The White House flat out lies about the Investment State Dispute Settlement (TPP)

[cali]

Of course, we actually know they're lies because the ISDS is included in several other trade agreements including NAFTA.

What is the ISDS?

Among the most dangerous but least known parts of today's "trade" agreements are extraordinary new rights and privileges granted to foreign corporations and investors that formally prioritize corporate rights over the right of governments to regulate and the sovereign right of nations to govern their own affairs. These terms empower individual foreign corporations to skirt domestic courts and directly challenge any policy or action of a sovereign government before World Bank and UN tribunals.

Comprised of three private attorneys, the extrajudicial tribunals are authorized to order unlimited sums of taxpayer compensation for health, environmental, financial and other public interest policies seen as frustrating the corporations' expectations. The amount is based on the "expected future profits" the tribunal surmises that the corporation would have earned in the absence of the public policy it is attacking. There is no outside appeal. Many of these attorneys rotate between acting as tribunal "judges" and as the lawyers launching cases against the government on behalf of the corporations. Under this system, foreign corporations are provided greater rights than domestic firms.

This extreme "investor-state" system already has been included in a series of U.S. "trade" deals, forcing taxpayers to hand more than $400 million to corporations for toxics bans, land-use rules, regulatory permits, water and timber policies and more. Under a similar pact, a tribunal recently ordered payment of more than $2 billion to a multinational oil firm. Just under U.S. deals, more than $38 billion remains pending in corporate claims against medicine patent policies, pollution cleanup requirements, climate and energy laws, and other public interest policies. Continue reading...

<snip>

http://www.citizen.org/investorcases

What the White House recently said:


Senator Warren raises some important questions about an element of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) called Investor-State Dispute settlement, or ISDS.

There are good answers.

The purpose of investment provisions in our trade agreements is to provide American individuals and businesses who do business abroad with the same protections we provide to domestic and foreign investors alike in the United States.

ISDS is an arbitration procedure – similar to procedures used every day by businesses, governments, and private citizens across the globe – that allows for an impartial, law-based approach to resolve conflicts and has been important to encouraging development, rule of law, and good governance around the world. ISDS does not undermine U.S. sovereignty, change U.S. law, nor grant any new substantive rights to multinational companies.

<snip>

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/02/26/investor-state-dispute-settlement-isds-questions-and-answers

fucking false on the face of it. The ISDS bypasses a nation's (or community's) judiciary.

PROOF and there's a shitload more)

http://www.citizen.org/documents/renco-la-oroya-memo.pdf

[djean111]

1. Yes, it looks to me like the White House is flat out lying.

And the TPP is why I will never vote for Hillary Clinton. The TPP is not a simple little thing to "get over".

[msanthrope]

5. Um....no. The White House is not lying.....it's why the US has never lost

an ISDS case. Not one.....and this article has some anti United Nations crap if I ever read it.

[newfie11]

8. +1

Same here

[woo me with science]

2. Corporatists LIE. It is what they do.

We live in a vile, dishonest, magnificently funded propaganda state.

We have come to accept the flat-out lies and propaganda assaults of corporate government as business as usual. We shouldn't.

Insincere, massively publicized speeches about reining in military power, followed immediately by huge escalations in military power, a new war in Syria, a new war in Iraq, carpet bombing of captive populations in Gaza, a continuation of the unconscionable droning of civilians in multiple countries with which we are not at war, and a new TRILLION DOLLAR ramp-up of nuclear weapons...That's not acceptable.

Lying, manipulative claims to care about the environment, while selling off expanses of the Gulf of Mexico for drilling, opening the Atlantic Coast for drilling, relentless support for fracking, and defense of the most environmentally predatory "free trade" agreements in this nation's history.....That's not acceptable.

Shameless, lying speeches extolling the government's transparency and protection of whistleblowers and respect for journalism, when we have all seen the treatment of Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden by this administration, and when we have all witnessed the outrageous targeting of investigative journalists through abuse of the Espionage Act....That's not acceptable.

Disgusting claims to represent the interests of the 99 percent, while stuffing the cabinet with predatory corporatists, signing cuts in aid for the poor and disabled repeatedly, putting SS on the table as a "greater evil" to justify the imposition of austerity greater even that that Paul Ryan initially requested, giving nauseating speeches about the need to eat our peas while repeating Republican LIES tying SS to the defiicit, personally lobbying to gain settlements for criminal bankers, and then unconscionably lobbying for the criminal CRONYBUS to even further deregulate banks and allow the looting of America to happen again.....That's not acceptable.

We are fed on slick PR and orchestrated lies as standard MO of our government now. This administration has legalized propaganda aimed at Americans that was considered unacceptable in previous decades. We are constantly assaulted with vapid pretty words and pictures that lie to our faces about what this administration cares about and is actually doing. And now we cannot even have discussion on the internet without the weird, creepy voices of corporatism infesting every single conversation through relentless disinformation and propaganda campaigns revealed by Edward Snowden and others.

