The New York Times story on the contents of a leaked chapter of the TPP showed that it’s as bad as many of us feared: It would let firms "sue" governments for loss of "expected future profits." Let that sink in.
Reports say the idea is to “sharpen differences” among liberals and blacks. This naturally leaves progressives asking if it is really “progressive” to try to divide “liberals” and “blacks?”
Seattle's city council is preparing to vote on a resolution opposing fast track trade authority, and a number of organizations sent an open letter spelling out what an acceptable fast-track process would do.
Another reason to oppose fast-tracking the Trans-Pacific Partnership: The struggle in towns like Ferguson, Mo., to overcome racial and economic barriers is hard enough without another wrong-headed trade pact.
The title of the segment was “TPP Tradenado” and the topic was trade, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), fast-track trade authority and a new AstroTurf campaign supposedly from "progressives."
The AFL-CIO president's speech before the Peterson Institute of International Economics detailed his concerns regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership and fast-track trade promotion authority legislation.
While the Trans-Pacific Partnership is still secret, leaks and precedent indicate that it will contain provisions allowing giant, multinational corporations to bypass our country’s legal system.
Krugman takes on the old trope that “protectionism” — democracies using tariffs to protect wages and regulations from being undermined by the lower costs that a thugocracy offers — harms the world’s economy.
A new PR campaign in support of Trade Promotion Authority a.k.a. “Fast Track” and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is launching. As its foundation are a set of misleading (at best) claims beginning with a Four-Pinocchio whopper.
A continuing trade deficit literally drains our economy, jobs, wages, factories, entire industries and our ability to make a living as a country.
Food is more than just what we eat. It connects us to each other and our environment. And how we treat it is of tremendous importance to our democracy. Right now, the future of our food is being decided behind closed doors.
Opponents of fast track and the Trans-Pacific Partnership are gaining momentum. In spite of a virtual media blackout, public awareness of and mobilization against the coming trade deal is increasing.
Why can't we have a trade debate worthy of the reality we face? Unprecedented trade deficits have undermined America's working families. We need a new strategy, not another dishonest and corrupted debate.
Eight senators let the country know there is going to be a fight over fast track trade authority and the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Sen. Bernie Sanders said, "Enough is enough. This country now is in a major race to the bottom."
All the talk about “trade” deals might seem complicated, with all the “TPP” and “TPA” and “FTA” and “TTIP” floating around. It doesn’t have to be difficult, though.
I used to believe in trade agreements. That was before the wages of most Americans stagnated and a relative few at the top captured just about all the economic gains. The fact is, trade agreements are no longer really about trade.
There will be a series of rallies across the United States this week and next week to oppose Fast Track legislation. On Thursday between 1-2 p.m. ET you can join the #FightFastTrack Twitter storm.
USTR Michael Froman testified before the Senate Tuesday to push for Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority. Protesters disrupted the hearing.
More than 40 top environmental and scientific groups are the latest to register to Congress their opposition to fast track trade authority. They want an open, transparent process that delivers benefits for working people.
Fast Track is nothing more than Congress pulling a fast one on the American people. It’s a plan for lawmakers to abdicate their Constitutional responsibility to regulate international trade.
If people come to understand and worry about the very real trade deficit, they will demand policies that are very good for regular, working people, and "Main Street" businesses that make or do things in America.
As soon as the new Congress is sworn in next year the fight will begin over Fast Track. Start preparing now.
The secret Trans-Pacific Partnership will have profound effects on our ability to make a living as a country. Yet you have to read about it in the Japan Times because few-to-no U.S. media outlets are covering it.
Corporations are pushing Congress to pass something called Fast Track — a process that essentially pre-approves trade agreements before Congress even reads them for the first time.
Last summer, Barack Obama and leaders of the European Union announced the start of negotiations on another trade deal. Wondering what all of these deals are about? Here’s a primer on the Obama administration’s vision for global trade.
Under Fast Track, Congress agrees to pass new trade treaties with no amendments, on a straight up-or-down vote, within 90 days of seeing what is in the treaty for the first time.
Some economists blame upward redistribution of income, which reduces overall demand, for excessive unemployment. However, upward redistribution is only part of the explanation. The trade deficit is a much bigger part of the picture.
Originally sold as protecting investors from "banana republic" dictators our "NAFTA-style" trade agreements now are protecting giant corporations from the efforts of citizens in democracies to make their lives better.
A Republican Senate candidate comes out against the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Two open letters from members of Congress question it. A former WTO director-general warns about it. And there are actions you can take.
Another leak of another secretly negotiated treaty reveals another assault on our ability to make our own laws and another boost for the largest (and dirtiest) corporations.
The enormous, humongous trade deficit is doing incredible damage to our economy. Our country’s elites used to care about that.
It is not entirely fair for President Obama to dismiss critics of the Trans-Pacific Partnership for having a "lack of knowledge" of what is being negotiated, as he did at a recent news conference.
A huge trade treaty is coming that will change the relationship between giant corporations and governments around the world. Why is the American corporate media telling the public so little about it?
Research concludes that if you're making less than $87,000 per year (the current 90th percentile wage), the Trans-Pacific Partnership would mean a pay cut. But that's fine for corporations who want this treaty.
The New York Times gets it right: It's time to "improve the ground rules of global trade." In the face of overwhelming evidence of the damage done by NAFTA-style trade deals, could the tide of elite opinion be changing?
We have a trade deficit in the $500-billion-per-year range. American billionaires and their giant corporations are benefiting tremendously by tapping into this drain of American’s wealth.
Many Wall Street and D.C. elites say that more trade is always better. But is the goal more trade, or trade that benefits We the People of the United States and our economy?
We know that the Trans-Pacific Partnership has an intellectual property section that will override government rules that limit the ability of giant corporations to trample the interests of smaller competitors and the public.
The old trade model has failed us miserably. Isn't it time to stop pursuing a fast track for another bad trade deal when the train is already off the rails? Isn't it long past time to take another look and think anew?