October, 05 2015, 09:45am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Lori Wallach
Email: lwallach@citizen.org
Melinda St. Louis
Phone: 202-441-7579
If There Really Is a Final TPP Deal: Can It Pass Congress? When Does Congress Get to See a Final Text?
Statement of Lori Wallach, Director, Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch
WASHINGTON
If there really is a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) deal, its fate in Congress is highly uncertain given the narrow margin by which trade authority passed this summer, the concessions made to get a deal, and growing congressional and public concerns about the TPP's threats to jobs, wages, safe food and affordable medicines and more. The intense national battle over trade authority was just a preview of the massive opposition the TPP will face given that Democratic and GOP members of Congress and the public soon will be able to see the specific TPP terms that threaten their interests.
With congressional opposition to TPP growing and the Obama administration basically up against elections cycles in various countries, this ministerial was extended repeatedly because this was the do or die time but it's unclear if there really is a deal or this is kabuki theatre intended to create a sense of inevitability so as to insulate the TPP from growing opposition.
Ten U.S. presidential candidates have pushed anti-TPP messages in their campaigning, stoking U.S. voters' ire about the pact. Democratic candidate Senator Bernie Sanders has repeatedly said that "The TPP must be defeated." GOP frontrunner Donald Trump also has repeatedly slammed the TPP, stating "It's a horrible deal for the United States and it should not pass." The Canadian national election outcome could also rock the TPP talks, as Conservative Prime Minister Harper's political opponents have taken critical views of his approach to TPP.
If there really is a deal, its fate in Congress is at best uncertain given that since the trade authority vote, the small bloc of Democrats who made the narrow margin of passage have made demands about TPP currency, drug patent and environmental terms that are likely not in the final deal, while the GOP members who switched to supporting Fast Track in the last weeks demand enforceable currency terms, stricter rules of origin for autos, auto parts and apparel, and better dairy access for U.S. producers.
The TPP's prospects will be even worse if the Administration announces a deal today but then does not actually have a final text to provide Congress. There is intense controversy in many TPP countries about the pacts' threats to jobs, affordable medicine, safe food and more.
Useful Resources
The Fast Track timeline for a U.S. congressional vote on the TPP: As this memo explains, under the Fast Track bill, various congressional notice and report filing requirements add up to about four and one half months between notice of a final deal and congressional votes being taken. Even if all of the timelines are fudged by the 90-day notice to Congress before signing, a TPP vote cannot occur in 2015.
Congressional Letters Raising Doubts on the TPP's Congressional Prospects: On Sept. 25, 160 House GOP and Democrats sent a letter to Obama demanding enforceable currency disciplines in the TPP. While building that level of support required months when a similar letter was sent in 2013, this letter was in circulation for only a week, starting when the TPP Atlanta ministerial was announced. Meanwhile, at the end of the summer, 19 pro-Fast Track Democrats sent a letter laying out necessary environmental terms for an acceptable deal, and 18 pro-Fast Track Democrats sent a letter about lack of enforcement in current and future trade agreements and demanding action against Peru for violations of environmental terms in its bilateral U.S. trade deal. Twelve Democrats who supported Fast Track and 12 GOP members were among the 160 representatives signing a letter decrying Malaysia's inclusion in the TPP and the upgrade of Malaysia's human trafficking status. During this week's negotiations, the top Republican and Democrat leaders on trade in the House and Senate sent a letter expressing frustration at the lack of coordination and consultation between USTR and Congress on the remaining issues of the negotiation, and 25 pro-Fast Track Republicans and Democrats from dairy districts sent a letter expressing their concern that a final deal would not meet their goal for improved dairy market access in Canada and Japan.
Polling: As this memo shows, recent polling reveals broad U.S. public opposition to more-of-the-same trade deals among Independents, Republicans and Democrats. While Americans support trade, they do not support an expansion of status quo trade policies, complicating the push for the TPP. Furthermore, recent Pew polls in many of the TPP nations show that, outside Vietnam, the deal does not have strong support.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
Trump DOJ Attacks 'Fundamental Fabric' of Democracy by Gutting Voting Rights Unit
"The upheaval and loss of experience will leave the division unable to enforce the nation's civil rights laws," said one voting rights advocate.
Apr 29, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump's Justice Department has reportedly gutted the leadership of the agency's voting rights unit and ordered attorneys to drop all active cases, the latest signal that the administration is hellbent on undercutting civil rights protections and abandoning federal enforcement of key election laws.
The Guardianreported Monday that Trump appointees at the Department of Justice "have removed all of the senior civil servants working as managers in the department's Voting Section," reassigning most of them to a DOJ office that handles employee complaints.
