January, 23 2014, 10:16am EDT
New Campaign Launched: "10 Days to Stop Fast Track" Brings Together Diverse Network of Labor, Internet, and Environmental Activists
10 days of intense action from Jan 22 - 31 includes in-person protests, national call Congress day, in-district meetings, reddit AMA, and State of the Union twitterstorm. AFL-CIO, Sierra Club, reddit, Fight for the Future, and over 60 other groups are among the participants
WASHINGTON
An unprecedented network of advocacy organizations, labor unions, tech companies and environmental groups have initiated ten days of coordinated action aimed at halting the controversial "Fast Track" legislation introduced by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) and Congressman Dave Camp (R-MI) earlier this month in an effort to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) without a full Congressional debate. The "10 Days to Stop Fast Track" campaign will run from January 22-31.
More than 60 organizations are working together to oppose the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act of 2014, which threatens to remove the ability of Congress and the public to meaningfully debate trade agreements like the TPP and ensure necessary protections for basic rights.
Read over 50 reasons to oppose Fast Track here: https://StopFastTrack.com
View photos of actions across the country here: https://StopFastTrack.com/#photos
Participants include: reddit, AFL-CIO, Sierra Club, Fight for the Future, Imgur, Communications Workers of America, BoingBoing, Corporate Accountability International, the Machinists Union IAMAW, Electronic Frontier Foundation, MoveOn, Rainforest Action Network, United Students for Fair Trade, Organic Consumers Association, Popular Resistance, ThoughtWorks, Sea Shepherd, Citizens Trade Campaign, 350.org, Demand Progress, Progressive Democrats of America, OpenMedia, GMO Action Alliance, Free Press, Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, Jobs With Justice, and more than 30 other groups.
Groups from across the political spectrum have condemned the TPP for its lack of transparency, and are now uniting to stop the Fast Track bill in the House of Representatives (HR 3830) and in the Senate (S 1900). Stopping Fast Track is the key to preventing the TPP from undermining democratic decision-making and negatively impacting communities in the U.S. and worldwide.
The StopFastTrack.com site lists logos from dozens of organizations allowing groups to articulate -- in their own words -- why they each oppose Fast Track.
"10 Days to Stop Fast Track" launched yesterday with a full day of rallies, Congressional office visits and other events across the country coordinated by the Communications Workers of America [See photos here] with support from the MoveOn National TPP team. Other groups have many actions planned during the 10-day period, including more on the ground protests, a Twitter Storm during the State of the Union, and a national call-in day on January 29th. The 10 days will culminate with an Inter-Continental Day of Action on January 31st, marking the anniversary of the passage of NAFTA, which will see hundreds of protests and events across North America.
Below are statements from several organizations participating in the 10 Days to Stop Fast Track. For a complete list, go to https://StopFastTrack.com.
For interviews, please contact Christina DiPasquale at 202.716.1953 or christina@fitzgibbonmedia.com.
AFL-CIO
"It is past time for the United States to get off the corporate hamster wheel on trade. Fast Track renews the undemocratic "trade promotion" process and completely fails to provide the transparency, accountability and oversight necessary for the far-reaching trade and investment agreements that the administration is negotiating," said Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO. "It is ironic that this year, which marks the 20th Anniversary of NAFTA, the supporters of that failed model are bringing forward a fast track trade promotion bill to bring us more of the same."
BoingBoing
"There is only one reason to negotiate an Internet treaty in secret: because you want to break the Internet," said Cory Doctorow, co-editor of BoingBoing. "Moving copyright and Internet regulation out of the UN and into a series of smoke-filled rooms is a blinking red sign flashing WARNING CORRUPTION WARNING CORRUPTION for all to see. Congress must debate each substantive point in TPP, rather than abdicating its duties to the USTR."
Communications Workers of America:
"Trade agreements are no longer just about tariffs and quotas," said Communications Workers of America President Larry Cohen. "They are about the food we eat, the air we breathe, the jobs we hold. We cannot abdicate this process to non-elected representatives. We cannot let foreign policy objectives trump domestic concerns and in the process unravel our own democracy instead of strengthening others."