This nation has sunk to the level of a corrupt, totalitarian state in its contempt for its own citizens, all because corporate money now drives everything it does. This is the difference between a representative government and a corporate government. By definition, corporations exist to grow their own profit and power. They don't represent anyone but themselves. They manipulate to grow profit, just like our government constantly manipulates us to sell the profitable, predatory corporate agenda it has already decided to implement against our interests.

[font size=3]And now Hillary, author of the predatory TPP and enthusiastic supporter of expansing H1B visas, is lying to out faces that she cares about income inequality. We are treated like blithering idiots.[/font size]

Yes, the White House is lying to us. Hillary is lying to us. Wall Street and Madison Avenue are lying to us.

Time to reject the lies.


Huge K&R.

[msanthrope]

4. Got a legal challenge for you woo.....Name the ISDS case the US

has lost.

I mean we've had over 100 agreements where ISDS is part of the resolution process. Surely you can name a single case we've lost.

The point is is that the White House isn't lying.......the protections are so strong....that's why the United States has never lost a case.

[stillwaiting]

10. Why in the world would anyone want to establish the system anyway?!?!

How could it POSSIBLY be good for average citizens of any country (U.S. included).

You seem to support it so please tell me why you support ISDS.

Even if there are supposedly protections that protect the U.S. government from huge settlements, the very framework itself can lead to further consolidation of corporate control of world governments (including our own). That is exactly the WRONG direction we need to be heading FTLOG.

They can use the EXISTENCE of the ISDS as a bludgeoning tool (although it doesn't seem like they have to these days, but it would definitely add to their arsenal in getting corporate legislation passed).

And, ISDS IS used around the world to prevent national governments from doing all manner of things that would protect their citizens.

If ISDS is included in the TPP and the TTIP, I have very little doubt that the U.S. WILL lose eventually (although U.S. citizens can lose and lose big in the quality of legislation that gets passed even if a settlement doesn't happen). These multinational corporations have ZERO loyalty to the U.S, and once the table has been set they will begin to dine. At first they might take small meals, but it will end up as a ravenous feast (in regards to ISDS; they are already feasting heavily though, aren't they?) eventually I have no doubt. Whether that happens in the U.S. or not is not my only concern.

The ISDS will prevent citizens in their home countries from passing legislation/regulations that help protect them, it could, and most certainly would, end up in governments ELIMINATING certain protections/regulations, and it could end up in massive payments from national governments to big corporations for infringing on their profits. Period. I don't think that could possibly be up for debate at this point, but please do correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't that the very purpose of ISDS? If not, what is the purpose? I haven't even heard a good corporate-speak, B.S. reason that could provide justification for the ISDS.

Also, what would stop future changes (if they would even need to be made) from being made which eliminated any so-called protections that might be included. And, if those protections are so strong and the citizens are truly well-represented then this "trade" agreement needs to be transparent. This isn't the 1990's. We've come a long way since then, the middle class has been heavily eroded, and people are massively struggling to make ends meet due to the ever-ravenous, firmly entrenched, corporate control of our government.

Transparency or fast-track needs to fail.

P.S. Why are you only concerned about the U.S. "losing a case" as well? That's the type of thinking that pisses off the rest of the world and for good reason.

[msanthrope]

17. You mean a system that's been around in some shape or form for 200

years? A system that's part of 50 current trade deals we already have? I call this "concern" overblown ODS....how would you settle disputes then?

[stillwaiting]

42. ODS? That's all you have. Pathetic and offensive.

Not worth engaging with you anymore. Thanks for revealing your true opinions.

If you don't see that multinational corporations are tightening their grip on national governments around the world, then I'm not sure what's left to say.

I don't trust our government or other national governments to advocate on behalf of ordinary citizens over multinational corporations ESPECIALLY today. It's gotten much, much worse over the past few decades (especially after 9-11).

We live in a very different world today, but you keep talking about the past 200 years. It's SUPER relevant.

[msanthrope]

43. Beyond facts...yes. Of course multinationals are trying to tighten their grip.....

they have since the time of Bismark.

The problem is that when you have biased, agenda-driven articles like the OP posted, that rely on hyperbole, you aren't going to get reasoned debate. There are issues to discuss with the TPP. This isn't an OP to do so.

[Doctor_J]

11. nice, concise post, woo

Not sure why some cling to the notion that Obama and hrc are pure of heart, especially in the face of mountains of evidence of their corporatism. Don't give up the fight

[Enthusiast]

14. Nailed it again.

[L0oniX]

24. We are treated like blithering idiots who will let this keep happening.

[msanthrope]

26. You are being treated as a blithering idiot by the sources of the OP, who

presumes that you know nothing of history or fact.

Since woo is apparently refusing my legal challenge, I put it to you, then.....can you name a single ISDS case the US has lost?

[Trillo]

37. I don't know if Hillary is lying or not.

Politicians regularly take opportunities to use populist buzzwords in order to get elected, then once elected, little changes. One thing I did note, Clinton only made this statement after dominionists said something about Cruz transferring wealth to the righteous. So the timing suggests it's a campaign reaction, part of the election game.

[msanthrope]

3. Cali....the reason the US has NEVER lost a ISDS case?

Because what the White House says is true.

