[S]tate lawmakers are mounting a grassroots effort against a federal trade agreement that they say would allow multinational corporations to overturn Vermont’s environmental regulations.
Nine Democrats in the Vermont Legislature have joined Vermont’s congressional delegation and 100 lawmakers nationwide in opposing portions of the international trade deal called the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The trade deal is making its way through Congress this summer, and so-called “fast track” legislation could be passed in a matter of days.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, is a proposed multinational trade agreement with 11 countries that share borders with the Pacific Ocean, including countries from Chile to Japan. The Obama administration has negotiated the deal privately with roughly 600 representatives from businesses and labor unions, state and federal lawmakers say. But states have not been involved, and public officials across Vermont are calling for more-open proceedings.
Wikileaks.org has been releasing sealed documents from the TPP agreement since 2013 and continues to leak documents detailing how the trade pact would affect intellectual property rights, the pharmaceutical industry, and environmental laws. The website that facilitates anonymous leaking of private information has been the main outlet exposing the issue to state lawmakers and the public, which it does through the publication of original documents. The latest Wikileak was Wednesday.
Wikileaks documents
2013 Wikileak
2014 Wikileak
Environmental info
Health care info
At the federal level, several Republicans and conservative economists support the TPP, saying the agreement furthers the popular concept of international free trade, helps small businesses across the country boost exports and creates jobs. Liberal lawmakers contest that the deal allows “unfettered” free trade that would help companies ship jobs to Vietnam, lower wages for workers in the U.S. and effectively dissolve the country’s environmental regulations.
Vermont lawmakers who oppose the deal are zeroing on provisions within the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement that would allow multinational corporations to sue the United States in a quasi-judicial international tribunal if the company claims that Vermont’s regulations would hurt the company’s future profits. (Those tribunals are part of investor-state dispute settlements.)
Additionally, Vermont lawmakers oppose legislation in the U.S. House that would put the trade agreement on a so-called fast-track for approval. The deal that the U.S. Senate passed in May would allow Congress vote “yes” or “no” on trade deals, but take away senators’ right to make amendments from the Senate floor.
“Open the closed doors,” said Sen. Ginny Lyons, D-Chittenden. “If the trade agreement were only about tariffs, taxes and fees, that might be fine. But these trade agreements are beginning to be about everything. When trade agreements go beyond tariffs and go to policy, that’s a concern. When and if the fast-track goes forward … that’s a concern.”
Lyons is the lead signatory on a letter from more than 100 state lawmakers from 41 states opposing the trade agreement itself, its private negotiation process and the fast-track process. The letter from the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators also includes signatures from eight Democratic state representatives from Vermont.
“The lack of transparency — indeed, extreme secrecy — of the trade negotiation process, coupled with the failure of negotiators to meaningfully consult on the far-reaching impact of these agreements on state and local laws, even when binding on our states, is of grave concern to us,” the letter reads.
“As state legislators, we are not at the table,” the letter continues. “Of the more than 600 cleared advisors [who can negotiate the trade deal], two state legislators have been invited to participate. … When Congress abdicates much of its authority, as it does in the Fast Track process, our democracy suffers.”
The letter then calls on Congress to remove any language in the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal that would allow corporations to take states to the international tribunals and establish “robust, transparent and inclusive oversight of both the negotiation process and the agreements themselves.”
Rep. David Deen, D-Westminster, said he, Lyons and others have worked with the state Legislature’s in-house lawyers to understand how different international trade agreements can preempt state law. Deen said the Trans-Pacific Partnership could essentially overturn regulations if a corporation successfully brings the federal government to an international tribunal over regulations enforced in Vermont.
“(Corporations) can bring a claim in the international court that our environmental laws are a barrier to trade under the terms of that international agreement,” Deen said. “And if the international court decides that ‘yes, it is in fact a barrier to trade under that agreement,’ our laws are considered a barrier to international trade and can get overturned.”
Rep. Mike Yantachka, D-Charlotte, also signed the letter. He called the letter the latest piece of state-level advocacy urging Congress to reject the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In 2013, the Legislature passed Resolution 230 on a bipartisan basis calling concern to the proposed deal.
“What the president wants to do is fast-track the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” Yantachka said. “What we want is a full debate on the floor of the House and Senate about the full impact of these provisions. Our congressional delegation, I’m happy to say, is 100 percent against fast-tracking the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.”
Vermont delegation’s response
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., opposed the North American Free Trade Agreement in the 1990s and is one of the most vocal opponents to the entire Trans-Pacific Partnership.
“The facts are very clear: The TPP follows in the footsteps of other disastrous trade agreements,” Sanders said in a news conference this month.
“Over and over again, we were told by corporate America and their representatives about all of the jobs that these trade agreements would create, and over and over again the proponents of unfettered free trade were wrong,” Sanders said.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., opposes the fast-track legislation dating back to at least 2014, according to a letter, and voted against that piece in May. Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., also opposes the fast-track deal, according to his spokesperson.
The lower chamber in Congress will vote on the “fast-track” deal in a matter of days, pending a decision from Republican leadership on when to schedule the vote.
The letter can be seen here:
