Trans-Pacific Partnership a Potential Disaster for American Workers
November 12, 2013Student Blogs ArticleMarx and Engels anticipated globalization. One hundred and sixty-five years later, capital has risen to the firmament where it can move instantaneously, unencumbered by states or social contracts. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), though shrouded in secrecy, seems poised to make global capital even less accountable, and to accelerate the race to the bottom. A spectre haunts the pacific, and the spectre is an extreme, dystopian brand of global capitalism.
The Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement (TPSEP) is a free trade agreement between Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore. For the past several years, a handful of other nations, including the United States, have been conducting negotiations to enter into an expanded TPSEP, known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The sensitive nature of the negotiations prevents us from knowing exactly what our corporate overlords have in store for us. According to one source, about six hundred lobbyists have had a chance to look at the draft texts. Members of Congress, however, have not been afforded the same opportunity. Much of what is known about the TPP comes from Wikileaks and Citizens Trade Campaign.
According to Citizens Trade Campaign, a leaked draft contained a “dispute resolution process that would grant transnational corporations special authority to challenge countries’ laws, regulations and court decisions in international tribunals that circumvent domestic judicial systems.” One writer has characterized the TPP as an agreement that “grants loads of rights to international corporations and locks those rights in place with an international tribunal of three corporate lawyers.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation has expressed concern that the TPP will “require signatory counties to adopt heightened copyright protection that advances the agenda of the US entertainment and pharmaceutical industries agendas.” Like other trade pacts, the TPP will erode national sovereignty in the area of environmental law. It will be up to international tribunals to decide whether new environmental laws and regulations constitute regulatory takings. The AFL-CIO seems to hold out some hope that the agreement won’t be an unmitigated disaster, but they are obviously very concerned. The Citizens Trade Campaign also states that “Wall Street banks, insurance companies and hedge funds want the financial services provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership to handcuff the steps governments can take to: protect against ‘too big to fail,’ regulate trade in toxic assets, erect firewalls between different financial service firms and control the flow of short-term capital into and out of economies.” According to David Swanson, the TPP will ban “buy American” procurement policies, as well as preferential treatment for minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses, and businesses that respect their workers.
The list goes on. An exhaustive list of everything that is frightening about the TPP is beyond the scope of this post. Pretty much every terrible thing that one can imagine is included or rumored to be included in drafts of the TPP.
What is perhaps the most alarming aspect of the TPP, is that the TPP aims to phase out import tariffs on all items, possibly within a thirty-year period. I fail to understand why the United States would want to phase out import tariffs. I guess I may be naïve, but I thought tariffs were an important tool that the United States once used to prevent our workers from the need to compete with foreign workers who are easier to exploit. The world is flat, and it is a nightmare. Globalization has temporarily lifted some people out of abject poverty, but as soon as they demand something more than subsistence, capital will move on to more easily exploitable workers.
We should be moving in the other direction. We should pull out of NAFTA and the WTO. Twenty years of evidence demonstrates that NAFTA has been a failure, and there is no need to replicate that failure on a grander scale. We should direct our trade representative to put the interests of the American workers first, and we should refuse to be a part of any shady backroom deal that may have been enacted for the benefit of Wal Mart, Cargill, and other large corporations. We should certainly not tolerate a power structure in which multinational corporations craft policy of profound global importance while our elected representatives are kept in the dark. This is what plutocracy looks like. There is strong opposition to NAFTA-style free trade agreements among Americans of all political persuasions. We should do everything we can do to prevent the power elite from repeating and compounding the mistakes of the past, but I am not holding my breath.
You may also like
3 comments
- November 2024
- October 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- October 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- April 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- August 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- June 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
“We should certainly not tolerate a power structure in which multinational corporations craft policy of profound global importance while our elected representatives are kept in the dark.”
Since the rise of corporations, hasn’t this been the case? Haven’t we tolerated it?
Definitely, Brian. But hope springs eternal.
Its interestingly how NAFTA discussions these days seems to be off-limits. In a recent article discussing whether, 20 years later, NAFTA was “successful” (http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/01/19/20-years-on-effect-of-nafta-is-modest.html) only examines the effect of NAFTA on the American economy, and does not address the impact free trade has had on ‘developing’ countries.