Sounds great in theory, however as the already leaked documents indicate, this will
mean higher drug prices for consumers(pharmaceutical companies get extended patents)
I didn't see anything preventing corporations from closing down shop here and
relocating to vietnam and paying those workers 12 cents an hour. Beyond a token TAA
for extended unemployment benefits, I didn't see any worker protections for our jobs
here.
I also noticed that not all parts of any trade agreement would be made public.
You only get to know what they will allow you to know and nothing more. I'm still
reading this, Let me know what you find in this document that I'm either missing or
misinterpreting.
Corporations will be able to sue countries for lost profits from environmental and
consumer/worker protection laws that may get made according to the Wikileaks
documents.
Makes null and void any reference as to where a product comes from. So your
hamburger could come from China, Korea, an EU country or anywhere else and you
aren't allowed to know from where. Many countries have lax food safety standards and
this is what we will be subjecting ourselves to. If you want to know where your food
comes from and how it's raised and processed, you will need to start buying directly
from your local farmers or grow your own food if you aren't willing to be made a
guinea pigs for chemicals used in other counties that are banned here.
https://www.congress.gov/...
%22search%22%3A%5B%22passed+both+houses%22%5D%7D
https://www.congress.gov/...
%22%3A%5B%22passed+both+houses%22%5D%7D
This page alone is totally wrong. Israel should be punished for war crimes via sanctions
and divestments(Of course the USA is also guilty of such things)
"(i) To discourage actions by potential trading partners that directly or indirectly
prejudice or otherwise discourage commercial activity solely between the United States
and Israel.
(ii) To discourage politically motivated actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction
Israel and to seek the elimination of politically motivated nontariff barriers on Israeli
goods, services, or other commerce imposed on the State of Israel.
(iii) To seek the elimination of state-sponsored unsanctioned foreign boycotts against
Israel or compliance with the Arab League Boycott of Israel by prospective trading
partners.
(B) DEFINITION.—In this paragraph, the term “actions to boycott, divest from, or
sanction Israel” means actions by states, non-member states of the United Nations,
international organizations, or affiliated agencies of international organizations that are
politically motivated and are intended to penalize or otherwise limit commercial
relations specifically with Israel or persons doing business in Israel or in Israeli-
controlled territories."
Allows for changes in existing US laws:
(3) BILLS QUALIFYING FOR TRADE AUTHORITIES PROCEDURES.—(A) The
provisions of section 151 of the Trade Act of 1974 (in this title referred to as “trade
authorities procedures”) apply to a bill of either House of Congress which contains
provisions described in subparagraph (B) to the same extent as such section 151 applies
to implementing bills under that section. A bill to which this paragraph applies shall
hereafter in this title be referred to as an “implementing bill”.
(B) The provisions referred to in subparagraph (A) are—
(i) a provision approving a trade agreement entered into under this subsection and
approving the statement of administrative action, if any, proposed to implement such
trade agreement; and
(ii) if changes in existing laws or new statutory authority are required to implement
such trade agreement or agreements, only such provisions as are strictly necessary or
appropriate to implement such trade agreement or agreements, either repealing or
amending existing laws or providing new statutory authority.
(c) Extension Disapproval Process For Congressional Trade Authorities Procedures.—
Shown Here:
Passed Senate amended (05/22/2015)
Trade Act of 2015
TITLE I--TRADE PROMOTION AUTHORITY
.....
(Sec. 212) Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
(Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act), with respect to the implementation of direct spending
reductions, to require the President to order a sequestration for FY2024 that increases
from 0.0% to 0.25% the reduction of Medicare payments for the second six months of
the order.
con't:
Read More