Corporate Accountability International:
"If Congress approves Fast Track, it's not just delegating its trade authority to the White House, it's effectively signaling its tacit approval to the largest corporate-driven trade agreement in U.S. history before even seeing it," said Jesse Bragg, spokesperson for Corporate Accountability International. "The TPP is a corporate wish list disguised as a trade agreement. The question we need to ask is: 'Do we really want to blindly approve an agreement devised by the likes of Walmart, Big Tobacco, and Chevron without even being able to amend it?'"
Electronic Frontier Foundation
"As long as the U.S. trade office treats corporate insiders as the only relevant voice in policymaking, as long as elected lawmakers are largely shut out, and as long as Internet users' concerns are considered as an after-thought (if they are considered at all), the entire trade negotiation process is undemocratic and illegitimate," said Mara Sutton, Global Policy Analyst at the EFF. "For the U.S. Trade Representative to ask for fast track authority against this backdrop is audacious, and for Congress to even consider it is irresponsible."
Fight for the Future
"Decisions that affect our most basic rights should never be made in secret," said Tiffiniy Cheng, co-director of Fight for the Future who initiated the StopFastTrack.com effort. "The Trans-Pacific Partnership would lead to a more expensive and censored Internet, and the Fast Track bill is nothing more than an anti-democratic attempt to ram it through Congress without proper debate or public scrutiny."
LabelGMOs
"We oppose Fast Track because we want our government to follow the Constitution," said Pamm Larry of LabelGMOs.org. "We believe in food sovereignty for all people and are taking a strong stand against corporate control of our food supply."
MoveOn National TPP Organizing Team
"Trade - the instrument that drives the global economy - is arguably the most influential force in determining standards of living for people the world over," notes MoveOn Regional Organizer Elizabeth Warren, coordinator for the MoveOn National TPP Team. "Driving down wages hurts everyone. Our economy can't thrive when workers don't earn enough to buy things. Any responsible trade agreement should include a mandated living wage for workers in every country - to address the problem of trade deficits and level the playing field. But it can't happen unless Congress retains its power to review, invite public comment, and revise trade agreements before they vote on them," she said. "MoveOn councils rallied when we learned about TPP. We recognized that as written it would hand multinational corporations even more rights, and accelerate the global race to the bottom. Fast Track for the TPP would circumvent the normal legislative process, prevent Congress from making changes, and shut down public debate on a whole host of issues having a direct and lasting impact on our lives," she added. "Our representatives need to know that a vote for Fast Track is a vote against democracy itself- a vote that their constituents will surely remember this fall."
OpenMedia
"We oppose Fast Tracking TPP Internet censorship because it will make the Internet more policed, expensive, and censored," said Steve Anderson, Executive Director of OpenMedia.org. "Over 125,000 people around the world have sent a message to TPP decision makers at https://openmedia.org/censorship."
Organic Consumers Association
"Congress shouldn't give President Obama fast-track trade promotion authority. Corporations like Monsanto are pushing the President to use secret, fast-tracked trade deals to force factory farming practices on the rest of the world, practices that include genetic engineering, treating poultry with chlorine and dosing animals with ractopamine," said Ronnie Cummins, International Director of the Organic Consumers Association. "GMO labels are on the trade deal hit list, too. In fact, 'Mandatory Labeling of Foods Derived from Genetic Engineering' is specifically listed in the U.S. Trade Representative's 2013 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade. Over 17,000 OCA members have sent letters to Congress through our website."
"We oppose Fast Track for the TPP because it's an undemocratic agreement that threatens the open Internet," said Erik Martin, general manager of reddit.
Sierra Club
"Across the country, Sierra Club members and supporters are ready to stand up for responsible trade that doesn't threaten American jobs, our air and water, and our climate," said Michael Brune, Sierra Club executive director. "The Sierra Club strongly opposes fast track. This bill not only undermines our democracy, it puts American families and our future at risk."
