‘In the 1990’s, Americans were promised a future with better wages, more jobs, and greater freedom in purchasing products and hiring workers. That future, we were told, would be made possible by a little piece of legislation known as NAFTA. The reality of NAFTA is far different than the rosy picture painted for us by the Clinton administration. We’ve seen a decline in worker protections, hundreds of thousands of jobs shipped out of the country, and stagnant wages. But still today you can hear those exact same talking points being thrown around by the Obama administration as they sell us the Trans Pacific Partnership.’ (Ring of Fire Radio)
- Obama critical of NAFTA on the campaign trail
- Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership Promises Echo Clinton’s On NAFTA
- By Pushing the TPP, Obama is Repeating the Mistakes of NAFTA: Interview with David Bacon
- 20 Years on, Mexico is NAFTA’s Biggest Lie: Interview with Tim Wise
- NAFTA Hurt Workers on Both Sides of the Border: Interview with David Bacon
- The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Warnings From NAFTA
- Trade Expert: Why TPP — “NAFTA on Steroids” — Must Be Stopped
- TPP: NAFTA on Steroids
‘The Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) poses massive threats to users in a dizzying number of ways. It will force other TPP signatories to accept the United States’ excessive copyright terms of a minimum of life of the author plus 70 years, while locking the US to the same lengths so it will be harder to shorten them in the future. It contains DRM anti-circumvention provisions that will make it a crime to tinker with, hack, re-sell, preserve, and otherwise control any number of digital files and devices that you own. The TPP will encourage ISPs to monitor and police their users, likely leading to more censorship measures such as the blockage and filtering of content online in the name of copyright enforcement. And in the most recent leak of the TPP’s Intellectual Property chapter, we found an even more alarming provision on trade secrets that could be used to crackdown on journalists and whistleblowers who report on corporate wrongdoing.
Here, we’d like to explore yet another set of rules in TPP that will chill users’ rights. Those are the criminal enforcement provisions, which based upon the latest leak from May 2014 is still a contested and unresolved issue. It’s about whether users could be jailed or hit with debilitating fines over allegations of copyright infringement.’
- What Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP)?
- Negotiators Burn Their Last Opportunity to Salvage the TPP by Caving on Copyright Term Extension
- Certification Allows US Trade Negotiators to Rewrite TPP Copyright Rules
- The Trans-Pacific Plague: How TPP Spreads the United States’ Terrible DRM Policies
- Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) – IP Chapter
- Cyber-Espionage and Trade Agreements: An Ill-Fitting and Dangerous Combination
- TPP Creates Legal Incentives For ISPs To Police The Internet. What Is At Risk? Your Rights.
- EFF Responds to USTR Bullying the World to Repeat Our Copyright Mistakes
- State Censorship by Copyright? Spanish Firm Abuses DMCA to Silence Critics of Ecuador’s Government
‘At his joint press conference with Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, Obama addressed concerns that intellectual property provisions in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) will lead to “higher costs of medical supplies.” His response was that people who raise concerns about TPP intellectual property provisions and access to medicines have a “lack of knowledge” about what is happening in (secret) negotiations, and are therefore prone to “rumors” and “conspiracy theories.”
Obama’s comments could almost be considered an argument in favor of greater transparency, though that was obviously not his intent. ‘
Negotiations for the world’s biggest trade deal have been conducted in total secrecy over the last four years. What’s worse, the deliberations are being held between multinational corporations and world leaders that are paving the way for a global corporate coup.
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) consists of twelve Pacific Rim countries: Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam and the US.
Over 600 corporate advisors are consulting on the TPP to establish an international court tribunal made up of corporate representatives, which could supercede the sovereignty of countries involved and override existing laws. But despite the drastic implications this deal could have concerning everything from food safety to pharmaceutical costs, a stunning new report by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) reveals that neither ABC, CBS, nor NBC have even so much as mentioned the TPP since Obama’s State of the Union address in February of 2013.
Given the magnitude of this so called “free trade” agreement and the corporate media’s blacking out of the issue, it’s important to look back at some of Breaking the Set’s coverage of the TPP.
What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and why is the White House trying to rush it through Congress with a “fast track” process that circumvents normal democratic procedures? You’d be hard-pressed to answer these questions if you depend on the US media to keep you informed—particularly corporate TV news, which, with few exceptions, has been silent on the issue. TPP is a sprawling treaty that critics say will enshrine corporate control of decisions on the environment, intellectual property and finance that were previously subject to democratic processes. Rep. Keith Ellison (D.-Minn.) has called it “the largest corporate power grab you never heard of” (Huffington Post, 10/8/13).
Twenty years ago, Bill Clinton used fast track authority to push another “free trade” pact through Congress. NAFTA was sold on the promise of new jobs and increased exports (Washington Post, 11/18/93), but by its 20th anniversary, around 700,000 American jobs were lost due to the agreement (EPI, 5/3/11); Public Citizen puts the number closer to a million (Huffington Post, 1/6/14). Both groups say that NAFTA has increased US trade deficits and lowered wages in the US and Mexico. Critics say TPP’s most profound impacts won’t be on jobs, wages or the trade deficit, but on the very sovereignty of people in the subject nations to make decisions regarding corporate conduct.
The broad movement for fair trade has stalled the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). When fast track trade promotion authority was introduced by former Senator Baucus, the Chairman of the Finance Committee, it was announced dead by Harry Reid and many of the members of the Finance Committee. A similar bill in the House also died quickly, not even proceeding to mark-up in the Ways and Means Committee, despite being introduced by its Chairman, David Camp (R-MI).
Congressional leadership including Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) all announced that they opposed the Baucus-Camp version of fast track. Vice President Biden acknowledged that trade promotion authority was unlikely this year. This happened because a movement of movements engaged in protests across the country, the issue was raised at town hall meetings and hundreds of thousands of phone calls and emails went to Capitol Hill saying “no” to fast track for the TPP.
But, we knew that efforts to rig global trade in the favor of trans-national corporations would not stop there. The movement of movements that stopped the first version of fast track has been preparing for the next stage.
The new chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), made a speech this week announcing that he was working to introduce a new version of trade promotion authority that he is propagandistically calling “smart-track,” but which sounds more like fast track in sheep’s clothing. Wyden was vague on the details, but this far into the process any fast track bill being pushed will still rig trade in favor of transnational corporations.
For people who care about worker’s rights, the environment, Internet freedom, health care for all, regulation of banks and big finance, healthy food, access to water and other issues, the fundamental question is: will trade put the necessities of the people and environment before the profits of transnational corporations and the already wealthy? From what we’ve seen, the TPP does not and that is why we must continue to organize not only to stop it but also to redefine how trade is negotiated from the first step and to correct the failures of past trade agreements.