General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs TPP trade deal a massive giveaway to corporations? An exchange between Obama and Sherrod Brown
By Greg Sargent
One way to make sense of the bewilderingly complex debate over the massive Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal which involves a dozen countries around the Pacific and could impact some 40 percent of U.S. trade is to understand that there are a number of separate arguments about it proceeding on different tracks.
Theres the argument over whether the deals higher labor standards will even be enforceable for countries such as Vietnam. Theres the argument over whether more import competition will further weaken American manufacturing, or whether lowering tariffs abroad will strengthen American exports. Theres the argument over whether TPPs intellectual property rules will primarily benefit Big Pharma and major corporations. Theres the argument over whether the fast track process is legitimate.
And this is one of the most contentious arguments of all: The debate over the TPPs Investor-State Dispute Settlement provision. The ISDS, which has drawn high profile criticism from Elizabeth Warren and many others, is a mechanism contained in the deal that would allow for the litigation of disputes between corporations and local governments in a manner designed to create a stable legal environment for investments in participating countries.
more
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/04/27/is-tpp-trade-deal-a-massive-giveaway-to-major-corporations-an-exchange-between-obama-and-sherrod-brown/
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Especially the part:
"The debate over the TPPs Investor-State Dispute Settlement provision. The ISDS, which has drawn high profile criticism from Elizabeth Warren and many others, is a mechanism contained in the deal that would allow for the litigation of disputes between corporations and local governments in a manner designed to create a stable legal environment for investments in participating countries. "
In plain English, ISDS represents an end run around the legal system in every country that is/will be a signatory to the TPP. Under NAFTA, any corporation can sue a country for loss of potential profits. If, for example, the US passes environmental laws that make it unprofitable for a foreign corporation to strip mine in the US, that corporation can sue the US government for a potential loss of profit. The TPP will accelerate that process. The corporations gain and the people lose.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Words are nice, but they don't enforce themselves.
There is no international police force that's going to deal with violations to the language. There's going to be panels of -corporate- lawyers, who much like juries on DU are going to rule on what is enforced.
DU juries are a perfect mirror of the sort of human behavior that's going to confound enforcement of TPP. IT's going to depend on who gets picked as the review panel.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I can guess how they will be inclined to rule, as compared to labor leaders or community representatives.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)they like; the corporation picks one they like; and the third is usually picked by agreement of both parties.
Labor experts, professors, experts in knowledgeable in field, etc., can be selected. I suspect attorneys are often selected because these are very technical cases.
And the type of dispute has to qualify for arbitration.
Of course if you listen to Warren or Sanders, you'd think the company's corporate counsel is going to be the sole judge and will take every penny from the country.