Sea Shepherd
The TPP has since its inception been kept in the shadows, negotiated without the public eye out of sight from the general public. Sea Shepherd supports the importance of biodiversity and open consultative dialogue for any trade agreements," said Omar Todd, CTO of Sea Shepherd. "The emphasis of these agreements must balance both economic and environmental priorities. Humanity's lust for commercialisation and unbridled growth, at the expense of our life support system, may cause us to fall off the precipice as a species."
LATEST NEWS
Columbia Students File Civil Rights Complaint After Arrests, National Guard Threat
"The violent repression we're facing as peaceful anti-war protesters is appalling."
Apr 25, 2024
A day after Columbia University officials warned it may call on the National Guard to remove nonviolent student protesters who have been occupying campus lawns since last week in solidarity with Gaza, advocacy group Palestine Legal on Thursday filed a federal civil rights complaint demanding an investigation into the school's "discriminatory treatment of Palestinian students and their allies."
The school discriminated against pro-Palestinian protesters last week when President Minouche Shafik summoned New York Police Department officers in riot gear to arrest more than 100 students, said Palestine Legal.
The complaint details how the escalation against students, who have set up an encampment on campus to demand Columbia divest from companies that work with the Israeli government and to support calls for a cease-fire in Gaza, is part of a monthslong pattern of the university's targeting of pro-Palestinian students.
According to Palestine Legal, students of all backgrounds who have demanded an end to Israel's U.S.-backed massacre of Palestinians in Gaza "have been the target of extreme anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and Islamophobic harassment, including receiving multiple death threats, being harassed for wearing keffiyehs or hijab, doxxed, stereotyped, being treated differently by high-ranking administrators including... Shafik, an attack with a chemical agent that led to at least 10 students requiring hospitalization and dozens of others, including a Palestinian student, seeking medical attention, and more."
Columbia student Maryam Alwan, who Palestine Legal is representing in the complaint to the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, said the university has "utterly failed to protect [her] from racism and abuse."
"Beyond that, the university has also played a role in this repression by having me arrested and suspended for peacefully protesting Israel's genocide in Gaza," said Alwan. "The violent repression we're facing as peaceful anti-war protesters is appalling. Palestinian students at Columbia deserve justice and accountability, not only for Israel's decadeslong oppression and violence against our people, but for the racism and discrimination we've experienced here on Columbia's campus."
Palestine Legal is representing four students in the case, as well as Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine, which was suspended from the campus late last year after holding anti-war protests.
The group called Columbia's threat to call in the National Guard "gravely concerning."
"Columbia's vicious crackdown on student protests calling for Palestinian freedom amidst an ongoing genocide should alarm us all. Students have always been at the forefront of the most pressing social issues of the day," said Palestine Legal staff attorney Sabiya Ahamed.
College campuses have been the sites of frequent pro-Palestinian protests since October, and the NYPD's crackdown on Columbia students last week galvanized students at universities across the country.
The Biden administration has said little about the student demonstrations, but President Joe Biden referred to them broadly as "antisemitic protests" this week.
"We urge federal civil rights officials to do what Columbia has disgracefully failed to," said Ahamed. "Ensure the rights of Palestinian and allied students are protected at a moment when their voices are most essential."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Top G20 Ministers Back 2% Wealth Tax for Global Billionaires
"It is time that the international community gets serious about tackling inequality and financing global public goods."
Apr 25, 2024
Ministers from four major economies on Thursday called for a 2% wealth tax targeting the world's billionaires—who currently only pay up to 0.5% of their wealth in personal income tax—to "invest in public goods such as health, education, the environment, and infrastructure."
Fernando Haddad, Brazil's finance minister; Svenja Schulze, Germany's minister for economic cooperation and development; Enoch Godongwana, South Africa's finance minister; Carlos Cuerpo, Spain's minister of economy, trade, and business; and María Jesús Montero, Spain's first vice president and finance minister, made their case in an opinion piece for The Guardian.
