DEAL WOULD PUSH STEALTH ECO-RADICAL AGENDA …
|| By ROBERT ROMANO || Global trade agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) can be used to “reduce greenhouse gas emissions” around the world. So said chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers Jason Furman in an April 8 speech to the Brookings Institution in favor of the Pacific trade deal.
Furman was referencing the 2015 Economic Report of the President, outlining the supposed environmental protection benefits of trade deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. According to the report, “Trade agreements can raise environmental standards in countries that otherwise would not be motivated to raise standards on their own.”
The report also states “strong, enforceable environmental provisions pursued as part of our bilateral and regional trade agreements can help raise environmental standards in our trading partners…”
To put the icing on the cake, the U.S. Trade Representative website on the trade deal explicitly states, “Through the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the United States is negotiating for robust environment standards and commitments from member countries.”
As the Trans-Pacific Partnership is negotiated, that certainly sounds like bad news for American coal producers, particularly those in Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) home state of Kentucky. The coal industry’s export interests could be adversely harmed if it turns out the trade agreement is really a stealth climate treaty.
And Senate Republicans may be prepared to put the trade agreement to an up or down vote — before they even read it.
That’s right. Next week, the Senate will be introducing so-called “fast track” trade promotion authority legislation to allow the trade agreement to come to the floor on an expedited basis without even the opportunity to amend it — after President Barack Obama is done negotiating it.
They’re not even going to review the agreement before they sacrifice the supermajority requirement to adopt it …
(To continue reading this piece, press the “Read More …” icon below).
Robert Romano is the Senior Editor of Americans for Limited Government. This piece (reprinted with permission) originally appeared on NetRightDaily.com.
***
18 comments
So: McConnell and the Republicans doing something for reasons Romano cannot figure out is Obama’s fault?
BTW, the TPP is not about “free trade”. It is in the interest of protecting the intellectual property of big business and preserving the high prices of patented drugs and trademarked software. Climate change is just a distraction.
Who said anything about it being Obama’s fault that Republicans are taking up the legislation? Obama requested it, and congressional Republicans are acquiescing. The piece holds Congress accountable for giving Obama a blank check to negotiate this trade deal, which the U.S. Trade Representative acknowledges will include environmental provisions, and which the chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers says can reduce carbon emissions. Should we take your word for it, or the people actually negotiating the treaty?
There is no such thing as “the environment.” I suggest you ban that word from articles and comments on this site.
“… Like lambs to the slaughter, they’re drinking the water … And breathing the airrrrr.” -Tom Leher song.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whPzJbntlnY
Don’t forget “New Math’ and “Poisoning Pigeons in the Park”.
Ah the HELL with this!
C’mon Fits!
Obama is shaking hands with that Damn Comie and Al Sharpton is heading this way!
Run something to get these Right Wing kooks really blabbering!
Well he did have a Clyburn piece. That sets them howling.
Free trade is about freedom. In all this discussion about the treaties, no one mentions the restrictions on American goods by other countries that will be eliminated and the retaliatory restrictions we place on them that end up hurting consumers. We must resist the habit fearing one lost job over thousands saving money.
I find it ironic that the very people who complain about Washington being too powerful are the same ones that want them to tell us what we can and can not buy based only on it’s origin.
Free Trade is about Jobs. It’s human psychology that people are more motivated by fear of losing their jobs than the opportunity of getting more and better jobs. If these anti free trade advocates had their way, the thousands of auto workers at BMW and it’s South Carolina suppliers would unemployed or working in out of date government protected textile mills. They support the same policies that have been so successful in Cuba and Venezuela.
If we want to be successful, we have to compete. We can beat other countries cheap labor because of our stable government, our freer society, our superior court system, our nation infrastructure and our higher education system. Or we can choose not to compete. We over protect our worker, thus trapping them in to low wage obsolete industries. We’ll be like the soccer team where everyone gets a trophy, but they all suck.
Have some courage South Carolina. We are successful. We are the nation’s number one exporter of automobiles and rubber products. We export commercial jets and gas turbines. Trade has been a tremendous benefit to South Carolina. Does anyone doubt that making it freer will not make us prosper more. We benefit by giving up a false short term job security for long term job opportunities.
Heck yeah, since Obama says its free trade it must be.
Just like, “If you like your insurance you can keep it.”
You can put a turd on stick and call it a Fudgesicle, but that doesn’t make it one.
Sorry, you can wrap your lips around i but I’m not buying this turd from Obama’s no matter what he says it is.
It is much freer than what is current law. The most important part is the foreign regulations on our exports that are swept away. Any evaluation of it should compare it with current law.
BibleThumper, you drinking the coolaid?
Read his lips. If you like free trade, you can keep it.
Yes. And “restrictions” have never improved “free trade”.
“… trade agreements can raise environmental standards … ”
… Or lower them. Considering governments past performances, which way would you bet?
But….. Furman is right.
Global trade agreements like the
Trans-Pacific Partnership CAN be used to “reduce greenhouse gas
emissions” around the world. It will destroy trade among our remaining friends and send us hurtling off into a world of confusion and hatred. And so-called “green-house” gases will continue to grow, but we won’t have the money to measure it – just posturing and braying that there are less.
Ha! Ha! America’s coal exports will be threatened! Um, what “coal exports” are those, exactly? I say we keep all our coal and pump the smoke directly into House Republican meetings.
The U.S. has an abundance of coal, and yes, we do export it. 117 million short tons annual, according to the Energy Information Agency: http://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/pdf/t7p01p1.pdf