How Globalism is Rigged To Make the Rich Richer

There is no break from politics.

Even though the election will finally - thankfully - hopefully end next week - the next big fight in Washington has already been pencilled into the schedule.

It'll be over the Trans-Pacific Partnership - or TPP - the massive trade deal between the US and 11 other Pacific Rim nations that both major candidates for president oppose.

Once the election is over - the Obama administration - with the help of Republicans and some corporate Democrats - plans on throwing whatever political capital it has left into a campaign to get the TPP through the lame-duck session of Congress.

Whether this full-court press push for a massively unpopular trade will work is still unclear - but one thing is certain: whatever public debate surrounds the lame-duck campaign for the TPP will probably involve words like "free trade" and "protectionism".

These two words have framed the debate around trade in the US for decades - and they're how most of the general public understands the issue.

The way most people see it - trade policy is either good because it's "free" or bad because it's "protectionist".

This dichotomy has deep roots in our political discourse - the only problem is it's wildly inaccurate - especially when it comes to the TPP.

Comments

Old_Curmudgeon 6 years 4 weeks ago
#1

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 18.0px Helvetica}

“Oh Tom”

{… a limerick …}

“Oh Tom,” the trade-fans objected,

“we WANT to become subjected

to T. P. P., -

- 'cause it makes us so free

and oh so dandily protected.”

==========================

TarryFaster 6 years 4 weeks ago
#2

To anyone paying attention, there is no big mystery about the TPP. It is just the next step that the fascist are initiating in order to "legally" take away more of our national sovereignty. Hell, they have been nibbling away at it ever since they tried to overthrow FDR and then later formed the CIA, to be used as their private -- but public funded -- front organization. These days, they are just getting bolder because of their increasing money/power, control of the media and thus lack of public awareness.

No big deal, as we are all doomed to become slaves to their NWO ... if we are able to survive a nuclear holocost, or an international financial breakdown, or the irreversable and ongoing environmental destruction.

cccccttttt 6 years 4 weeks ago
#3

Trade is great ONLY after all of a country's own workers are fully employed.

Corporations care little about the ONLY.

ct

UNC Tarheels's picture
UNC Tarheels 6 years 4 weeks ago
#4

Inside the latest batch of Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s hacked emails by WikiLeaks is a stunning story of how the Democratic presidential nominee’s campaign staff forced her through the uncomfortable process of flip-flopping against the Trans Pacific Partnership.

In the emails is a bald admission from several campaign staffers that the Democratic presidential nominee flip-flopped on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). That admission is coupled with the revelation of how exactly—over a months-long period—her campaign staff helped her maneuver through her position change on the explosive issue. And all of that is mixed together with the admission in writing in these emails by her campaign manager Robby Mook that Hillary Clinton would not be “comfortable” coming out against TPP during the campaign, even though she had to do it for votes. These emails indicate just how seriously her team of political operatives took the issue—and how they viewed it, as Mook said in one email, as an “annoying” issue in terms of timing—in terms of not infuriating labor unions, which by and large oppose such trade deals. Clinton has had a rocky relationship with Big Labor, as other emails have shown her campaign staff’s frustration with union bosses like the AFL-CIO’s Richard Trumka.

Clinton’s pollster John Anzalone admitted in the clearest possible language that the goal in manicuring Clinton’s newfound position against TPP was for political purposes to get on the side of voters. In one email, Anzalone detailed how it’s clear that Clinton would lose an “integrity gold star” by not “staying pure” in her support of the TPP and the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) that would fast track congressional consideration of TPP and other deals. He also noted that Clinton previously supported the deal in her book Hard Choices, and hinted at the 45 times she previously promoted the deal as reported by CNN. The thinking of coming out against TPP was that it would get Clinton “right with voters” and “right with labor,” as the general public and labor unions both oppose trade deals like TPP, regardless of her actual position on the deal.

