Countries Sign The TPP... Whatever Happened To The 'Debate' We Were Promised Before Signing?
from the now-the-ratification-fight dept
About an hour ago, representatives from 12 different nations officially signed the Trans Pacific Partnership (TTP) agreement in Auckland, New Zealand. The date, February 4th (New Zealand time) is noteworthy, because it's 90 days after the official text was released. There was a 90 day clock that was required between releasing the text and before the US could actually sign onto the agreement. The stated purpose of this 90 day clock was in order to allow "debate" about the agreement. Remember, the entire agreement was negotiated in secret, with US officials treating the text of the document as if it were a national security secret (unless you were an industry lobbyist, of course). So as a nod to pretend "transparency" there was a promise that nothing would be signed for 90 days after the text was actually released.So... uh... what happened to that "debate"? It didn't happen at all. The TPP was barely mentioned at all by the administration in the last 90 days. Even during the State of the Union, Obama breezed past the TPP with a quick comment, even though it's supposedly a defining part of his "legacy." But there's been no debate. Because there was never any intent for an actual debate. The 90 day clock was just something that was put into the process so that the USTR and the White House could pretend that there was more "transparency" and that they wouldn't sign the agreement until after it had been looked at and understood by the public.
Of course, the signing is a totally meaningless bit of theater. The real fight is over ratification. The various countries need to ratify the TPP for the agreement to go into effect. Technically, the TPP will enter into force 60 days after all signers ratify it... or, if that doesn't happen, within two years if at least six of the 12 participant countries ratify it and those six countries account for 85% of the combined gross domestic product of the 12 countries. Got that? In short, this means that if the US doesn't ratify it, the TPP is effectively dead. The US needs a majority of both houses of Congress to approve it, similar to a typical bill. And that's no sure thing right now. Unfortunately, that's mainly because a group of our elected officials are upset that the TPP doesn't go far enough in helping big businesses block competition, but it's still worth following.
Inevitably, there will be some debate during the ratification process, though there are enough rumors suggesting that no one really wants to do it until after the Presidential election, because people running for President don't want to reveal that they're happy to sell out the public's interest to support a legacy business lobbyist agenda. But, even that debate will likely be fairly limited and almost certainly will avoid the real issues, and real problems, with the TPP.
Either way, today's symbolic signing should really be an exclamation point on the near total lack of transparency and debate in this process. The 90 day window was a perfect opportunity to have an actual discussion about what's in the TPP and why there are problems with it, but the administration showed absolutely no interest in doing so. And why should it? It already got the deal it wanted behind closed doors. But, at least it can pretend it used these 90 days to be "transparent."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: aukland, debate, new zealand, ratification, signing, tpp, transparency, ustr
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Debate? What Debate?
Governments promising a debate on some topic is an old ploy designed to take wind out of sails and otherwise stymie opposition. Like New Years' resolutions, they are made one day and forgotten the next.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Can somebody get a dictionary?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TPP
I'm confused
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They probably didn't want that to happen again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Debate
"Uhhh... yes?"
"Debate over! Refreshments in the lobby. Have a good weekend all."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
it's Ebonics.
Ask Admiral Akbar about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: TPP
Boo hoo.
It's just the internet. Nothing is being taken away.
What's wrong with those who oppose paying royalty to make a derivative work out of someone's original idea, cartoon character, or novel? If anyone who don't want to pay, they should be originally creative.
Creators are not corporations, they real people struggling to make a living, and they are not making a single penny and losing billions of dollars over unauthorized derivative work that is taken from originals.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Govt corruption in general
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Govt corruption in general
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: sounds like you watch to much TV
~~~~~~
In 1783, hundreds of Pennsylvania war veterans marched on Philadelphia, then the nation's capital, surrounded the State House where the U.S. Congress was in session, and demanded back pay. Congress fled to Princeton, New Jersey, and several weeks later, the U.S. Army expelled the war veterans from Philadelphia. In response to that experience, the federal district is now directly governed by the U.S. Congress, now known as Washington, D.C., was excluded from the restrictions of the 'Posse Comitatus Act' which forbade the use of the U.S. military for domestic police activity.'' WiKi
On march 9th, 1945 1-2 million were killed in three hours, according to newspaper headlines at the time. MacArthur needed his Emperor alive, so my Father spent months in experiments in Hollywood perfecting the firebombing to spare Hirohito's palace.
Good call, stupid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Obama's tricks are old
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Obama's tricks are old
and...
2) Thinking long-term. FTA helps Obama for the TPP sure, but it also stays in place for a few years, and if a republican is elected president next, then that means they get all the benefits from it as well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Can somebody get a dictionary?
If you can't see right thru it, you're just not looking hard enough.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wait til we see 100,s of lawsuits from 100,s of european or asian countrys against the usa ,
The so called 1 per cent increase in gdp will be wiped out .
TTP is a deal for the 1 per cent and for big corporations
who do their best to avoid paying tax .
ttp could unleash a war of lawsuits against the us ,
think the cost of patent trolls x 1000 .
