Globalization-- Who Is It Good For, Y'all?

On Monday we took a look at the dangers posed to ordinary working by the rush to bipartisan corporate globalization. You should give it a read as background to what's unfolding now that Congress is back in Washington for a few days, desperate to find something they can pass and get signed into law. And, of course a trade pact that generates billions and dollars for multinational corporations while crushing the aspirations and dreams of American workers seems perfect for the Beltway Conservative Consensus, which is, after all, underwritten by those same corporations that benefit most from Globalization. Everybody gets a cut-- except... we the people, who get a deteriorating society and more conic, social and political inequality.

The two Beltway party establishments want to rush through the TPP with as little scrutiny and discussion as possible because they are well aware that if the details get out, the American people will start stringing up their congressmembers. With more Republican votes after last Tuesday, there's more chance for Fast Track to pass-- if enough of the new members will do whatever Boehner, Cantor and Ryan tell them to do. But it looks like they might now be quite to willing.

Three very influential thought leaders on Capitol Hill-- Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Louise Slaughter (D-NY) and Alan Grayson (D-FL)-- told The Hill that Boehner doesn't have the votes he needs to pass Fast Track. DeLauro, who is extremely close to Nancy Pelosi said that "Fast-track doesn't have support in the current Congress and won’t have support in the next Congress. The votes are not there."

The three Democrats deemed TPP doomed in Congress because it doesn't include a chapter dealing with currency manipulation issues.

A majority of lawmakers in both chambers have said that the trade deals should lay out ways to identify and enforce internationally recognized currency rules to stop foreign countries from gaining a global advantage.

Lori Wallach, head of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, said the midterms elections that elevated Senate Republicans into the majority didn't "fix the GOP leadership’s math problem with finding enough votes in the House."

She also questioned whether GOP leaders would be willing to take a party-line vote and give fast-track for a Democratic president.

Thursday, the Editorial Board of USAToday jumped into the fray with a featured editorial explaining it in the context of U.S.-China rivalry-- while admitting that "the details of a TPP are not yet known." They're not concerned... they insist the U.S. push ahead, details be damned. The Washington Post ran an even worse editorial pushing Fast Track a few days earlier. They neglected to mention that the "bipartisan group of lawmakers producing a bill to push it through are three die-hard corporate whores, each of whose career has been paid for by lobbyists and Big Business contributions-- House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI), former chairman of the Senate Finance Committee Max Baucus (D-MT) and current Finance Committee chair Orrin Hatch (R-UT). Predictably, the lobbyist conceived and written bill they presented allow congressional leaders to push the bill through without amendments or filibusters.

A subsequent OpEd in the Post by Kevin Kearns, president of the U.S. Business and Industry Council, took the editors to task for assuming the task of getting Fast Track approved would be easier with Republicans controlling both houses of Congress. "Not so," he insists. "Many Republicans, especially in the House, where the real trade action is, question the constitutionality of fast-track trade authority and the wisdom of giving the president even freer rein.

"Congressional Democrats would not give their own president new trade authority. Are the Republicans more likely to do so, especially if cut out by executive action on immigration and other critical issues by a president who ignores election results? Polling shows Republican voters are more averse to free-trade agreements than Democrats. New political realities will only increase the intransigence of our Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiating partners, especially Japan.

"With Mr. Obama now a lame duck, a particularly perverse outcome is likely: The TPP countries will not compromise on the most contentious issues, knowing Mr. Obama will cave to achieve a legacy deal. Republicans are not so devoid of political acumen as to hand Mr. Obama a victory on a dubious trade deal and alienate their base in key 2016 industrial states."

The Post gave equal space to Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth U.S. who made a case that is commonly heard in progressive circles:

Reviving the old fast-track bill would grease the skids for the Trans-Pacific Partnership and a deal with Europe. But these deals are not so much about trade as they are about deregulation. Under the TPP and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, foreign investors could use biased international tribunals to sue governments and seek unlimited damages to cover the cost of complying with environmental and other regulations. Such suits could chill sensible environmental and health regulations.

To prevent the negotiation of such misguided trade deals, the fast-track model should be revamped: First, a broadly representative congressional group must be able to approve negotiating partners, and Congress must be able to veto trade talks with some countries. Second, Congress must be able to certify that its objectives have been met before negotiations are concluded. Finally, we must end the disgraceful secrecy of U.S. trade negotiations.

UPDATE: Grayson Is Worried

Orlando Congressman Alan Grayson has been one of the loudest voices against passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. He sent me this explanation why today:

Here are some very painful facts:

(1) In 200 years of American history before NAFTA was passed, the US never had a trade deficit as high as $135 billion. Every single year since NAFTA went into effect, the US trade deficit has been more than $135 billion.

(2) Our last 14 trade deficits have been the 14 largest trade deficits in the history of Planet Earth.

(3) As a result, we have gone from being the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation.

(4) Foreigners now own $7 trillion of US government debt, and $10 trillion of US assets. The US has only $60 trillion in total assets.

(5) President Obama promised to renegotiate NAFTA. He claims that he is doing that by extending it to 40+ other countries.

(6) The minimum wage in Vietnam is $89 a month, which works out to around 37 cents an hour. Child labor and prison labor are legal in Vietnam, there are no safety regulations, and there is no right to organize. The TPP pits American workers against Vietnamese workers, head to head.

(7) “Fast track,” as proposed in the Senate, gives each Congressman no right to amend, and 88 seconds to debate each trade agreement.

(8) For five years, Members of Congress were not allowed to see drafts of these trade agreements. Now we are, but we are not allowed to discuss them with staff, make notes or copies, or discuss them with each other. 500+ corporate lobbyists, however, are Trade Representative “advisors” with full access to the drafts, who can influence the Trade Representative’s proposals and negotiating provisions.

(9) Less than 10% of the draft “trade agreements” have anything to do with actual trade.

(10) The TPP, according to published reports, establishes special arbitration tribunals under the World Bank, open only to foreign corporations, using corporate lawyers as judges, which have the authority to issue awards against federal, state and local governments for anything that the corporations say reduced their revenue or profit.

(11) The bottom line is that foreigners have been exploiting trade agreements to sell us goods and services, get paid in dollars, and then use those dollars not to buy our goods and services (which would create US jobs), but rather to buy our assets (which creates no jobs). So we lose twice: America loses the jobs, and America goes bankrupt.

I could go on, but you get the idea.