A beast of a trade pact is lumbering, claws outstretched, towards American small business owners, consumers and workers, and it’s not clear if anyone can stop it. The beast is called the “Trans Pacific Partnership” or TPP.

Behind the lofty language of partnership, and the stated goal of stimulating trade worldwide, it aims to strengthen multinationals at the expense of nearly everyone else. Most importantly, and most dangerously, the pact undermines the power of governments everywhere to encourage local entrepreneurship, protect consumer health and assets, and preserve clean air and water.

The Trans Pacific Partnership has been negotiated largely in secret by representatives from major multinational corporations. No drafts have been released. Involvement by the U.S. government has been closely-held, even though Congress must ultimately vote on the treaty. Only the Obama administration’s Office of the U.S. Trade Representative knows the details. Even your senator or representative has little insight and less input into the discussions.



The pact threatens our economic security in two ways. The first threat involves the particulars contained in it, which have not been officially disclosed (but portions have been leaked). It's a grab-bag of special interest provisions: Pharmaceutical companies want greater leverage to prevent third world countries from making affordable generic drugs. Content companies — the media giants — want to extend copyright provisions out to 120 years in some cases. Tobacco companies want to limit countries’ ability to run anti-smoking campaigns. (For more info on such issues, see my earlier posts on the pact here and here.)

Even more troubling is the mechanism that is being set up to enforce the particular provisions. According to leaked drafts, the pact empowers a system of tribunals that circumvent U.S. courts. These tribunals will allow corporations to force governments to retract laws the voters have approved.

For example, a town might enact a “buy local” preference to support local small business and entrepreneurs. Under the Trans Pacific Partnership, a corporation anywhere could sue that town and force it to dismantle these so-called “trade barriers.” Similarly, governments anywhere could be forced to dismantle environmental protections, safe workplace rules and more. Do we really want a system where the most basic and essential regulations – for example, those that ensure the safety of pharmaceuticals – are at risk?



To get this stinking mess past Congress the administration needs to rely on a mechanism called “fast track.” Fast track basically presents the treaty to Congress on a take-it-or-leave-it basis with no amendments allowed. The deal’s backers know that without fast track the bill would be pecked to death in Congress as angry constituents attack its most onerous provisions. But if members of Congress can pass the bill without being held to account, they will go along in order to secure campaign donations from those with interests at stake in the treaty.

With Republicans firmly in control of both houses of Congress, the odds of the trade pact’s passage have gone up, according to polls of political scientists. It’s a bit ironic, though, that many who otherwise condemn the “executive overreach” of the Obama administration are all too eager to embrace it this time.



Many Democrats who ordinarily support the president are against the Trans Pacific Partnership in its present form and against the use of fast track to push it through. Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and George Miller, D-Calif., speak for a group of more than 150 House Democrats opposing fast track. Prominent progressive senators like Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., also oppose it. So far the president has shown little inclination to heed his progressive base.

At the same time, conservative media have highlighted the risks with fast track. A few conservative legislators have come out in direct opposition, more on constitutional grounds than on the particulars of the trade deal. Most recently, a bipartisan group in Congress has pressed the demand to include restrictions on currency manipulation as part of the treaty. Including currency restrictions at this late stage would likely scuttle the entire treaty, so perhaps this is a way for conservatives and progressives to join forces without appearing to do so.