SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Nick Florko (202) 454-5108 nflorko@citizen.org
Valerie Holford (301) 926-1298 valerieholford@starpower.net
WASHINGTON - Today's long-awaited release of the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership's (TPP) reveals that the pact replicates many of the most controversial terms of past pacts that promote job offshoring and push down U.S wages while further expanding the scope of the controversial investor-state system and rolling back improvements on access to affordable medicines and environmental standards that congressional Democrats forced on the George W. Bush administration in 2007.
"Apparently, the TPP's proponents resorted to such extreme secrecy during negotiations because the text shows TPP would offshore more American jobs, lower our wages, flood us with unsafe imported food and expose our laws to attack in foreign tribunals," said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. "When the administration says it used the TPP to renegotiate NAFTA, few expected that meant doubling down on the worst job-killing, wage-suppressing NAFTA terms, expanding limits on food safety and rolling back past reforms on environmental standards and access to affordable drugs."
On some key issues, the text reveals provisions that will cost TPP support from members of Congress who supported the narrow passage of Fast Track trade authority this summer, and affirm for the many members of Congress who backed past trade deals but opposed Fast Track that the TPP must be stopped.
"Many in Congress said they would support the TPP only if, at a minimum, it included past reforms made to trade pact intellectual property rules affecting access to affordable medicines. But the TPP rolls back that past progress by requiring new marketing exclusivities and patent term extensions, and provides pharmaceutical firms with new monopoly rights for biotech drugs, including many new and forthcoming cancer treatments," said Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen's Access to Medicines program. "The terms in this final TPP text will contribute to preventable suffering and death abroad, and may constrain the reforms that Congress can consider to reduce Americans' medicine prices at home."
The text also confirms that demands made by Congress and key constituencies were not fulfilled.
"From leaks, we knew quite a bit about the agreement, but in chapter after chapter the final text is worse than we expected with the demands of the 500 official U.S. trade advisors representing corporate interests satisfied to the detriment of the public interest," said Wallach.
Today's text release confirms concerns about TPP that were based on earlier leaks and reveals ways in which the TPP rolls back past public interest reforms to the U.S. trade model and expands anti-public-interest provisions demanded by the hundreds of official U.S. corporate trade advisers:
Worse anti-public-interest provisions relative to past U.S. trade pacts
Anti-public-interest provisions that are the same as past U.S. pacts
Please see a bullet point analysis of key TPP investment, food safety, labor and environmental, market access, rules of origin, procurement, and other provisions prepared by labor and public interest experts for more details. More detailed analyses of each chapter will be available next week.
The TPP can take effect only if the U.S. Congress approve it given the rules about conditions for the TPP to go into effect. The TPP's fate in Congress is uncertain at best given that since the trade authority vote, the small bloc of members of the U.S. House of Representatives who made the narrow margin of passage possible have expressed concerns that the text release shows were not addressed.
Ten U.S. presidential candidates have pushed anti-TPP messages in their campaigning, stoking U.S. voters' ire about the pact.
An unprecedented number and wide array of organizations oppose any attempt to railroad the TPP through Congress by using the Fast Track process. Groups united on this extend well beyond labor unions and include consumer, Internet freedom, senior, health, food safety, environmental, human rights, faith, LGBTQ, student and civil rights organizations.
"Now that Congress and the public can scrutinize the actual text, the reality that it fails to meet Congress' demands and its terms would be harmful to most Americans will replace the administration's myth-based sales job for TPP, further dimming the TPP's prospects in Congress," Wallach said.
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) 588-1000"We will not sit idly by while political leaders manipulate voting maps to entrench their power and subvert our democracy," said the head of Common Cause.
As Republicans try to rig congressional maps in several states and Democrats threaten retaliatory measures, a pro-democracy watchdog on Tuesday unveiled new fairness standards underscoring that "independent redistricting commissions remain the gold standard for ending partisan gerrymandering."
Common Cause will hold an online media briefing Wednesday at noon Eastern time "to walk reporters though the six pieces of criteria the organization will use to evaluate any proposed maps."
The Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group said that "it will closely evaluate, but not automatically condemn, countermeasures" to Republican gerrymandering efforts—especially mid-decade redistricting not based on decennial censuses.
Amid the gerrymandering wars, we just launched 6 fairness criteria to hold all actors to the same principled standard: people first—not parties. Read our criteria here: www.commoncause.org/resources/po...
[image or embed]
— Common Cause (@commoncause.org) August 12, 2025 at 12:01 PM
Common Cause's six fairness criteria for mid-decade redistricting are:
"We will not sit idly by while political leaders manipulate voting maps to entrench their power and subvert our democracy," Common Cause president and CEO Virginia Kase Solomón said in a statement. "But neither will we call for unilateral political disarmament in the face of authoritarian tactics that undermine fair representation."
"We have established a fairness criteria that we will use to evaluate all countermeasures so we can respond to the most urgent threats to fair representation while holding all actors to the same principled standard: people—not parties—first," she added.
Common Cause's fairness criteria come amid the ongoing standoff between Republicans trying to gerrymander Texas' congressional map and Democratic lawmakers who fled the state in a bid to stymie a vote on the measure. Texas state senators on Tuesday approved the proposed map despite a walkout by most of their Democratic colleagues.
Leaders of several Democrat-controlled states, most notably California, have threatened retaliatory redistricting.
"This moment is about more than responding to a single threat—it's about building the movement for lasting reform," Kase Solomón asserted. "This is not an isolated political tactic; it is part of a broader march toward authoritarianism, dismantling people-powered democracy, and stripping away the people's ability to have a political voice and say in how they are governed."
"Texas law is clear: A pregnant person cannot be arrested and prosecuted for getting an abortion. No one is above the law, including officials entrusted with enforcing it," said an ACLU attorney.
When officials in Starr County, Texas arrested Lizelle Gonzalez in 2022 and charged her with murder for having a medication abortion—despite state law clearly prohibiting the prosecution of women for abortion care—she spent three days in jail, away from her children, and the highly publicized arrest was "deeply traumatizing."
Now, said her lawyers at the ACLU in court filings on Tuesday, officials in the county sheriff's and district attorney's offices must be held accountable for knowingly subjecting Gonzalez to wrongful prosecution.
Starr County District Attorney Gocha Ramirez ultimately dismissed the charge against Gonzalez, said the ACLU, but the Texas bar's investigation into Ramirez—which found multiple instances of misconduct related to Gonzalez's homicide charge—resulted in only minor punishment. Ramirez had to pay a small fine of $1,250 and was given one year of probated suspension.
"Without real accountability, Starr County's district attorney—and any other law enforcement actor—will not be deterred from abusing their power to unlawfully target people because of their personal beliefs, rather than the law," said the ACLU.
The state bar found that Ramirez allowed Gonzalez's indictment to go forward despite the fact that her homicide charge was "known not to be supported by probable cause."
Ramirez had denied that he was briefed on the facts of the case before it was prosecuted by his office, but the state bar "determined he was consulted by a prosecutor in his office beforehand and permitted it to go forward."
"Without real accountability, Starr County's district attorney—and any other law enforcement actor—will not be deterred from abusing their power to unlawfully target people because of their personal beliefs, rather than the law."
Sarah Corning, an attorney at the ACLU of Texas, said the prosecutors and law enforcement officers "ignored Texas law when they wrongfully arrested Lizelle Gonzalez for ending her pregnancy."
"They shattered her life in South Texas, violated her rights, and abused the power they swore to uphold," said Corning. "Texas law is clear: A pregnant person cannot be arrested and prosecuted for getting an abortion. No one is above the law, including officials entrusted with enforcing it."
The district attorney's office sought to have the ACLU's case dismissed in July 2024, raising claims of legal immunity.
A court denied Ramirez's motion, and the ACLU's discovery process that followed revealed "a coordinated effort between the Starr County sheriff's office and district attorney's office to violate Ms. Gonzalez's rights."
The officials' "wanton disregard for the rule of law and erroneous belief of their own invincibility is a frightening deviation from the offices' purposes: to seek justice," said Cecilia Garza, a partner at the law firm Garza Martinez, who is joining the ACLU in representing Gonzalez. "I am proud to represent Ms. Gonzalez in her fight for justice and redemption, and our team will not allow these abuses to continue in Starr County or any other county in the state of Texas."
