The American Public should have input on the TPP

Congress is about to introduce a bill to fast track a secret deal that could lead to global censorship. It’s called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). We think Internet users everywhere should have a say in decisions that affect the Internet — but if “Fast Track” legislation passes, there is no chance that the public will see the text before the deal is approved. Join the Internet Vote on April 23rd and let’s make it clear to DC how we’re voting: against Fast Track and against Internet censorship.

Continue ReadingThe American Public should have input on the TPP

No way out for Democracy?

Robert Kuttler is pessimistic about meaningful democracy in the U.S., as I am. In his article, "Why the 99% keeps losing, he gives the following reasons:

  • Reason One. The Discrediting of Politics Itself.
  • Reason Two. Compromised Democrats.
  • Reason Three. The Reign of Politicized Courts and Big Money.
  • Reason Four. The Collapse of Equalizing Institutions.
  • Reason Five. Bewildering Changes in How Jobs Are Structured.
  • Reason Six. The Internalization of a Generation's Plight.
  • Reason Seven. The Absence of a Movement.

Continue ReadingNo way out for Democracy?

Senator Elizabeth Warren warns us about the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Elizabeth Warren warns us about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, as reported by the Public Citizen Consumer Blog:

Sen. Warren's op-ed in the Post this week is a must-read, and a must-share: it explains how our country's consumer, worker, and environmental protection laws could be undermined by a dispute-resolution clause in the TPP, currently being negotiated. More generally, the danger Sen. Warren describes is a potent illustration of how trade deals that may sound benign in terms of their general aims can contain some pretty radical giveaways to corporate interests. Here's a flavor:
[The Investor-State Dispute Settlement clause, or ISDS] would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws — and potentially to pick up huge payouts from taxpayers — without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court. Here’s how it would work. Imagine that the United States bans a toxic chemical that is often added to gasoline because of its health and environmental consequences. If a foreign company that makes the toxic chemical opposes the law, it would normally have to challenge it in a U.S. court. But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages.

Continue ReadingSenator Elizabeth Warren warns us about the Trans-Pacific Partnership