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Governments have forgotten the lesson of Tsarist Russia - if you take away the good options for fighting corruption, you only leave bad options on the table.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Obama's tricks are old
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Now if any country has to pay to the USA and refuses to pay the USA will threaten sanctions and possibly send the army over and the country will cave like a coward and pay up even with interest on top to please the USA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
driving their A8s,
GROOMING their beards,
there is plenty of room for us going "fightclub" on them
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So why no ask Ron (I am assuming you are on a first name basis, after all) why he's so silent on something that is apparently so important. Perhaps there are no grandstanding points available on this level.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The only thing cheaper to bribe than an experienced politician are fresh ones. They don't yet have a politician's standards of living. The initial down payment for the conscience may be larger, but that's offset by the running rates.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Am I the only one who reads this as the politicians wrote the requirements such as to ensure a great deal of bribery (lobbying) of politicians in both houses had to occur for this to pass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Govt corruption in general
What does that even mean?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What do you mean no debate?
Oh, you mean debate with them? With the possibility of revisions? You are a dreamer, aren't you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Which countries have more powerful militaries than the US? Should be a lot of them according to your claim, right?
Government draw downs and spending cuts saw to that.
"The U.S. spends more on defense than the next seven countries combined"
http://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0053_defense-comparison
And our sanctions worked so well with Iran didn't they?
Sure did, we got both a nuclear weapons and inspection deal, and a prisoner release.
The current political will of the present government of the US is appeasement.
"Appeasement in a political context is a diplomatic policy of making political or material concessions to an enemy power in order to avoid conflict."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement
So what concessions has Obama been making in order to avoid conflict?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Unconstitutional?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I know you won't go look for yourself so...
http://www.gazettetimes.com/news/local/wyden-talks-tpp-education-at-phs/article_791651f5-c386-5 73f-9e32-839eac2ae8da.html
http://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/politics/2016/01/15/q-sen-ron-w yden-talks-oregon-trade-and-surveillance/78687022/
There could be more that he's been saying but that was all I found in a couple of pages of results.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Unconstitutional?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Unconstitutional?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
He finally conceded it would be insane to invade Iran because it would be both un-winnable and turn the entire Middle East into a bonfire from which none would escape, and possibly bankrupt all those involved. Besides, he was already busy cooking up a NATO backed coup in Ukraine to tweak Putin's nose for failing to respect his "authoritay."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It would be interesting to see how Sanders fares with this feat, assuming that he actually cares (Obama was a real turncoat with regard to raised expectations). It may well be that he'd turn into another Carter (who went on to become a great ex-president since the "great president" angle did not work out), basically getting neutered by his administration. If he's unlucky, another JFK (now there would be a fine use for one of the many curated FBI "terrorists").
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Unconstitutional?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Can you show any motions to bring the discussions and debate onto senate floor? Any move to reconvene the senate for an emergency debate?
You likely won't find anything (I couldn't find anything substantive). In fact, the congress as a whole has been remarkably silent during the 90 days, as if perhaps there was an agreement in place not to talk about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Not necessarily. He may have been asking all and sundry "let's debate this", and all he got back was "" so he knew that dog wasn't going to hunt. You don't flog a dead horse.
That doesn't mean he was in on the fix, just that he was powerless to do anything about it.
I'm just speculating though.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It showed the less than and greater than symbols in Preview, but once you Submit, they're stripped out. That's why those two double quotes don't show & l t ;crickets& g t ;
Harumph. :-|
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's never too late
FTFY
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
And whose fault is that? Wyden was in favor of giving Obama fast-track authority to sign this deal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: TPP
But you've got to be able to actually serve the papers... it's a game of whack-a-mole and nobody really wins. Give it up and find other ways of making money from your art. Here's a list of links to TD stories about business models you might want to try: https://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=business+models
Good luck. Let us know how it goes. I'd love to see yet another success story getting a write-up here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
it's all over
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Unconstitutional?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Govt corruption in general
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: TPP is not a trade agreement
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: TPP
Josh, you are clearly ignorant of how intellectual property works in the corporate world. The geniuses (engineers, programmers and designers) who invent most everything are forced to sign away the rights to all intellectual property they create when they become employees of a corporation. The corporation owns all patents and copyrights they create while in its employ. They are paid a salary. Period. If they object, they are not hired, and good luck finding a corporation willing to give them full credit for their creativity.
These trade agreements have nothing to do with preserving the rights of Paul McCartney or J K Rowling. They are multi-millionaires and their rights are fully protected under current law. If you are an individual artist who has not yet made it big, and some corporation rips off your work, good luck hiring and paying a legal team to fight the the legal team the corporation already has on staff or under contract. You'll be severely disadvantaged both now and after TPP. TPP has absolutely nothing to do with protecting individual rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
post-fascist governance
In the new corporate fascism, a corporate world order trumps sovereign rights. Welcome to your new rulers. In the new corporate order, nationalism and nations will be only used to promote and fight wars, which all forms of fascism recognize as a very successful business model, with national governments having the function of funneling taxpayer funds to corporations through lucrative war contracts. In this sense, the new fascism will be just like the old, based on war as a means of transferring public funds to private pockets.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TPP BULL SHIT
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yes, it's the end.
[ link to this | view in thread ]