In a recently released poll from the Coalition for Better Trade, a clear majority of voters who can offer an opinion about the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Agreement (TPP) say they oppose the deal. Of those voters who offered an opinion of TPP, 60 percent were opposed to the deal, and 30 percent were in favor. This deal is currently being negotiated by the Administration in Atlanta.
Almost half of those polled (47 percent) did not know enough about the TPP deal to offer an opinion. But among those that did, their opinion was clear. Opposition also cut across demographic groups. For those that had an opinion of TPP, the majorities of women (64 percent oppose) and men (59 percent oppose), voters over 50 (61 percent oppose) and under 50 (62 percent oppose), voters who have college educations (55 percent oppose) and those who are not college educated (67 percent oppose). Plus, a large majority of independent voters who have an opinion of the deal are opposed to TPP (67 percent oppose).
“While there is still some awareness building that needs to happen around TPP, the large majority of voters who know anything about it, oppose it wholeheartedly. They’ve seen the devastating effects that prior trade deals have had on American workers, and they don’t want more of the same,” said Khristyn Brimmeier, Communications Director for the Coalition for Better Trade. “In fact, the top concerns voters had were the negative consequences that the TPP would have on American jobs and wages, and the fact that this deal has been negotiated in secret. Voters do not like the idea that neither the public nor Congress has been allowed to see the provisions of the deal.”
“Voters are opposed to TPP, and the Administration and Congress should listen to what they have to say. Rather than continue to push for a deal based on 25 years of failed policy, the Administration and Congress should heed the public demand for a trade policy that’s transparent rather than one developed in secret and at the hand of global corporations, and one that will keep good jobs at here at home,” Brimmeier continued.
These findings are based on a national survey of 881 registered voters reached via live telephone interviews on both landlines and cell phones. The survey was conducted September 24-27, 2015 by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research on behalf of the Coalition for Better Trade. The margin of error for results is +/-3.30 percentage points at a 95 percent confidence interval.
If an enemy was seeking to hire someone to destroy America he might have hired the political leaders who created the foreign, undemocratic World Trade Organization (WTO), job killing North American “Free Trade” Agreement (NAFTA), the disastrous Korean-U.S. “Free Trade” Agreement (KORUS FTA) and the pending unholy trinity of trade agreements – the TPP, TTIP and TISA.
In 1994 there was NAFTA; an agreement that set out to reduce trade barriers and promote “free trade” between Mexico, Canada, and the United States (which turned out to be a disaster for Canada and the U.S.) Ross Perot’s comments “a giant sucking sound” turned out to be true.
In 2005 the US ratified CAFTA. Similar to NAFTA, this agreement attempted to eliminate trade barriers and widen the trade community. CAFTA included the Central American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and later the Dominican Republic.
The Korean-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, or KORUS FTA, went into effect in March 2012. The trade deficit with South Korea nearly tripled in one month to $1.8 billion. It proved to be yet another failure for the United State.
Now the TPP, TTIP and TISA will be even more damaging as it will not only further deplete our manufacturing base, it will also take international trade in services, banking and finance out of our control.
If these pass, every aspect of our economy will be controlled by foreigners. Most of our legislators are not even aware of what is in these agreement – they are TOP SECRET, with TISA set to remain top secret until 5years after it is signed!
To understand the effects of job killing “free trade” agreements, we should focus on what has happened under NAFTA. According to the Economic Policy Institute, NAFTA has increased our trade deficit with Mexico and Canada and crippled US jobs. NAFTA has allowed corporations to move their companies to less regulated production facilities abroad.
We must tell Congress that “free trade” is not what the United States or its workers need. To even consider this disastrous proposed trade agreement is to contemplate economic suicide. Click on the link below to contact your representatives in Washington.
Our “free trade” policies have allowed other countries to use unfair tactics to put our industries out of business. Theoretically these nations are committed to opening their markets to our goods – but they are not as foolish as we are to allow that to happen in an uncontrolled way.
Our trade treaties should protect our country from predatory foreign countries seeking to weaken or destroy American industry. To that end, tariffs should be enacted where needed and where practical, as was our policy and procedure in the past. Experience has shown that it is futile to expect other countries to adopt our policies on fair and free competition.
What we can do is control the impact of their policies on our economy. The most obvious tool we have is placing tariffs on their exports to us, as they do with our exports to them. No doubt our tariffs would unjustifiably upset them. We would also have to accept the possibility that our loans from them might suffer. However, in the long run, these negatives would be offset by positives and allow us to manufacture competitively and profitably for the first time in the last ten years.
Instead, we are left with a policy of unfettered “free trade” that has brought this nation disastrous deals such as NAFTA and the WTO. “Free trade,” as it is practiced by China, Japan, Mexico and some others, translates to unrestricted access to buy, sell, undercut, or put out of business any company we own (which has been happening at an accelerated rate). We are not allowed to prevent this, due to having signed these disastrous agreements with the WTO and NAFTA.
