Academic: The TPP Is Too Flawed For A ‘Yes’ Vote In Congress

image_pdfimage_print

TN Note: The author of this story is the Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. Generally, Democrats are against TPP while Republicans are for it. By contrast, Democrats are for global warming and Sustainable Development, while Republicans are against them. What neither faction realizes is that both TPP and Sustainable Development are being created by the same people for a common purpose. So, when you scratch your head at articles like this, which says TPP does far to little on Sustainable Development, elevate your horizon and look at the bigger picture.

Globalization is a positive and powerful force for good, if it is embedded in the right kind of ethical and legal framework. Yet the current draft of the Trans-Pacific Partnership is not worthy of a simple thumbs-up by the Congress. Without jettisoning the purported goals of TPP, the 12 signatories should slow down, take the pieces of this complex trade agreement in turn and work harder for a set of international standards that will truly support global sustainable development.

The TPP should be judged on whether it guarantees global economic well-being, not whether it gives advantages to the United States to the detriment of other countries. The ultimate goal of economic policy should be to raise the well-being of all parts of society, including the poor and middle class. Agreements that help the rich at the expense of the poor, capital at the expense of labor, or particular sectors at the expense of consumers should be viewed with skepticism.

The Obama administration surely negotiated the TPP in good faith, and the accord would likely add to global and U.S. economic growth. This is not a pernicious accord, the fruits of a secret cabal as some have feared. Nor is globalization an evil to be fought tooth and nail. The sad truth, however, is that while the administration promised a 21st-century agreement, we have yet another late 20th-century agreement. And we already know the likely results: economic growth at the expense of widening income inequality; excessive power of big pharma, big finance and other sectors with strong lobbying power; and the growing threats of negative-sum trade conflict with China.

The agreement, with its 30 chapters, is really four complex deals in one.

The first is a free-trade deal among the signatories. That part could be signed today. Tariff rates would come down to zero; quotas would drop; trade would expand; and protectionism would be held at bay.

The second is a set of regulatory standards for trade. Most of these are useful, requiring that regulations that limit trade should be based on evidence, not on political whims or hidden protectionism.

The third is a set of regulations governing investor rights, intellectual property and regulations in key service sectors, including financial services, telecommunications, e-commerce and pharmaceuticals. These chapters are a mix of the good, the bad and the ugly. Their common denominator is that they enshrine the power of corporate capital above all other parts of society, including labor and even governments.

The fourth is a set of standards on labor and environment that purport to advance the cause of social fairness and environmental sustainability. But the agreements are thin, unenforceable and generally unimaginative. For example, climate change is not even mentioned, much less addressed boldly and creatively.

Read full article here…

 

Join our mailing list!


avatar
1 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
1 Comment authors
dennisambler Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
dennisambler
Guest
dennisambler

Jeffrey Sachs Earth Institute is part funded by Soros’ Open Society Foundation and Soros is on the Advisory Board. He was involved in the “hi-jacking” of the Pope, with Potsdam’s John Schellnhuber, in the production of the Encyclical which pushed for controls on carbon based energy. He is also Special Advisor to United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. From 2002 to 2006, he was Director of the UN Millennium Project and Special Advisor to United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan on the Millennium Development Goals, Agenda 21. In 2009, Sachs addressed the annual conference of the Party of European Socialists: https://vimeo.com/8673040 He… Read more »