AfD Portland marches against TPP

Alliance for Democracy Oregon members traveled by bus to the Peace Arch in Blaine WA on Dec 3, 2012 for a rally and summit with others opposing the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) from Washington state and from Canada.  They joined friends from the Oregon Fair Trade Campaign and many unions in Oregon to make the trip. Here's AfD members Greg Magolis, David Delk (who is also chapter president and AfD's national co-chair) and Barbara Council. And yes, that is a giant posterior-shaped balloon hoisting a slogan into the air.

All kidding aside, summit participants decided to get at least 1,000 organization sign-ons to a tri-party statement opposing the TPP. Negotiations for this deal have been carried on in secret, with even Congress locked out of the process. Lack of transparency is only one concern with the TPP--it has the potential to undermine democratically-determined laws on public health, "Buy American" compacts, and the environment.

For more rally pictures (and a view of the Portland chapter in action this year) see this page on their website.

Read more...

Defending Water in Maine takes on the proposed East-West Corridor

The Defending Water in Maine campaign will be holding several East-West Corridor informational events across the state during July and August. The latest list is here on the campaign website, along with the first of a two-part video report on the planned super-corridor.

In May, a full house packed the Foxcroft Academy auditorium in Dover-Foxcroft to hear Peter Vigue, CEO of Cianbro, a construction company that stands to make millions off the supercorridor, which would consist of a private toll road for tractor-trailer trucks, as well as pipelines and power lines. Many of the 1000 people at the hearing wore hunter orange hats or shirts to protest the project.

Opposition to the project has come from farmers, hunters, environmentalists, and local landowners. Chris Buchanan, of Defending Water in Maine who also coordinates the state wide coalition, points out that constructing the highway opens the door to more extractive industry: “If it was built, it would open up areas of Maine that are currently very difficult to get to for companies like Nestlé to mine for water and sell it on the global market.”

 

Read more...

Multiple countries are rejecting investor state dispute settlement clauses in free trade agreements

by Janet Eaton

There appears to be a growing awareness that NAFTA-style foreign investor privileges and their private "investor-state dispute system [ISD]", which have been among the most controversial aspects of past US trade deals, should be rejected in trade and investment agreements. (ISDs allow corporations to sue to overturn local or national regulations or laws that are perceived as impinging in any way on the "right" of the corporation to profit. Past suits have targeted environmental and health regulations.)

In particular this provision has emerged as a point of major contention in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations, with Julia Gillard's Australian government announcing last April that they would reject investor-state arbitration in all trade agreements. It seems that her government was not only concerned about the loss of public policy sovereignty but was also taking seriously the advice of the  Australian Productivity Commission which concluded there were "few clear benefits, and several worrying risks, associated with such provisions."

Following on the heels of Australia, Korea appeared poised to go the same route with polls showing the opposition, which rejected ISD, favoured to win the upcoming election; however, in the election held last week, the governing Conservatives managed to hold on to a slender majority so the jury is still out as regards South Korea. However one clue might be found in a recent April 6th claim by India that it plans to abolish the investor-state dispute system and renegotiate FTAs with South Korea, Singapore, and other countries. According to the English language newspaper, Indian Express,  New Delhi´s decision to abandon the ISD system is based on its first-hand experience with the potential threat foreign companies pose to public policy on the grounds of investment agreement violations.

Other countries that have concerns with, are opposed to, or have rejected, ISD, include the South African government which is re-examining the ISD system after a policy of affirmative action for blacks, aimed at reducing economic disparities between white and black people, was targeted in 2007 by a multinational corporation; the Brazilian parliament which has refused to ratify a number of investment agreements on the grounds that they infringe on legislative sovereignty and Ecuador and Bolivia that have pulled out of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes convention.

Meanwhile in the US and Canada, both President Obama and Prime Minister Harper are pushing Investor State Dispute settlement in their frenzy to initiate  free trade deals in every corner of the world. In the case of Obama this is in spite of his presidential campaign promises to review NAFTA Ch 11 [investor state] and other harmful aspects of free trade agreements in general and in spite of over 100 members of Congress and many progressive NGOs expressing support for the TRADE [Trade Reform, Accountability, Development and Employment] Act introduced by Representative Michael Michaud [D-Maine] and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio).

In the case of Mr. Harper, he ignores calls from civil society, NGOs, institutes, activists and three opposition parties to renegotiate NAFTA Ch 11 while belittling anyone who tries to make the case. . [6]

Hopefully this momentum to reject the ISD system will eventually be powerful enough to influence the Harper government because in the words of a statement of concern initiatied by Canadian academics with expertise relating to investment law, arbitration, and regulation:

"We have a shared concern for the harm done to the public welfare by the international investment regime, as currently structured, especially its hampering of the ability of governments to act for their people in response to the concerns of human development and environmental sustainability."

Photo: Foreign Policy In Focus

Read more...

