Since the election on Tuesday, both Obama and Mitch McConnell have highlighted trade as a potential source of bipartisanship. Obama has been negotiating two large trade deals--the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Harry Reid has been hostile to these deals so far---and rightfully so, given that they are major corporate giveaways that would be bad for the environment, workers, and democracy. But Republicans, unsurprisingly, love them.
The administration has been very secretive about the details of the TPP negotiations---even more secretive than the Bush administration. And it's not surprising given how negative the public response could be.
A central feature of both TTIP and the TPP is the investor-state dispute settlement process, which would effectively give large corporations veto power over policy (more so than they already have). Here's George Monbiot of the dangers of ISDS:
The central problem is what the negotiators call investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). The treaty would allow corporations to sue governments before an arbitration panel composed of corporate lawyers, at which other people have no representation, and which is not subject to judicial review.
Already, thanks to the insertion of ISDS into much smaller trade treaties, big business is engaged in an orgy of litigation, whose purpose is to strike down any law that might impinge on its anticipated future profits. The tobacco firm Philip Morris is suing governments in Uruguay and Australia for trying to discourage people from smoking. The oil firm Occidental was awarded $2.3bn in compensation from Ecuador, which terminated the company’s drilling concession in the Amazon after finding that Occidental had broken Ecuadorean law. The Swedish company Vattenfall is suing the German government for shutting down nuclear power. An Australian firm is suing El Salvador’s government for $300m for refusing permission for a goldmine over concerns it would poison the drinking water.
The same mechanism, under TTIP, could be used to prevent UK governments from reversing the privatisation of the railways and the NHS, or from defending public health and the natural world against corporate greed. The corporate lawyers who sit on these panels are beholden only to the companies whose cases they adjudicate, who at other times are their employers.
…
So outrageous is this arrangement that even the Economist, usually the champion of corporate power and trade treaties, has now come out against it. It calls investor-state dispute settlement “a way to let multinational companies get rich at the expense of ordinary people”.
Leaked text about the TPP shows how it would entail
backdoor financial deregulation, prohibiting bans on risky financial services and undermining efforts to end “too big to fail." It would also extend the monopoly power of pharmaceutical companies, denying access to affordable drugs to millions. It would also pose a
threat to privacy and Internet freedom.
As I noted earlier this year, Obama has been fully willing to pass "free" trade deals despite majority opposition from his own party in Congress, particularly the House.
The United States Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act passed the House 262 to 167. House Democrats, however, opposed it 158 to 31.
It passed the Senate 66 to 33. However, the members of the Senate Democratic caucus opposed it 31 to 22.
The United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act passed the House 300 to 129. However, House Democrats opposed it 123 to 66.
It passed the Senate 77 to 22. Democratic caucus support was the inverse of what it was for the Colombia deal: 31 to 22 in favor.
The United States-Korea Trade Agreement Implementation Act passed the House 278 to 151. However, House Democrats opposed it 130 to 59.
It passed the Senate 83 to 15. The Democratic caucus supported it 38 to 14.
I analyzed the roll calls on these votes to see which Democrats who will be returning for the 114th Congress consistently voted against all three.