“I talked to Marlon [Marshall, Clinton’s director of state campaigns and political engagement] today about this,” Anzalone wrote to Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook on April 13, 2015, around 2:45 p.m. He went on:

Naturally we should not be making this decision in a policy vacuum or just because we are concerned about a story of her changing her mind or taking on Obama. It is so much bigger than this. Getting on the wrong side of Labor on the only issue they care about has ramifications on the ground in these early states. I say we suck it up and be as definitive as possible from the beginning that we don’t like these deals. We will be right with voters and right with labor. We get no integrity gold star for staying pure on this issue because of one line if friggin Hard Choices or because this is a key issue for a lame duck president.

A previous email exchange in March 2015detailed how Clinton’s staff believed she intended to support both TPA and TPP. The email from her lead speechwriter makes it very clear: The draft letter he was circulating “assumes that she’s ultimately going to support both TPA and TPP.”

“All, I want to share our draft letter on trade,” Clinton speechwriter Dan Schwerin wrote to Podesta and Mook among others on the Clinton team. Schwerin continued:

As you’ll recall, the idea here is to use this to lay out her thinking on TPA & TPP ahead of action on the Hill and a joint letter by all the former Secretaries of State and Defense. This draft assumes that she’s ultimately going to support both TPA and TPP. It focuses on what needs to happen to produce a positive result with TPP, and casts support for TPA as one of those steps. It also says that we should walk away if the final agreement doesn’t meet the test of creating more jobs than it displaces, helping the middle class, and strengthening our national security. We’ve tried to speak directly to the most prominent concerns expressed by Labor and Hill Dems, including Warren. Of course, if we go ahead with a meeting with HRC to lay out the pros and cons and then come to a different conclusion, this letter would change dramatically.

To set the scene here, at this stage of the game, Congress was soon going to be considering the highly controversial TPA fast track authority. Fast track greases the skids for congressional approval of trade deals, lowering U.S. Senate vote thresholds to 51 votes rather than 60 votes needed to pass them. It also eliminates the ability for Congress to amend trade deals, and forces Congress to consider trade deals in a certain amount of time after the president introduces them onto the fast track. It is widely understood that passing TPA is absolutely necessary to passing any multilateral global trade deal, as no deal would muster 60 votes in the Senate or survive a grueling amendment process where opponents could run out the clock. Killing TPA would have killed TPP, but technically speaking TPP can still be killed—even though it still hasn’t been—in a much harder way on the fast track.

Congressional passage of TPA last year inspired a surge in populist nationalism that served as the backbone of the presidential campaigns of eventual GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump and of Clinton’s primary rival Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. From both sides, Clinton—the former Secretary of State, former U.S. Senator and former First Lady who’s married to a former president known for backing globalist trade deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—has taken incoming on trade policy. The issue nuked the last man standing against Trump in the GOP primaries, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), whose ambivalence was part of what cost him the nomination. And it certainly had the potential to derail Clinton in her battle against Sanders.

These emails indicate that her staff understood that Clinton was in favor of TPP. Specifically, in her book Hard Choices—as Anzalone referenced in that April 13, 2015, email—Clinton praised the TPP as beneficial to American workers. Hillary Clinton wrote:

One of our most important tools for engaging with Vietnam was a proposed new trade agreement called the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which would link markets throughout Asia and the Americas, lowering trade barriers while raising standards on labor, the environment, and intellectual property. As President Obama explained, the goal of TPP negotiations is to establish ‘a high standard, enforceable, meaningful trade agreement’ that ‘is going to be incredibly powerful for American companies who, up until this point, have often been locked out of those markets.’ It was also important for American workers who would benefit from competing on a more level playing field. And it was a strategic initiative that would strengthen the position of the United States in Asia.

That was in addition to at least 45 other times she praised and promoted TPP, as reported on June 15, 2015, by CNN’s Jake Tapper and his reporting staff. Clinton would not actually officially oppose TPP until October 2015, stating according to CNN in an Oct. 7, 2015 interview with PBS’ sJudy Woodruff: “As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it.”

