Fast Track to Banana Republic

In a move that elicited a collective groan from virtually all of progressive America, the Obama administration and congressional Republicans reached a deal on April 16 on so-called “fast track” trade authority. This is the legislation needed to ram new trade agreements through the U.S. Congress with limited debate and no amendments.

[...]

The bill lays out trade policy objectives that elevate the narrow interests of large corporations and undercut efforts to support good jobs, the environment, and financial stability.

Nowhere is this corporate bias more explicit than in the “investor-state” dispute settlement mechanism. In fact it would be hard to find in any U.S. policy a stronger example of excessive power granted to large corporations. Under this mechanism, private foreign investors are allowed to sue governments in international tribunals over actions—including public interest regulations— that reduce the value of their investments.

[...]

You would think the proliferation of such “investor-state” suits in recent years would give policymakers pause. Here we are, for example, in the middle of the climate crisis, and yet investors are allowed to sue governments over policies to encourage renewable energy. In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, we have a case against Germany over their decision to phase out nuclear power. And at a time when tobacco-related health costs total about half a trillion dollars per year, Philip Morris is suing the governments of Australia and Uruguay over anti-smoking laws.

What I find particularly galling is that in the wake of the financial crisis, we still have trade agreements that allow private investors to sue governments if they use policies called capital controls to deal with destabilizing hot money flows. Good grief, it was back in the aftermath of the 1990s global financial crisis that reasonable people started pointing out the foolishness of such policies.

  War Times

But “people” don’t run things.

On a conference call with a small group of reporters, President Obama significantly intensified his criticism of Elizabeth Warren and other opponents of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, accusing them of being “dishonest” about the secrecy around the TPP process, suggesting they were playing to their “fundraising” lists, and arguing flatly that they were using “misinformation that stirs up the base but doesn’t serve them well.”

[...]

“The one that gets on my nerves the most is the notion that this is a ‘secret’ deal,” Obama said. “Every single one of the critics who I hear saying, ‘this is a secret deal,’ or send out emails to their fundraising base saying they’re working to prevent this secret deal, can walk over today and read the text of the agreement. There’s nothing secret about it.”

[...]

Obama allowed that some parts of the deal cannot currently be read, but argued that allowing those portions that have not yet been finalized to receive public exposure could undermine ongoing negotiations.

  Greg Sargent

But that’s not secret. I wonder what secret means.

Obama actually said that there are “brackets” for parts of it that are not finalized, meaning that those parts don’t actually exist yet.

TBA. After it’s done.

How can anyone with even a pretense of being "progressive" look at economic issues we face -- most of them tied to raging plutocracy - and say, "you know, what we REALLY need to do now is push a corporate agenda of fast tracking "free" trade deals"?

The fact that Obama has made TPP his key 2nd term economic priority says one (or both) of two things -- and I don't know which is worse.

Either Obama and his administration never had the slightest intention of doing anything other than push a corporate economic agenda, or they've gotten behind TPP because they think it's a get, a doable deal -- something to add to list of presidential accomplishments.

Either motive would be depressing, but in some ways 2nd one would almost be worse: Careerism as Obama's only real authentic ideology.

  Billmon Twitter

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

(And I think that's a fair assessment of what Obama is all about.)