"The argument behind such tax is straightforward: We need to enhance the ability of our tax systems to fulfill the principle of fairness, such that contributions are in line with the capacity to pay," they explained. "Persisting loopholes in the system imply that high-net-worth individuals can minimize their income taxes."
"What the international community managed to do with the global minimum tax on multinational companies, it can do with billionaires."
Brazil, Germany, and South Africa are all Group of 20 members while Spain is a permanent guest. The ministers noted that "Brazil has made the fight against hunger, poverty, and inequality a priority of its G20 presidency, a priority that German development policy also pursues and that Spain has ambitiously addressed domestically and globally."
"By directing two-thirds of total expenditure on social services and wage support, as well as by calibrating tax policy administration, South Africa continues to target a progressive tax and fiscal agenda that confronts the country's legacy of income and wealth inequality," they wrote.
The ministers continued:
It is time that the international community gets serious about tackling inequality and financing global public goods. One of the key instruments that governments have for promoting more equality is tax policy. Not only does it have the potential to increase the fiscal space governments have to invest in social protection, education, and climate protection. Designed in a progressive way, it also ensures that everyone in society contributes to the common good in line with their ability to pay. A fair share contribution enhances social welfare.
With exactly these goals in mind, Brazil brought a proposal for a global minimum tax on billionaires to the negotiation table of the world's major economies for the first time. It is a necessary third pillar that complements the negotiations on the taxation of the digital economy and on a minimum corporate tax of 15% for multinationals. The renowned economist Gabriel Zucman sketched out how this might work. Currently, there are about 3,000 billionaires worldwide. The tax could be designed as a minimum levy equivalent to 2% of the wealth of the superrich. It would not apply to billionaires who already contribute a fair share in income taxes. However, those who manage to avoid paying income tax would be obliged to contribute more towards the common good.
The five ministers cited estimates suggesting that "such a tax would potentially unlock an additional $250 billion in annual tax revenues globally—this is roughly the amount of economic damages caused by extreme weather events last year."
"Of course, the argument that billionaires can easily shift their fortunes to low-tax jurisdictions and thus avoid the levy is a strong one. And this is why such a tax reform belongs on the agenda of the G20," they added. "International cooperation and global agreements are key to making such tax effective. What the international community managed to do with the global minimum tax on multinational companies, it can do with billionaires."
Guardian economics editor Larry Elliott reported Thursday that "Zucman is now fleshing out the technical details of a plan that will again be discussed by the G20 in June. France has indicated support for a wealth tax and Brazil has been encouraged that the U.S., while not backing a global wealth tax, did not oppose it."
The French economist told Elliott that "billionaires have the lowest effective tax rate of any social group. Having people with the highest ability to pay tax paying the least—I don't think anybody supports that."
Except the billionaires, of course. "I don't want to be naive. I know the superrich will fight," Zucman added. "They have a hatred of taxes on wealth. They will lobby governments. They will use the media they own."
A few months ago, no one wanted to talk int. taxes, let alone on the super rich. Now we have a process (#G20), finance ministers (\ud83c\udde7\ud83c\uddf7 \ud83c\uddeb\ud83c\uddf7 \ud83c\uddff\ud83c\udde6 \ud83c\uddea\ud83c\uddf8 & others) supporting it, \ud83c\udde9\ud83c\uddea in part & everyone agreeing that proceeds should help fund climate and dev: https://t.co/ZldF557pAL— (@)
The ministers' opinion piece follows the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank's Spring Meetings last week, during which anti-poverty campaigners pressured the largest economies to address inequality with policies like taxing the superrich and to pour resources into the global debt and climate crises.