2950-10K's picture
2950-10K 6 years 4 weeks ago
#5

I bet anything Fox News isn't informing it's viewers that the Teapublican Party is the main force behind the promotion of the TPP and free trade in general. It cracks me up how righties attack Clinton on something their own party is trying to shove down our throats...??? Vote for the Democratic Party if the TPP is something you're against, otherwise guys like Paul Ryan will get their way and push it through.

If the population is being lied to about something, is it wrong not to represent the will of those who believe the lies? If the will of the duped citizens is in fact honored via legislation that hurts not only them , but all of us..... is that fair to those who took the time and effort to uncover the lies and know the truth? Is it fair the enlightened suffer because Teapublicans believe whatever the self- serving billionaire and Fox News wants them to believe? Is that 21st century Democracy???

Hephaestus's picture
Hephaestus 6 years 4 weeks ago
#6

Aged human values appear to have disappeared in a common mass persuit of greed

Shame!

Hephaestus's picture
Hephaestus 6 years 4 weeks ago
#7

Why is there a question about globalism?

IT IS RIGGED against "we the people"

It is fascism without being named... or understood by most folk!

Hephaestus's picture
Hephaestus 6 years 4 weeks ago
#8

Stop watching golum the one eyed monster that sucks out your brains and start thinking... it's easy!

ChristopehrCurrie's picture
ChristopehrCurrie 6 years 4 weeks ago
#9

This sneaky (highly dishonest and unconstitutional) effort by President Obama to pass the TPP during the lame duck session has largely destroyed Hillary Clinton's credibility which is one of the main reasons this presidential race is so close. If Bernie Sanders were the Democratic nominee for President, he would be about 30 points ahead of Trump and the Democratic Party takeover of both Houses of Congress would be a foregone condlusion by now.

If Hillary loses next Tuesday, this will be one of the major reasons why.

Legend 6 years 4 weeks ago
#10

The Axe Files Podacast (David Axelrod on Itunes) has an interview with John Kerry where he discusses the TPA. One of the few places I have heard it discussed. Certainly not in our 1% owned and operated mainstream media. He is for it. If it comes up for vote it will pass against the populations will. Both Bernie and Trump have proved its unpopularity with the Amercian people.

RFord's picture
RFord 6 years 4 weeks ago
#11

I have no doubt President Obama believes that the Trans Pacific Partnership is a great deal for us. That's probably what his advisors are telling him. I doubt he has read the entire agreement. His advisor(s) may have some skin in the game, you know they may personally stand to profit off of it. That could be the reason they are telling him it's great and the reason he's telling us it's great. Then again, it may be a good deal or it could be a bad deal. I don't know for sure.

Personally, I haven't read it. Have you? I understand it's lengthy and complicated and somewhat secretive. I would like to have some college professors check it out for us and congress so they could tell us what they think about it after they have studied it. We and congress need to know what's bad about it and what's good about it. We need to know if it's a bad deal or a good deal. We need these findings made public. I've written my 2 Mississippi US senators and asked them to reject it if it's not good for all of the people of Mississippi and to accept it if it is. They wrote me back and said they will take my concerns into consideration when they make their decisions on it. Anyone can do this. Have you?

Thom's Blog Is On the Move

Hello All

Today, we are closing Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.

Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.

From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann is a literary descendent of Ben Franklin and Tom Paine. His unflinching observations and deep passion inspire us to explore contemporary culture, politics, and economics; challenge us to face the facts of the societies we are creating; and empower us to demand a better world for our children and grandchildren."
John Perkins, author of the New York Times bestselling book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
From Screwed:
"Thom Hartmann’s book explains in simple language and with concrete research the details of the Neo-con’s war against the American middle class. It proves what many have intuited and serves to remind us that without a healthy, employed, and vital middle class, America is no more than the richest Third World country on the planet."
Peter Coyote, Actor and author of Sleeping Where I Fall
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Beneath the success and rise of American enterprise is an untold history that is antithetical to every value Americans hold dear. This is a seminal work, a godsend really, a clear message to every citizen about the need to reform our country, laws, and companies."
Paul Hawken, coauthor of Natural Capitalism and author of The Ecology of Commerce