[cali]

6. So the only nation that counts is the U.S.? Nice

[msanthrope]

7. Now that I proved the White House isn't lying you're worried about the rest

of the world? Without googling...can you name the other signatory countries?

Without googling....tell us what UNCTAD is, and why I should believe the black helicopter anti United Nations propaganda from your source?

[cali]

9. Did you even see the case I cited? Was that a U.S. case, my dear Mis?

[msanthrope]

18. What case did you cite, cali? And it's ms. nt

[cali]

19. Last link in op. please at least read the summary.

[msanthrope]

21. Um....you do realize that's Peru being sued, not the US?

And....the attempted removal to an Article III court by the corporation strengthens the case for ISDS....Peru doesn't want this dispute in our courts.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. In a multi-lateral negotiation one must in fact consider one's own side as the only priority. Sorry.

If I am negotiating a contract for my services on a single project with one or more other parties, my only interests are my own, not those of the people from which I am seeking the very best deal for myself. They are also out to get the very best thing for themselves which is how it should be. My interest in their happiness extends only to how their happiness might serve me.

Would you actually negotiate with the interests of others placed over your own interests? Some do, which is why God made attorneys.

[cali]

13. I'm sorry, but that's obscene and it's outdated. One can both consider

one's "side" and consider the impact on such things as pollution, the environment, medicine, etc as issues that transcend "sides".

It's not about placing one's own interests below those of others. It's about considering the interests of people and communities over the interests of corporations.

[1StrongBlackMan]

15. The response doesn't have to make sense ...

it just must be a response ... lest others think your claim is ... well ... unresearched and likely false.

No ... My pundit of choice makes a claim supportive of my position ... I repeat it ... someone challenges my repeating of the claim ... I make a ridiculous response ... I, then, repeat the original claim (again and again).

[cali]

16. word salad. care to put it in English?

[1StrongBlackMan]

22. I'm sure you can figure it out. n/t

[msanthrope]

23. Peru. nt

[cali]

27. and? So you don't find this troubling because it happened in Peru?

It was an american corporation.

[msanthrope]

29. So you admit that the case you cited does not stand for what you claimed?

Now.....if you'd read your link, you'd note that US Corp wants article III removal. Which blows your second point out of the water, too.

I'd seriously consider deleting the thread where you confused Peru and the United States.

[NCTraveler]

20. Reading through what you have written, I don't see the lie from the WH.

Can you detail the lie itself? It also defines this as something new. How new? I thought this was a part of long standing trade agreements. Not new.

[msanthrope]

25. There isn't a lie from the White House, as the OP was completely debunked

in a few posts.....note how what I've written has gone unchallenged by fact?

[Bobbie Jo]

30. Wow

Some people will just blindly rec/endorse anything that fits the narrative.

I used to think DU was smarter than this Faux News level nonsense.

[msanthrope]

34. You know...after POSUCS, nothing surprises me. nt

[NCTraveler]

31. There are a number of things that don't seem accurate in the op.

At the same time I really do have great respect for cali and their posting on the TPP. Originally, cali had great links to go to and it really was educational. We seem to have gone in a different direction here. With my respect for cali on this subject, I wanted to ask a couple of follow-ups. I do not believe they post in bad faith yet this seems to fall flat on face value. From my interactions with cali in the past, I know if I feel I am being fed a lie by them, it is probably my lack of understanding that makes me see it as I do. That is why I give cali the respect of a follow up question. I have now also read your posts on the topic. I think we are in agreement and your position with respect to this op is where I am at. Yet I do not discount cali on this topic.

[msanthrope]

36. Unfortunately. ..the vast majority of the posting on the site about the TPP

is no better than this OP. And now that it's descended into personal invective against Obama and Hillary it's even less a coherent critique of the issues. Which is too bad because it deserves discussion.

[cali]

28. the basic lie is that the ISDS system is fair.

[msanthrope]

32. So you want the US to lose some cases, to make it 'fair?'

Cali.....up thread you confused Peru with the United States. I'd stop digging.

[cali]

40. no I did not. You're confused.

[snooper2]

33. Peru has nice trees

[NCTraveler]

38. I didn't think that is where the op was going. Seems it is.

Pretty ugly tree by the way. What does that make you?

[snooper2]

39. Peru Frog!

baby frog badass! My momma gonna kick your booty!

[NCTraveler]

41. There is some honesty.

That is a baby frog bad ass and I wouldn't mess with mom.

[NCTraveler]

35. "fair"

A lie based on the WH calling the system "fair." Truly ambiguous at best to be called a lie. Just about every group in the US has a similar mediation group set up. Look at FREC and their mediation set up. Saying it is different because we are dealing with other countries doesn't fly. FREC deals with multi-state real estate disputes if the principal piece of property is located in Florida. Just one example. Every state has a FREC, just named differently. When one becomes licensed, they agree to FREC arbitration in the state of Florida. Other options are often given but outcomes are binding.

[woo me with science]

44. Kick. Enough of corporate lies and liars. nt

[Scuba]

45. Kick. More than enough of corporate lies and liars.

[woo me with science]

46. kick

[AzDar]

47. K & R