I found 73 Democrats in the House:
Karen Bass (CA-37)
Bob Brady (PA-01)
Corinne Brown (FL-05)
G. K. Butterfield (NC-01)
Lois Capps (CA-24)
Mike Capuano (MA-07)
Andre Carson (IN-07)
Judy Chu (CA-27)
David Cicilline (RI-01)
Yvette Clarke (NY-09)
Lacy Clay (MO-01)
Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Steve Cohen (TN-09)
John Conyers (MI-13)
Joe Courtney (CT-02)
Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Pete DeFazio (OR-04)
Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Ted Deutch (FL-21)
Mike Doyle (PA-14)
Donna Edwards (MD-04)
Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Marcia Fudge (OH-11)
John Garamendi (CA-03)
Al Green (TX-09)
Gene Green (TX-29)
Raul Grijalva (AZ-03)
Luis Gutiérrez (IL-04)
Janice Hahn (CA-44)
Alcee Hastings (FL-20)
Brian Higgins (NY-26)
Mike Honda (CA-17)
Steve Israel (NY-03)
Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18)
Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
William Keating (MA-09)
Dan Kildee (MI-5)
Jim Langevin (RI-02)
Barbara Lee (CA-13)
John Lewis (GA-05)
Dan Lipinski (IL-03)
David Loebsack (IA-02)
Zoe Lofgren (CA-19)
Ben Luján (NM-03)
Stephen Lynch (MA-08)
Betty McCollum (MN-04)
Jim McGovern (MA-02)
Jerry McNerney (CA-09)
Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Jerry Nadler (NY-10)
Grace Napolitano (CA-32)
Frank Pallone (NJ-06)
Ed Perlmutter (CO-07)
Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-40)
Dutch Ruppersberger (MD-02)
Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Tim Ryan (OH-13)
Linda Sánchez (CA-38)
John Sarbanes (MD-03)
Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Bobby Scott (VA-03)
Jose Serrano (NY-15)
Brad Sherman (CA-30)
Jackie Speier (CA-14)
Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
John Tierney (MA-06)
Paul Tonko (NY-20)
Nydia Velázquez (NY-07)
Peter Visclosky (IN-01)
Maxine Waters (CA-43)
John Yarmuth (KY-03)
Honda and McNerney's races have not been officially called yet, but both are on track to win.
Louise Slaughter (NY-25), who will hopefully maintain her seat (The race has yet to be called), and Frederica Wilson (FL-24) were not in attendance for any of the votes. Louise Slaughter voted against NAFTA, and I would assume she would have opposed these as well. Both she and Wilson did, though, sign a letter organized by Rosa DeLauro to oppose the reauthorization of fast-track authority.
The freshman Democrats of the 113th Congress did not vote on any such trade deals. 31 of them who were just re-elected did, however, sign DeLauro's letter.
Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-01)
Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)
Jared Huffman (CA-02)
Eric Swalwell (CA-15)
Gloria Negrette McLeod (CA-35)
Raul Ruiz (CA-36)
Mark Takano (CA-41)
Alan Lowenthal (CA-47)
Juan Vargas (CA-51)
Elizabeth Esty (CT-05)
Alan Grayson (FL-09)
Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
Lois Frankel (FL-22)
Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02)
Cheri Bustos (IL-17)
Joe Kennedy (MA-04)
Dan Kildee (MI-05)
Rick Nolan (MN-08)
Dina Titus (NV-01)
Ann Kuster (NH-02)
Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM-01)
Grace Meng (NY-06)
Hakeem Jeffries (NY-08)
Sean Maloney (NY-18)
Joyce Beatty (OH-03)
Matt Cartwright (PA-17)
Beto O’Rourke (TX-16)
Joaquin Castro (TX-20)
Filemon Vela (TX-34)
Derek Kilmer (WA-06)
Mark Pocan (WI-02)
Ami Bera (CA-07), Julia Brownley (CA-26), and Ami Bera (CA-52) did as well, but their races have yet to be called.
I cannot vouch for the 16 freshman Democrats of the 114th Congress.
Now, let's look at the Senate.
9 Democrats who will be in the Senate in the 114th Congress consistently voted against the so-called “free trade” deals.
Richard Blumenthal (CT)
Sherrod Brown (OH)
Bob Casey (PA)
Joe Manchin (WV)
Jeff Merkley (OR)
Jack Reed (RI)
Harry Reid (NV)
Jon Tester (MT)
Sheldon Whitehouse (RI)
Bernie Sanders (I-VT) was not in attendance for the vote Korean “free trade” bill, but he voted against the other two (and NAFTA) and is vocal in his criticism of such trade policy.
And then there are seven who voted against all three bills when they were in the House:
Tammy Baldwin (WI)
Joe Donnelly (IN)
Martin Heinrich (NM)
Mazie Hirono (HI)
Ed Markey (MA)
Chris Murphy (CT)
Gary Peters (MI)
I cannot vouch either way for Heidi Heitkamp (ND). However, given her vote against US Trade Representative Michael Froman, her criticism of the TPP, and her stated opposition to renewing fast-track authority, I would be willing to add Elizabeth Warren to the list.
There's a base of opposition among the Democratic caucus, but it's far from sufficient.