"Political appointees have also instructed career employees to dismiss all of their active cases without meeting with them and offering a rationale—a significant break with the department's practices and norms," The Guardian added.
Angelina Clapp, advocacy manager for election protection at Issue One, said in a statement Monday that "our democracy must be accessible for all eligible voters to participate in and make their voices heard, but these recent moves by President Trump's appointees at the Justice Department take us further away from those goals."
"This decision to dismiss all active cases threatens to erode public trust in the very department tasked with protecting Americans' freedom to vote and sends the message that the rule of law is not being upheld," said Clapp. "These actions are part of a broader trend of the second Trump administration dismantling and interfering with federal agencies dedicated to protecting our elections and democracy."
"In the end," Clapp added, "all Americans will suffer as a result of decisions like these because taken together, they undermine the fundamental fabric of our democracy—the idea that the government should be by, of, and for the people."
"If regular Americans think that this administration is going to protect their rights, they're just wrong."
The DOJ's Voting Section is housed within the department's Civil Rights Division, which is now led by Harmeet Dhillon, a lawyer who aided Trump's unsuccessful bid to overturn his 2020 election loss. Dhillon, who is not a civil rights attorney, was confirmed by the Republican-controlled Senate in a largely party-line vote earlier this month.
Since her confirmation, she has moved quickly to do Trump's bidding at the department, prompting a mass exodus of lawyers from the Civil Rights Division. CNNreported Monday that roughly 70% of division staffers are "expected to accept a second offer to federal workers that allows them to resign from their positions and be paid through September."
Joyce Vance, a former U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, wrote Monday that "when the career people, the experts at civil and criminal enforcement in this area, are removed from their positions, there is no one there to protect us."
"And as we've learned from Trump's deportations to El Salvador, when due process is denied to one person, we are all at risk," Vance added. "The news from the Justice Department tonight, on the eve of Trump's 100th day in office, is deeply disturbing."
The departures come after Dhillon issued a series of internal memos indicating, as NBC News put it, "a 180-degree shift in the direction of the department from its original mission: enforcing laws that prohibit discrimination in hiring, housing, and voting rights."
One unnamed Civil Rights Division lawyer who recently left their DOJ toldNBC News that "if regular Americans think that this administration is going to protect their rights, they're just wrong."
The progressive advocacy group Common Cause noted Tuesday that the DOJ's Voting Section "enforces the federal laws protecting the right to vote, including the Voting Rights Act, the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, the National Voter Registration Act, the Help America Vote Act, and the Civil Rights Act."
Omar Noureldin, Common Cause's senior vice president for policy and litigation, said Monday that "the Trump administration’s gutting of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division is doing profound and lasting damage to the protection of voting rights in the United States."
"The removal and reassignment of the section's leadership and the dismissal of cases are themselves attacks on the voting rights of every American," said Noureldin. "Attorney General Pam Bondi's systematic removal of career attorneys and staff is not confined to the voting section—it extends to the entire Civil Rights Division. The upheaval and loss of experience will leave the division unable to enforce the nation's civil rights laws."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Trump Is Trying to Break Us,' Carney Warns as Liberals Win Canadian Election
"As I have been warning for months, America wants our land, our resources, our water, our country," said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. "That will never, ever happen."
Apr 29, 2025
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney declared that his country's "old relationship with the United States... is over" after leading his Liberal Party to victory in Monday's federal election, a contest that came amid U.S. President Donald Trump's destructive trade war and threats to forcibly annex Canada.
"As I have been warning for months, America wants our land, our resources, our water, our country. But these are not idle threats," Carney, a former central banker who succeeded Justin Trudeau as Canada's prime minister last month, said after he was projected the winner of Monday's election.
On the day of the contest, Trump reiterated his desire to make Canada "the cherished 51st. State of the United States of America."
"President Trump is trying to break us so that America can own us," Carney said Monday. "That will never, ever happen."
Carney: President Trump is trying to break us so that America can own us. That will never, ever happen pic.twitter.com/dUEI0YGSM2
— Acyn (@Acyn) April 29, 2025
It's not yet clear whether the Liberal Party will secure enough seats for a parliamentary majority, but its victory Monday was seen as a stunning comeback after the party appeared to be spiraling toward defeat under Trudeau's leadership.
Pierre Poilievre, the head of Canada's Conservative Party, looked for much of the past year to be "cruising to one of the largest majority governments in Canada's history," The Washington Postnoted.
But on Monday, Poilievre—who was embraced by Trump allies, including mega-billionaire Elon Musk—lost his parliamentary seat to his Liberal opponent, Bruce Fanjoy.
