"Their meetings are secret. Their members are generally unknown. The decisions they reach need not be fully disclosed."
(http://www.mindfully.org/WTO/NAFTA-Powerful-Secret.htm)
"Free" trade is an attack on democracy. No really.
Is it really right for a secret, unelected tribunal to have the power to overturn local and state laws protecting workers and the environment?
Because, that's exactly what's happening.....
The problem is that unable to achieve standing for regulatory "takings" claims in domestic courts, coporate lawyers and lobbyist have found a new tool to try to force the public to pay for their mistakes, Chapter 11 of the NAFTA treaty.
Under Chapter 11, corporations can sue state and local governments when they feel that laws issued by these jurisdictions consitute a non tariff barrier to trade.
So when California banned the use of MTBE in gasoline, because it contaminates ground water, a Canadian company, Methanex, sued for $970 million in damages from California. So states passing environmental laws put themselves in danger for a massive suit by corporations.
UPS is suing the Canadian postal service becauuse UPS believes the Canadian postal service recieves an unfair subisdy from the Canadian gov't because it is publically owned. UPS is seeking $160 million in damages. This opens up all public entities to Chapter 11 challenges. What if a private school group decides to file a suit against local school districts because they feel that public funding for schools is an unfair subsidy? Where does it end? Can they privatize Social security, the police, the military????
A list with some of the older cases is online at:
www.citizen.org/trade/nafta/CH__11/articles.cfm?ID=1177
Let alone being open to public scrutiny, it's very hard to judge the scale of Chapter 11 suits because the public is not these cases exist. You literally have to petition to get the info, and it's just very easy to hide the fact that there's even a suit going on.
Let's face it folks, this is a brazen assault of democracy and the poplar sovereignty.
I don't understand why Kerry hasn't gone after this issue. This is a powerful wedge issue. I am fully aware that Kerry was voted for NAFTA, but he also has a strong record of pushing for environmental and labor side agreements to trade treaties.
When the Republicans hand out flags to show that they're patriots, shouldn't we point out they were made in China? When the Republicans role out the idea that Bush is defending the sovereignty of the American people, shouldn't we show the way that his support for "free" trade and the neo-con job that seeks regulatory takings through the unaccountable, unelected tribunals is undermining the very idea that the people make the laws?