"Trade is good" says Chris Mathews this morning on Morning Joe. This follows his interview Tuesday with President Obama who, after being asked by Mathews why some democrats like Elizabeth Warren were so steadfastly against the latest and largest trade deal since NAFTA, the Trans-Pacific-Partnership.
After claiming Elizabeth Warren and countless other Democrats are "Just wrong", President Obama suggested that the new TPP contains, "Protections for workers never before included in a trade deal" These "protections" include parameters for protection of labor, environment and programs to assist displaced workers.
To be perfectly honest, the TPP, or what has been leaked of it so far, does seem to have far more protections than those of previous deals such as NAFTA. Still, Labor unions and Progressive groups are staunchly against such a deal with the AFL-CIO prepared to spend six figures to discourage people from supporting Fast-track Authority to President Obama in making the final TPP deal.
What is NOT being said about the trade deal, is a simple provision called ISDS or Investor-State Dispute Settlement. ISDS is a provision included in virtually every major trade deal including the TPP.
What this simple provision does, is to allow big Multi-National Corporations to settle disputes over such things as a sovereign nation's rules and regulations including the very environmental, worker and government regulations that President Obama assures us are the centerpiece of the TPP's arrangement. When such a dispute occurs and an investor feels that a particular law, regulation or worker protection hurts their bottom-line, they can take their case to an international Arbitral Tribunal. If the investor wins their case, than they no longer have to abide by such law.
Basically, our sovereignty as a nation, along with our ability to put laws into place that protect us from companies that may wish to dispose of toxic chemicals into our waterways, into the air, or even using toxic chemicals in the making of our children's toys and other products, is compromised. Under ISDS our ability as the people of a sovereign nation and our ability to make laws protecting us from the abuses of Big Business take the backseat to the interests of investors and Multi-Nationals.
To sum it up, when an investor feels his bottom-line is in jeopardy, the investor goes to an international arbitral tribunal, as secretively as possible, to have the issue settled. Now, President Obama has assured us that such a deal will be more transparent than ever before. But judging by previous disputes, that doesn't mean very much. These tribunals are held in secret international courts, with a secret panel of judges and in most cases the investor wins and no longer has to follow a particular nation's laws so long as it costs the investor money.
Over the years, these cases have included everything from environmental protections to labor laws, allowing such companies to pollute however they see fit as well as avoiding paying workers proper salaries or following employee safety rules. How long will we allow our leaders to continue putting the needs of investors before our sovereignty and our right to legislate new laws governing the protection of workers as well as those that live near factories and plants? These are our most basic rights as a republic and basically, the rights of Corporations are given priority over the lives of those affected by said Corporations.
Yet, somehow, mention of ISDS is minimal. Instead of answering legitimate questions raised by concerns over ISDS and its secret tribunals held by secret judges and lawyers, our pundits and leaders, living in a corporate dreamland want to picture the issues surrounding the TPP as a simplistic debate over potential job losses or job gains. But this kind talk is clearly being deflective.
The fact is that the TPP, with all of its strict parameters involving protections for individuals, still contains an ISDS clause. No amount of regulatory law will matter if investors can just take the government to court over regulatory disputes. Not only is this a bad deal for the regulatory gains made in recent years, its a bad deal for Americans and small businesses that will see little or no gains from the TPP but ever more risk to their lives.
Even as we speak, Multi-National Corporations are suing the federal government using these same clauses to force the courts to throw out proposed EPA rules because they could cost these company's money.
We are on a steady march to allow companies rights beyond, not just that of individual citizens but even those of our government. Any deal that involves an ISDS clause is a bad deal no matter how you look at it. It's not that I am against globalization, in fact, I see it as a good thing to be more interconnected with nations all across the world. But to actively give away our freedom to legislate and regulate protections for ordinary Americans isn't just wrongheaded, it's another testament to the power that these companies hold.
That's not being an isolationist, instead it's a legitimate concern that the President and others who support the deal should have to answer for before we agree to give the President Fast-track authority.