Vox's Zack Beauchamp wrote Tuesday that "Trump has single-handedly created the greatest surge of nationalist anti-Americanism in Canada's history as an independent country," pointing to a recent survey showing that "61% of Canadians are currently boycotting American-made goods."
"Trump's aggressive economic policy isn't, as he claimed, making America Great or respected again. Instead, it's having the opposite effect: turning longtime allies into places where campaigning against American leadership is a winning strategy," Beauchamp added. "If we are indeed witnessing the beginning of the end of the American-led world order, the history books will likely record April 28, 2025, as a notable date—one where even America's closest ally started eying the geopolitical exits."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Led 'Unprecedented' Surge in Global Military Spending in 2024
"As governments increasingly prioritize military security, often at the expense of other budget areas, the economic and social trade-offs could have significant effects on societies for years to come," said one expert.
Apr 28, 2025
Military spending worldwide soared to $2.718 trillion last year, meaning it "has increased every year for a full decade, going up by 37% between 2015 and 2024," according to an annual report released Monday.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has tracked conflict, disarmament, and weapons for nearly six decades. Its 2024 spending report states that "for the second year in a row, military expenditure increased in all five of the world's geographical regions, reflecting heightened geopolitical tensions across the globe."
In a Monday statement, Xiao Liang, a researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Program, highlighted that "over 100 countries around the world raised their military spending in 2024."
"It was the highest year-on-year increase since the end of the Cold War."
"This was really unprecedented... It was the highest year-on-year increase since the end of the Cold War," Liang told Agence France-Press, while acknowledging that there may have been larger jumps during the Cold War but Soviet Union data is not available.
Liang warned that "as governments increasingly prioritize military security, often at the expense of other budget areas, the economic and social trade-offs could have significant effects on societies for years to come."
The United States—whose Republican lawmakers are currently cooking up a plan to give even more money to a Pentagon that's never passed an audit—led all countries, with $997 billion in military spending. The report points out that the U.S. not only allocated "3.2 times more than the second-largest spender," but also "accounted for 37% of global military expenditure in 2024 and 66% of spending by North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members."
In the second spot was China, with an estimated $314 billion in spending. Nan Tian, director of the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Program, raised the alarm about spending in Asia.
"Major military spenders in the Asia-Pacific region are investing increasing resources into advanced military capabilities," said Tian. "With several unresolved disputes and mounting tensions, these investments risk sending the region into a dangerous arms-race spiral."
In third place was Russia, with an estimated $149 billion in spending. Russia remains at war after launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Rounding out the top five were Germany ($88.5 billion) and India ($86.1 billion).
They were followed by the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, France, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Poland, Italy, and Australia. The report says that "together, the top 15 spenders in 2024 accounted for 80% of global military spending ($2,185 billion) and for 79% of the total increase in spending over the year. All 15 increased their military spending in 2024."
"The two largest year-on-year percentage increases among this group were in Israel (+65%) and Russia (+38%), highlighting the effect of major conflicts on spending trends in 2024," the publication continues. Israel has been engaged in a U.S.-backed military assault on the Gaza Strip—globally condemned as genocide—since October 2023.
"Russia once again significantly increased its military spending, widening the spending gap with Ukraine," noted SIPRI researcher Diego Lopes da Silva. "Ukraine currently allocates all of its tax revenues to its military. In such a tight fiscal space, it will be challenging for Ukraine to keep increasing its military spending."
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday announced an upcoming three-day truce to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe. In response, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called for an immediate monthlong cease-fire.
All NATO members boosted military spending last year, which SIPRI researcher Jade Guiberteau Ricard said was "driven mainly by the ongoing Russian threat and concerns about possible U.S. disengagement within the alliance."
"It is worth saying that boosting spending alone will not necessarily translate into significantly greater military capability or independence from the USA," the expert added. "Those are far more complex tasks."
Another SIPRI researcher, Lorenzo Scarazzato, highlighted that "for the first time since reunification Germany became the biggest military spender in Western Europe, which was due to the €100 billion special defense fund announced in 2022."
"The latest policies adopted in Germany and many other European countries suggest that Europe has entered a period of high and increasing military spending that is likely to continue for the foreseeable future," Scarazzato said.
As for the Middle East, SIPRI researcher Zubaida Kari said that "despite widespread expectations that many Middle Eastern countries would increase their military spending in 2024, major rises were limited to Israel and Lebanon."
In addition to slaughtering at least tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza over the past nearly 19 months, Israel has killed thousands of people in Lebanon while allegedly targeting the political and paramilitary group Hezbollah. Kari said that elsewhere in the region, "countries either did not significantly increase spending in response to the war in Gaza or were prevented from doing so by economic constraints."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular