor corporate interests over arguments for protecting national sovereignty, the environment, and human rights.

The pending case in El Salvador gives a glimpse into what can likely be expected if controversial trade deals like the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) go through. With strong “investor protections,” the TPP and TTIP will pave the way for many more instances of investor-state settlements that allow companies to sue governments for billions through highly secretive hearings and supra-national courts. The number of such corporate lawsuits levelled against countries in the World Bank’s little-known International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has skyrocketed over the past decade. According to Mining Watch, while just three cases where brought to the body in the year 2000, this climbed to 169 cases in 2013.

Trade agreements including NAFTA, DR-CAFTA, and hundreds of bilateral investment agreements include corporate-friendly provisions for investor-state settlement that allow companies, or investors, to sue governments if they claim their profits have been affected. Like the ICSID tribunal hearing the OceanGold-El Salvador case, the flood of corporate lawsuits expected under TTP and TTIP mechanisms will similarly take place in grossly imbalanced “arbitration tribunals,” often referred to by critics as kangaroo courts that have a vested interest in favoring corporations over national and international public interest.

OceanaGold Versus El Salvador, or Corporate Profits Versus Water Rights

OceanaGold filed a lawsuit against El Salvador in 2009 for not granting permission to the company’s El Dorado gold mine after the project failed to meet national regulatory requirements. Initially filed for US$77 million in the ICSID, OceanaGold has since upped the suit to US$301 million – amounting to about 5 percent of El Salvador’s GDP or equivalent to a three-year budget for health, education, and public security in the small Central American country. The ruling on the secretive proceeding is expected imminently.