Gonzalez's fight for justice comes as a wrongful death case in Texas—filed by an "anti-abortion legal terrorist" on behalf of a man whose girlfriend use medication from another state to end her pregnancy—moves forward, potentially jeopardizing access to abortion pills across the country.
One critic said Buttigieg's description of Israel's genocide in Gaza as "complicated" is "disqualifying... both as a politician and a human being."
Pete Buttigieg, one of the top contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, is facing a bevy of criticism, including from his supporters, after he gave a largely incoherent answer about his preferred policy towards Israel and Palestine.
Over the past several weeks, the genocidal nature of Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip has become undeniable to much of the world. Israeli leaders have openly discussed the goal of clearing the strip of Palestinians and, to that end, have inflicted a punishing blockade that has resulted in mass starvation.
Though official estimates from the Gaza Health Ministry put the death count around 60,000, many expert analyses have found that it will have likely eclipsed 100,000 or potentially 200,000 once all indirect deaths from disease and starvation are accounted for.
In an interview on Pod Save America, the former South Bend mayor and Biden transportation secretary was asked if he would support efforts backed by a majority of Senate Democrats to halt weapons sales to Israel.
Buttigieg began by acknowledging that taxpayer money should not be going to "things that shock the conscience," adding that "we see images every day that shock the conscience" out of Gaza.
"So much of this is complicated," he continued. "But what's not complicated is that if a child is starving because of a choice made by a government, that is unconscionable."
After this brief acknowledgment, however, Buttigieg proceeded to give an answer that Gal Debored of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft called "a beautiful example of sounding like you care about genocide while actually saying nothing at all."
Buttigieg spent the bulk of his time discussing how Israelis were being affected.
He discussed the necessity of "including the voices of those who care about Israel, who believe in Israel's right to exist, who have stood with Israel in response to the unbelievable cruelty and terrorism of October 7th."
He said what was happening in Gaza was a "catastrophe for Israel in the long run," before describing the United States as "Israel's strongest ally and friend."
"You put your arm around your friend when there's something like this going on," he said, "and talk about what we're prepared to do together."
William Lafi Youmans, a professor at the George Washington School of Media and Public Affairs, described this as rhetorically identical to former U.S. President Joe Biden's approach to Israel.
"Biden wanted to 'bear hug' Israel to constrain it via friendship," he said, noting that it "ended in genocide."
When asked whether he'd support recognizing a Palestinian state, Buttigieg said it was "a profound question that arouses a lot of the biggest problems that have happened with Israel's survival."
Zeteo founder Mehdi Hasan responded: "Answer the fricking question."
Buttigieg later seemed to contradict his previous statement, saying he'd support a "two-state solution" to end the conflict.
J.P. Hill, the author of the Substack newsletter New Means, called out Buttigieg's unwillingness to take a clear stance.
"Pete Buttigieg talking about Palestine," Hill said, "is what happens when someone who wants to perfectly triangulate a middle position on every issue runs into an issue where [there] is no middle ground for him to hide in."
Even Ben Rhodes, a foreign policy official for former President Barack Obama and a co-host on the Democrat-friendly network that produces Pod Save America, was left bewildered.
"Pete is a smart guy and I admire a lot of what he's done," Rhodes said on X. "But I have absolutely no idea what he thinks based on these answers. Just tell us what you believe."
These outraged comments reflect a now overwhelming dissatisfaction among Democratic voters with the party's near-unwavering devotion to Israel. In a July Gallup poll, just 33% of them described themselves as having a favorable view of Israel.
While Buttigieg continues to find himself on the wrong side of that increasingly yawning chasm of public opinion, other Democrats have become much more willing to call for swift action to be taken to constrain Israel.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), another potential 2028 candidate who introduced a resolution calling for the U.S. to recognize Palestinian statehood and urged his fellow Democrats to support a bill that would block weapons to Israel, also denounced Buttigieg's feckless response.
"I respect Pete. But we need moral clarity," Khanna wrote on X. "[President Donald] Trump AND Biden disastrously failed on Gaza, and we need a new human rights-centered vision."