As long as we are rendered uncompetitive by the effects of these agreements there is nothing we can do, not only to compete, but to exist.
If we are to survive we must change this immediately or surrender in an economic war that has been forced on us and is destroying us. We have thus been rendered uncompetitive and defenseless and we will be forced to accept a future declining standard of living.
Food safety has been a major issue in the United States for years. Not because the food we produce is bad, but because much of the food that is imported from countries like China and Vietnam is severely hurting people in the United States. Our food safety regulations are strict to ensure healthy foods, however poor countries have much lower food safety standards than we do.
Vietnam uses chemicals that are banned in the United States in their fish farms yet we still open up our borders to them. China has been notorious for mislabeled food with past due expiration dates on their beef products yet we still allow it to come through onto our dinner plates.
The fact is that 3,000 people in the United States die each year from foodborne illnesses. To make matters worse, if the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is to pass, this will only become worse. Below are four reasons as to why the TPP makes food safety an even greater issue.
The FDA is currently underfunded and has only the resources to inspect 1 to 2 percent of imported food. The TPP would only stretch that further since more food imports will be flooding in than now. “We don’t have the regulatory capacity to deal with increased trade from a food standpoint,” said Tony Corbo, senior lobbyist for Food & Water Watch.
Food from all countries involved in the TPP would be deemed equal, even though one country might have higher standards than the others. “Fish raised with some antibiotics and other veterinary drugs banned in U.S. food production — but allowed in many other TPP countries — could be sold in U.S. grocery stores as a result of the agreement,” said Debbie Barker, international director for the Center for Food Safety.
Food labeling could completely disappear. According to citizen.org, “under TPP, any U.S. food safety rule on pesticides, labeling or additives that is higher than international standards would be subject to challenge as ‘illegal trade barriers.’ The U.S. would be required to eliminate these rules and allow in the unsafe food, or we would face trade sanctions.”
We would lose our food sovereignty. According to exposethetpp.org, any U.S. food safety rule on pesticides, labeling or additives that is higher than international standards would be subject to challenge as “illegal trade barriers.” The U.S. would be required to eliminate these rules and allow in the unsafe food, or we would face trade sanctions.
These negotiations are being held completely in secret. Why? Lori Wallach believes that the politicians don’t want the general public to know because the TPP would not survive public scrutiny. If we allow the TPP to pass, our quality of food will be compromised.
Almost half of those polled (47 percent) did not know enough about the TPP deal to offer an opinion. But among those that did, their opinion was clear. Opposition also cut across demographic groups. For those that had an opinion of TPP, the majorities of women (64 percent oppose) and men (59 percent oppose), voters over 50 (61 percent oppose) and under 50 (62 percent oppose), voters who have college educations (55 percent oppose) and those who are not college educated (67 percent oppose). Plus, a large majority of independent voters who have an opinion of the deal are opposed to TPP (67 percent oppose).
“While there is still some awareness building that needs to happen around TPP, the large majority of voters who know anything about it, oppose it wholeheartedly. They’ve seen the devastating effects that prior trade deals have had on American workers, and they don’t want more of the same,” said Khristyn Brimmeier, Communications Director for the Coalition for Better Trade. “In fact, the top concerns voters had were the negative consequences that the TPP would have on American jobs and wages, and the fact that this deal has been negotiated in secret. Voters do not like the idea that neither the public nor Congress has been allowed to see the provisions of the deal.”
“Voters are opposed to TPP, and the Administration and Congress should listen to what they have to say. Rather than continue to push for a deal based on 25 years of failed policy, the Administration and Congress should heed the public demand for a trade policy that’s transparent rather than one developed in secret and at the hand of global corporations, and one that will keep good jobs at here at home,” Brimmeier continued.
These findings are based on a national survey of 881 registered voters reached via live telephone interviews on both landlines and cell phones. The survey was conducted September 24-27, 2015 by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research on behalf of the Coalition for Better Trade. The margin of error for results is +/-3.30 percentage points at a 95 percent confidence interval.
If an enemy was seeking to hire someone to destroy America he might have hired the political leaders who created the foreign, undemocratic World Trade Organization (WTO), job killing North American “Free Trade” Agreement (NAFTA), the disastrous Korean-U.S. “Free Trade” Agreement (KORUS FTA) and the pending unholy trinity of trade agreements – the TPP, TTIP and TISA.
In 1994 there was NAFTA; an agreement that set out to reduce trade barriers and promote “free trade” between Mexico, Canada, and the United States (which turned out to be a disaster for Canada and the U.S.) Ross Perot’s comments “a giant sucking sound” turned out to be true.
