Fast track is about pushing through the TPP, TTIP and future trade agreements that would massively increase the power of big international corporations and affect the daily lives of Americans.
While trade agreements are negotiated in secrecy, behind-closed doors, we have learned enough from leaks to know that the result of passing TPA to 'fast track' these trade agreements would affect everything from food safety to environmental protection to consumer financial protections.
I would like to believe that TPP will lead to more exports and jobs for the American people. But history shows that big trade agreements - from NAFTA to the Korea Free Trade Agreement - have resulted in fewer American jobs, lower wages, and a bigger trade deficit.
If we are to garner sustained U.S. domestic support for future trade agreements, we have to make sure those Americans who have suffered as a consequence of past agreements have an effective social safety net, adjustment assistance, opportunities for retraining and new job creation that enables all Americans to thrive.
To centralize power in the name of freedom is akin to putting a crime syndicate in charge of rooting out corruption. It is the normal state of politics that the more centralized it is, the more damage it does. Fast-track authority [for government-to-government trade agreements] centralizes power and is therefore part of the problem.
The Transatlantic and Transpacific Trade and Investment Partnerships have nothing to do with free trade. 'Free trade' is used as a disguise to hide the power these agreements give to corporations to use lawsuits to overturn sovereign laws of nations that regulate pollution, food safety, GMOs, and minimum wages.
I do think there would be a receptivity to somebody who campaigned in a straightforward, cohesive way, supporting an increase in the minimum wage, being for universal health care for all Americans, and opposing trade agreements like NAFTA.
Governments have been ceding power to big multinational corporations in the market. We see the manifest in a variety of ways. Where governments are giving up power to big international institutions like the World Trade Organization or NAFTA, which are disabling governments' ability to protect the rights of their own people.
Now Barack Obama, who campaigned for transparency, is the President defending secret negotiations on new trade agreements that are largely being written by corporate lawyers and lobbyists. He would give corporations the key to the treasury while he gets the authority to fast track another hammering of working people and the environment. Yet the only people who get a real tongue-lashing from this President's White House are progressives around town who dare to call him on the carpet for abandoning his promises.
TPP replicates similar language from past trade agreements that has allowed foreign corporations the right to challenge U.S. federal, state, and local laws outside of American courts. These tribunals will not meet our high standard of transparency and due process, and they will rely on weak impartiality rules for selecting judges.
We have to develop a strong economic message which says every American is entitled to health care through a national health care program. And we're not going to allow these large corporations to push through trade agreements which allow them to throw Americans out on the street and run to China.
If we want an international trade deal that advances the interests of our own people, then perhaps we don't need a 'fast-track' but a regular track: where the president sends us any proposal he deems worthy, and we review it on its own merits.
We want trade agreements that aid development and increase prosperity, growth and productivity at home and in our trade partner countries.
We can restore E.U. growth through reducing regulation, strengthening governance, pushing ahead with free trade agreements and strengthening the single market.
By reducing trade barriers, improving intellectual-property protections, and setting international rules of the road, TTIP has the potential to improve America and Europe's global competitiveness and strengthen their comparative advantages.
Our engagement through international economics, trade, these trade agreements, is vital and is linked to our national security. This is a lesson we learned from the '30s, it is a lesson we learned post-World War II, and it plays to our strengths.
Whenever people in Washington complain about spending cuts, they mean spending cuts that would affect defense contractors. They want to massively increase spending cuts everywhere else in the budget.