Now, in 2014, President Barack Obama has been quietly nurturing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a free trade deal supported by corporate interests that Noam Chomsky states would “further erode the security of workers and the middle class, irrevocably harm the environment and undercut important financial, medical and food safety regulations.”

There is a growing problem of income inequality in the U.S., striking a blow to the functioning of a healthy democracy. With TPP, the richest 5 to 10 per cent of American households would get richer, while the bottom 90 per cent of Americans suffer a loss of income.

President Obama has tried to keep TPP secret.Thanks to WikiLeaks parts of the text were made public. A public outcry against TPP was expressed to Congress. Senator Harry Reid, Majority Leader, refused to fast-track TPP legislation, which has temporarily blocked approval from Congress.

FlushtheTPP.Org sums it up very well. “The TPP is about much more than trade. It is a global corporate coup.” We must stay vigilant.

References

“NAFTA, Twenty Years After: A Disaster” (Economic Policy Institute)

Effect of TPP on richest 5 to 10 percent and poorest 90 percent is by Ruth Conniff in The Progressive, March, 2014, page 6.

Chomsky is quoted in The Nation, March 10, 2014, page 11.

The TPP and a related trade and investment partnership with our European friends can add at least $200 billion a year to our economy and double that to them, according to reasonable estimates. Freer trade in services could mean cheaper banking, health, and educational services for us, just as free trade has already meant cheaper import (clothing, electronics, etc.) for all consumers. Indiana has an interest, for example, in exporting more food grains to Japan, just as we export auto parts to our NAFTA partners. Free export of energy to Europe would make sense, too.

These likely results would be one way to address the rising inequality that has marked the US and most other developed economies in recent years. NAFTA is thus not the main cause of lost manufacturing jobs; worldwide technological change is. Progressives have rightly pointed to the stagnation of incomes of the middle-class, but protectionism is not the right answer. Since better jobs increasingly require more skills, we need to invest more in education by improving internet access and providing extra help and hours for literacy and math, without cutting out the arts and humanities. We are now a multicultural and internationalized society, and the outlook of all our citizens must adapt to that reality. That means our interests will forever be tied to those across the oceans.

Research and development should be restored to give rise to new industrial jobs, too. Reduced military spending, much of which has been wasted this last decade on failed wars, will make room for these investments, as will paring tax benefits for small groups of the rich and outsourced profits.