Sunday's DC action against KeystoneXL

Saying no to the Keystone XL oil pipeline, protesters, including AfD vice co-chair and Defending Water for Life campaign coordinator Ruth Caplan, surrounded the White House on Sunday. More photos from Ruth are here.

Meanwhile, Brad Johnson of ThinkProgress debunks the idea that the KeystoneXL project will create jobs in this article. Pipeline proponents throw out all kinds of figures here, from "13,000 union jobs" in the Wall Street Journal (one imagines the "union" part came out through gritted teeth) to “more than 250,000 permanent jobs," according to the US Chamber of Commerce.

But according to Johnson,

these tremendous-seeming jobs claims are based entirely on a report by the Perryman Group, commissioned by the pipeline’s owner TransCanada, whose results have been described as “dead wrong” and “meaningless” by Council on Foreign Relations fellow Michael Levi and environmental economist Andrew Leach, neither of whom oppose the construction of the pipeline.

Instead, "the only independent analysis conducted of the American job-creation potential of the Keystone XL pipeline finds that between 500 and 1400 temporary construction jobs will be created, with a negative long-term economic impact as gas prices rise in the Midwest and environmental costs are borne," Johnson writes.

Read more...

Don't give corporations more power to attack US laws

Technical Barriers to Trade clauses are another reason to oppose the South Korean, Colombian and Panamanian FTAs

by David e. Delk, co-chair, Alliance for Democracy
President Obama has recently promoted three Bush regime-negotiated bilateral "Free Trade Agreements" (FTA's) with South Korea, Panama and Columbia. He claims these agreements are essential to creating jobs here in the U.S. In fact, he advocated for these agreements in his job creation address to Congress last week.

From the history of other trade agreements, we know that in fact trade agreements have resulted in a net loss of U.S. jobs. This will be particularly true for South Korea. The economies of Panama and Colombia are so small that very few jobs could possibly result.

Equally important, these bilateral agreements, just like CAFTA and NAFTA, empower corporations to sue our government directly in undemocratic trade tribunals whenever they believe that government regulation or law represents a barrier to trade, especially if future profits are alleged to be threatened!

This means that environmental protection, public health, or laws and regulations in any other area where human needs come into conflict with the corporate bottom line could be challenged and overturned by secret trade tribunals.

I offer the examples below to show the importance of strongly opposing these agreements.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) has reached two new decisions this month which further empower corporations, overriding local decision making in favor of decisions made at the international level by privately empowered WTO trade tribunals. A third decision is expected within days.

The three decisions involve the WTO...

Banning the voluntary labeling of canned tuna as "Dolphin Safe"—these labels are illegal because they're restrictive of trade, says the WTO. Mexico won this case against the U.S.

Hindering efforts to reduce teen smoking—the US had, among other actions, banned the sale of clove and other types of flavored cigarettes as being "trainers" by cigarette companies to get youth addicted to smoking. Can't be banned, says the WTO. Indonesia won this case against the U.S.

Banning country of origin labeling of beef and other meat products--the US required country of origin labels after the mad cow and e.coli scares of the 1990s. The WTO is expected to say no dice. Our neighbors Canada and Mexico brought this case against the U.S.

These decisions are based on trade language called "technical barriers to trade" which is part of just about all trade agreements. Health provisions, environmental protection, worker safety—all are technical barriers to trade in the world of "free trade" promoted by these agreements.

Under the WTO, countries have to sue on behalf of their corporations. With bilateral agreements allowing for corporations to sue governments directly, we can expect even more harmful decisions.

Prior to the advent of these trade agreements, American states or the U.S. Congress were able to decide on these types of rules and laws. Now an international trade tribunal decides with no recourse to the American court or legislative systems. With every such decision, our ability to be a sovereign people is diminished. Sovereignty indicates who gets to decide. It is clearly not "We, the People" any more.

Take action now!
Move now to stop the web of corporate power from further attacks on democratic decision making. Call your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and demand that they vote against the U.S.-Korea, U.S.-Colombia, and U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreements.

David e. Delk,
Co-chair, Alliance for Democracy

Need contact info?
You can call the White House at 202-456-1111. See this page for Senate contact information, and this page for House members. A phone call carries much more weight than an on-line comment, so we ask you to please take a few minutes and contact these offices directly. Let us know what response you receive! Email afd@thealliancefordemocracy, or call 781-894-1179.

Read more...

"Dump the Sick" blog offers a Canadian perspective on US health care

Darren Puscas, a labor researcher and activist based in Toronto, has started a new blog, Dump the Sick, designed to set Americans straight about universal health insurance in Canada, cover Canadian perspectives on American health care, and highlight the activities of the "cast of thousands" health industry lobby. Darren will be interviewing Canadians on their
universal healthcare thoughts and experiences for a "multimedia" section of his site.

You can email Darren at info@dumpthesick.com, and follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/dumpthesick.

Read more...