

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said this week that it is unlikely that a Fast Track trade bill will come before lawmakers for consideration before April.
According to Reuters, "Hatch said talks on the trade bill, seen as key to finalizing the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), were 'stuck' over Democratic demands to allow unsatisfactory deals to be taken off the fast track."
While the delay affords time for Republican leaders to line up votes in favor of the corporate-friendly trade agreement, it also provides a window for "a long overdue serious national debate on our global trade and tax policy," writes Robert Borosage, founder and president of the Institute for America's Future, in an op-ed published Friday.
A good starting point for that debate could be the alternative trade strategy (pdf) released this week by the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC)--a set of broad principles "to establish standards for U.S. trade policy that put workers first, balance trade deficits, and improve labor and environmental protections around the world."
"The CPC seeks more trade, but on terms that will strengthen working families, not sabotage them," Borosage writes.
The Caucus charges that since implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, "the U.S. has lost millions of jobs in key sectors like manufacturing, wages have stagnated, and the standard of living for working families has dropped." Current trade deals up for negotiation, such as the TPP and the equally troubling Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe, offer the American people more of the same, the progressive lawmakers say.
"The United States must stop using trade agreements as investment deals for the world's wealthiest corporations and instead prioritize higher wages, safer work and environmental standards, and a healthier world economy," said the CPC in a statement.
Among other things, the Caucus's proposed model calls for:
In addition, the CPC would terminate the creation of a private court system for foreign investors, strengthen trade adjustment assistance, and prohibit currency manipulation.
"All of these principles are basic common sense," Borosage argues. "All are elements of a trade policy that represents the interests of the American people, as opposed to the interests of global corporations and investors.
He adds: "If accepted they would provide a framework for expanded trade in which workers both here and abroad would benefit. If refused, we could continue to trade with various countries, but without locking ourselves into trade deals that steal our jobs, undermine our wages and trample our courts."
Perhaps most importantly, Borosage concludes, the CPC's proposed model "shows there is an alternative" to secret trade deals written for--and by--multinational banks and corporations.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said this week that it is unlikely that a Fast Track trade bill will come before lawmakers for consideration before April.
According to Reuters, "Hatch said talks on the trade bill, seen as key to finalizing the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), were 'stuck' over Democratic demands to allow unsatisfactory deals to be taken off the fast track."
While the delay affords time for Republican leaders to line up votes in favor of the corporate-friendly trade agreement, it also provides a window for "a long overdue serious national debate on our global trade and tax policy," writes Robert Borosage, founder and president of the Institute for America's Future, in an op-ed published Friday.
A good starting point for that debate could be the alternative trade strategy (pdf) released this week by the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC)--a set of broad principles "to establish standards for U.S. trade policy that put workers first, balance trade deficits, and improve labor and environmental protections around the world."
"The CPC seeks more trade, but on terms that will strengthen working families, not sabotage them," Borosage writes.
The Caucus charges that since implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, "the U.S. has lost millions of jobs in key sectors like manufacturing, wages have stagnated, and the standard of living for working families has dropped." Current trade deals up for negotiation, such as the TPP and the equally troubling Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe, offer the American people more of the same, the progressive lawmakers say.
"The United States must stop using trade agreements as investment deals for the world's wealthiest corporations and instead prioritize higher wages, safer work and environmental standards, and a healthier world economy," said the CPC in a statement.
Among other things, the Caucus's proposed model calls for:
In addition, the CPC would terminate the creation of a private court system for foreign investors, strengthen trade adjustment assistance, and prohibit currency manipulation.
"All of these principles are basic common sense," Borosage argues. "All are elements of a trade policy that represents the interests of the American people, as opposed to the interests of global corporations and investors.
He adds: "If accepted they would provide a framework for expanded trade in which workers both here and abroad would benefit. If refused, we could continue to trade with various countries, but without locking ourselves into trade deals that steal our jobs, undermine our wages and trample our courts."
Perhaps most importantly, Borosage concludes, the CPC's proposed model "shows there is an alternative" to secret trade deals written for--and by--multinational banks and corporations.
Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said this week that it is unlikely that a Fast Track trade bill will come before lawmakers for consideration before April.
According to Reuters, "Hatch said talks on the trade bill, seen as key to finalizing the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), were 'stuck' over Democratic demands to allow unsatisfactory deals to be taken off the fast track."
While the delay affords time for Republican leaders to line up votes in favor of the corporate-friendly trade agreement, it also provides a window for "a long overdue serious national debate on our global trade and tax policy," writes Robert Borosage, founder and president of the Institute for America's Future, in an op-ed published Friday.
A good starting point for that debate could be the alternative trade strategy (pdf) released this week by the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC)--a set of broad principles "to establish standards for U.S. trade policy that put workers first, balance trade deficits, and improve labor and environmental protections around the world."
"The CPC seeks more trade, but on terms that will strengthen working families, not sabotage them," Borosage writes.
The Caucus charges that since implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, "the U.S. has lost millions of jobs in key sectors like manufacturing, wages have stagnated, and the standard of living for working families has dropped." Current trade deals up for negotiation, such as the TPP and the equally troubling Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe, offer the American people more of the same, the progressive lawmakers say.
"The United States must stop using trade agreements as investment deals for the world's wealthiest corporations and instead prioritize higher wages, safer work and environmental standards, and a healthier world economy," said the CPC in a statement.
Among other things, the Caucus's proposed model calls for:
In addition, the CPC would terminate the creation of a private court system for foreign investors, strengthen trade adjustment assistance, and prohibit currency manipulation.
"All of these principles are basic common sense," Borosage argues. "All are elements of a trade policy that represents the interests of the American people, as opposed to the interests of global corporations and investors.
He adds: "If accepted they would provide a framework for expanded trade in which workers both here and abroad would benefit. If refused, we could continue to trade with various countries, but without locking ourselves into trade deals that steal our jobs, undermine our wages and trample our courts."
Perhaps most importantly, Borosage concludes, the CPC's proposed model "shows there is an alternative" to secret trade deals written for--and by--multinational banks and corporations.