In 2005 the US ratified CAFTA. Similar to NAFTA, this agreement attempted to eliminate trade barriers and widen the trade community. CAFTA included the Central American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and later the Dominican Republic.
The Korean-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, or KORUS FTA, went into effect in March 2012. The trade deficit with South Korea nearly tripled in one month to $1.8 billion. It proved to be yet another failure for the United State.
Now the TPP, TTIP and TISA will be even more damaging as it will not only further deplete our manufacturing base, it will also take international trade in services, banking and finance out of our control.
If these pass, every aspect of our economy will be controlled by foreigners. Most of our legislators are not even aware of what is in these agreement – they are TOP SECRET, with TISA set to remain top secret until 5years after it is signed!
To understand the effects of job killing “free trade” agreements, we should focus on what has happened under NAFTA. According to the Economic Policy Institute, NAFTA has increased our trade deficit with Mexico and Canada and crippled US jobs. NAFTA has allowed corporations to move their companies to less regulated production facilities abroad.
We must tell Congress that “free trade” is not what the United States or its workers need. To even consider this disastrous proposed trade agreement is to contemplate economic suicide. Click on the link below to contact your representatives in Washington.
Our “free trade” policies have allowed other countries to use unfair tactics to put our industries out of business. Theoretically these nations are committed to opening their markets to our goods – but they are not as foolish as we are to allow that to happen in an uncontrolled way.
Our trade treaties should protect our country from predatory foreign countries seeking to weaken or destroy American industry. To that end, tariffs should be enacted where needed and where practical, as was our policy and procedure in the past. Experience has shown that it is futile to expect other countries to adopt our policies on fair and free competition.
What we can do is control the impact of their policies on our economy. The most obvious tool we have is placing tariffs on their exports to us, as they do with our exports to them. No doubt our tariffs would unjustifiably upset them. We would also have to accept the possibility that our loans from them might suffer. However, in the long run, these negatives would be offset by positives and allow us to manufacture competitively and profitably for the first time in the last ten years.
Instead, we are left with a policy of unfettered “free trade” that has brought this nation disastrous deals such as NAFTA and the WTO. “Free trade,” as it is practiced by China, Japan, Mexico and some others, translates to unrestricted access to buy, sell, undercut, or put out of business any company we own (which has been happening at an accelerated rate). We are not allowed to prevent this, due to having signed these disastrous agreements with the WTO and NAFTA.
As long as we are rendered uncompetitive by the effects of these agreements there is nothing we can do, not only to compete, but to exist.
If we are to survive we must change this immediately or surrender in an economic war that has been forced on us and is destroying us. We have thus been rendered uncompetitive and defenseless and we will be forced to accept a future declining standard of living.
Food safety has been a major issue in the United States for years. Not because the food we produce is bad, but because much of the food that is imported from countries like China and Vietnam is severely hurting people in the United States. Our food safety regulations are strict to ensure healthy foods, however poor countries have much lower food safety standards than we do.
Vietnam uses chemicals that are banned in the United States in their fish farms yet we still open up our borders to them. China has been notorious for mislabeled food with past due expiration dates on their beef products yet we still allow it to come through onto our dinner plates.
The fact is that 3,000 people in the United States die each year from foodborne illnesses. To make matters worse, if the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) is to pass, this will only become worse. Below are four reasons as to why the TPP makes food safety an even greater issue.
The FDA is currently underfunded and has only the resources to inspect 1 to 2 percent of imported food. The TPP would only stretch that further since more food imports will be flooding in than now. “We don’t have the regulatory capacity to deal with increased trade from a food standpoint,” said Tony Corbo, senior lobbyist for Food & Water Watch.
Food from all countries involved in the TPP would be deemed equal, even though one country might have higher standards than the others. “Fish raised with some antibiotics and other veterinary drugs banned in U.S. food production — but allowed in many other TPP countries — could be sold in U.S. grocery stores as a result of the agreement,” said Debbie Barker, international director for the Center for Food Safety.
Food labeling could completely disappear. According to citizen.org, “under TPP, any U.S. food safety rule on pesticides, labeling or additives that is higher than international standards would be subject to challenge as ‘illegal trade barriers.’ The U.S. would be required to eliminate these rules and allow in the unsafe food, or we would face trade sanctions.”
We would lose our food sovereignty. According to exposethetpp.org, any U.S. food safety rule on pesticides, labeling or additives that is higher than international standards would be subject to challenge as “illegal trade barriers.” The U.S. would be required to eliminate these rules and allow in the unsafe food, or we would face trade sanctions.
These negotiations are being held completely in secret. Why? Lori Wallach believes that the politicians don’t want the general public to know because the TPP would not survive public scrutiny. If we allow the TPP to pass, our quality of food will be compromised.
RSS Feed
