In his State of the Union address, President Obama declared in his intent to complete negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The Obama administration has pursued the TPP through the offices of U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk instead of under the auspices of the Department of State.<\/p>\n
This was the first time<\/a> negotiations to create a free trade zone with Pacific Rim countries were made public although 15 rounds have been concluded. Eleven nations are participating: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam. Although Japan and China are not presently participating in TPP negotiations, \u201cdocking provisions\u201d being written into the TPP draft agreement would permit either Japan or China to join the TPP at a later date without suffering any disadvantage.<\/p>\n To implement the TPP free-trade agreement, Congress will be asked to surrender its responsibility under Section 1, Article 8 of the Constitution to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and grant President Obama extra-constitutional “Trade Promotion Authority” to negotiate the final TPP agreement. The administration seeks to gain \u201cfast-track authority<\/a>,\u201d a provision under the Trade Promotion Authority that requires Congress to review an FTA under limited debate, in an accelerated time frame subject to a yes-or-no vote by a simple majority vote rather than a two-thirds vote, as required for the ratification of a formal treaty.<\/p>\n Under fast-track authority, there is no provision for Congress to modify the agreement by submitting amendments. Fast-track authority also treats the FTA as if it were trade legislation being negotiated by the executive branch. The purpose is to assure foreign partners that the FTA, once signed, will not be changed during the legislative process.<\/p>\n A report<\/a> released Jan. 24 by the Congressional Research Service, \u201cThe Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Issues for Congress,\u201d makes clear that the present negotiations are not being conducted under the auspices of formal trade promotion authority as the latest TPA expired July 1, 2007. However, the Obama administration is acting as if fact-track authority were in effect already.<\/p>\n The report states that the TPP is being negotiated as a regional free-trade agreement that U.S. negotiators describe as a \u201ccomprehensive and high-standard\u201d FTA. The U.S. hopes the agreement \u201cwill liberalize trade in nearly all goods and services and include commitments beyond those currently established in the World Trade Organization (WTO.)\u201d<\/p>\n Oppostion to the TPP ranges from one end of the political spectrum to the other ? from the liberal Public Citizen non-profit, consumer rights advocacy group founded by Ralph Nader in 1971 to the far-right, conservative news organization, World Net Daily founded in 1997 by Joseph Farah.<\/p>\n Lori Wallach of Public Citizen has written several articles warning about the dangers of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. According to her review of TPP<\/a>, foreign firms would gain the follow privileges:<\/p>\n Ms. Wallach opines that U.S. multinational corporations have the goal of imposing on more countries a set of extreme foreign investor privileges and rights and their private enforcement through the notorious \u201cinvestor-state\u201d system. \u201cThis system elevates individual corporations and investors to equal standing with each TPP signatory country’s government- and above all of us citizens.\u201d This would enable \u201cforeign investors to skirt domestic courts and laws, and sue governments directly before tribunals of three private sector lawyers operating under World Bank and UN rules to demand taxpayer compensation<\/strong> for any domestic law that investors believe will diminish their \u2018expected future profits.\u2019 Over $3 billion has been paid to foreign investors under U.S. trade and investment pacts, while over $14 billion in claims are pending under such deals, primarily targeting environmental, energy, and public health policies.\u201d<\/p>\n This opinion was confirmed by Jerome Corsi in an article<\/a> last week on World Net Daily, in which he reported that a \u201cleaked copy of the TPP draft<\/a> makes clear in Chapter 15, \u2018Dispute Settlement,\u2019 that the Obama administration intends to surrender U.S. sovereignty to an international tribunal to adjudicate disputes arising under the TPP. Disputes concerning interpretation and application of the TPP agreement, according to Article 15.7, will be adjudicated by an \u201carbitral tribunal\u201d composed of three TPP members.<\/p>\n He states, \u201cBecause the TPP agreement places arbitral tribunals created under TPP to be above U.S. law, the Obama administration\u2019s negotiation of the Trans-Pacific pact without specific consultation with Congress appears aimed at creating a judicial authority higher than the U.S. Supreme Court. The judicial entity could overrule decisions U.S. Federal District and Circuit courts make to apply U.S. laws and regulations to foreign corporations doing business within the United States. The result appears to allow foreign companies doing business within the United States to operate in a legal and regulatory environment that would give the foreign companies decided economic advantages over U.S. companies that remain subject to U.S. laws and regulations.\u201d<\/p>\n Another group opposing the TPP is\u00a0Americans for Limited Government<\/a> , <\/em>a lobbying group and advocacy organization which describes itself as a non-partisan, nationwide network committed to advancing free-market reforms, private property rights and core American liberties <\/em>President <\/em>Bill Wilson states, <\/em>\u201cThis new trade agreement will place domestic U.S. firms that do not do business overseas at a competitive disadvantage. Foreign firms under this trade pact could conceivably appeal federal regulatory and court rulings against them to an international tribunal with the apparent authority to overrule our sovereignty. If foreign companies want to do business in America, they should have to follow the same rules as everyone else. Obama is negotiating a trade pact that would constitute a judicial authority higher than even the U.S. Supreme Court that could overrule federal court rulings applying U.S. law to foreign companies. That is unconstitutional. The U.S. cannot be allowed to enter a treaty that would abrogate our Constitution.\u201d<\/p>\n\n