"The IMF and World Bank say that tackling inequality is a priority but in the same breath back policies that drive up the divide between the rich and the rest," Kate Donald, head of Oxfam International's Washington D.C. office, said last week. "Ordinary people struggle more and more every day to make up for cuts to the public funding of healthcare, education, and transportation. This high-stakes hypocrisy has to end."
Oxfam America policy lead Rebecca Riddell declared Thursday that "extreme inequality stands in the way of solving our most urgent global challenges. We need to tax the ultrawealthy."
"Read this brilliant new op-ed on the case for a global tax on billionaires, by ministers from Brazil, Germany, South Africa, and Spain," Riddell added, posting the piece on social media.
Keep ReadingShow Less
200 Rights Groups Call On Biden to End 'Cruel' Expansion of Immigrant Detention
"This suffering does not advance any rational policy goal," said the advocacy groups. "It merely exists to further the political goal of deterrence, which is cruel, inhumane, and misguided."
Apr 25, 2024
Citing ample evidence of human rights abuses in U.S. immigration detention centers, 200 advocacy groups on Thursday demanded that the Biden administration reverse course on a planned expansion of detention facilities and said President Joe Biden's "further entrenching" of the government's reliance on detaining migrants marks "an utter betrayal" of his campaign promises.
The president's signing of a spending bill last month provided $3.4 billion for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), clearing the way for the agency to make space to jail 41,500 immigrants per day in facilities across the country.
After Biden campaigned on ending the use of for-profit detention centers, said the groups, he took office at a time when fewer than 15,000 people were being held in immigration detention facilities—which gave him "a remarkable opportunity to wind down a wasteful and abusive system."
But after the president's 2023 and 2024 budget requests signaled an intention of reducing detention funding—with ICE itself recommending that numerous facilities be closed due to "critical staffing shortages that have led to safety risks and unsanitary living conditions"—Biden last year requested supplemental detention funding as commentators and Republicans in Congress hammered the administration for allowing so-called "chaos" at the U.S.-Mexico border.
"Your FY2025 budget request sought funding for 34,000 beds instead of the 25,000 sought in the two previous cycles," wrote the groups, including Amnesty International USA, the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), and the Texas Civil Rights Project. "The result is unsurprising: the FY2024 spending bill you signed provides ICE $3.4 billion to jail an average of 41,500 immigrants per day, historically high funding surpassing all four years of the Trump administration."
The groups, which provide legal aid and other assistance to people who have been detained as migrants, said many of their clients "carry lifelong scars from the mistreatment and dehumanization they endured because of the United States' reliance on detention, mostly through private prisons and county jails."
The administration is seeking to expand a system, said the groups, in which the jails and prisons used have been found to "operate under insufficient standards."
The organizations cited a 2018 ACLU reportthat found inadequate medical care contributed to the deaths of more than half of the detained immigrants who died in custody between December 2015-April 2017; a 2021 case in which an LGBTQ+ man reported "physical and homophobic verbal abuse" at a facility in Louisiana; and the finding by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) that the use of solitary confinement in detention centers "regularly meets the United Nations' definition of torture."
Biden signed the spending bill two weeks after Charles Daniel, a 61-year-old migrant from Trinidad and Tobago, died at a detention center operated by the private contractor GEO Group after being held in solitary confinement for four years. ICE has placed people in solitary confinement over 14,000 times in the last five years, according to PHR, for an average of 27 days each; U.N. experts say exceeding 15 days in solitary confinement constitutes torture.
"This suffering does not advance any rational policy goal," said the groups on Thursday. "Detention does not provide an efficient or ethical means of border processing, and it certainly does not indicate to migrants that they are welcome in the United States. It merely exists to further the political goal of deterrence, which is cruel, inhumane, and misguided—as even the most punitive forms of detention have been proven not to deter people from seeking safety or a better life."
Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which tracks government data, found that as of April 7, more than 61% of ICE detainees have no criminal record, while "many more have only minor offenses, including traffic violations."
"Increasing the incarceration of immigrants is a grave mistake," said the groups, "and we urgently implore you to reverse course."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular