Is TPP Really Dead?

A total of 72 percent of those surveyed either hadn’t heard of the deal, or had heard “not much” about it.

  Morning Consult

And the reason Americans don't know what it is: negotiations have been conducted in secret.

Despite Republicans’ historic support for major trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement, the poll indicates a shifting landscape in public support for U.S. trade policy, including TPP. Of the surveyed Republican voters, 34 percent oppose TPP, compared to 24 percent who support it. Just under one-third of surveyed Democrats support the agreement, despite their party’s general skepticism of free trade policy. Independent voters more closely mirror Republicans voters, with 22 percent supporting and 30 percent opposing.

I think we can safely say that we don't know how Republicans really feel about it, because they will oppose it simply because it's being pushed by Obama.  Considering its terms, I have to believe they would otherwise be all for it.

Obama’s administration has described TPP as “the most progressive trade agreement in history” largely because of language targeting labor and environmental abuses it claims are the strongest negotiated in any U.S. trade agreement. Unions and a number of other interest groups have blasted that rhetoric, however.

We’ve all heard over and over that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is the “most progressive trade agreement ever.” Even if we don’t know what the TPP is, we know it’s progressive. Or do we?

Here’s the deal: I can be the tallest person in the room and still not be tall. You can be the richest person at the meeting and still not be rich. Likewise, the “most progressive trade deal ever” isn’t progressive.

Let’s just start with a simple question: How “progressive” is it to negotiate permanent economic rules that will affect 40% of the world’s GDP in secret—with more than 85% of your advisers representing business interests?

The TPP gives Australian, Japanese, Malaysian and other TPP corporations their own private justice system (ISDS) that they can use to attack our democracy. If these companies think that a California law banning a certain toxic chemical, or a Fort Lauderdale City Commission decision denying backyard fracking, or Rock Island County, Ill., increase in the minimum wage is “unfair” and violates their rights as a foreign investor, they can sue the United States before a panel of private arbitrators (usually international commercial lawyers) for damages. If they win, the foreign companies take home our taxpayer dollars to compensate for lost “expected profits.” Giving foreign businesses power and influence over local and state decisions isn’t progressive.

The TPP also creates extreme monopoly rights for global pharmaceutical companies. [...] The TPP will raise drug prices for families across the region. That’s regressive.

[...]

America’s working families and those in the other 11 TPP countries will certainly not benefit by a trade deal that permanently locks in increased corporate power and rights.

  AFL-CIO

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