Greens: Obama’s trade deal promotion undermines efforts to curb climate change

p Green Party US new logoFrom Green Party US:

Obama’s promotion of trade deals during his State of the Union undermines effort to curb climate change

Greens stress the need for a “Green New Deal”

View and download Green Party responses to the 2015 State of the Union: http://tinyurl.com/greenplaylist-2015sotu

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Green Party leaders urged Congress to reject President Obama’s call for fast-track authority for passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The President urged Congress to grant him such power when he delivered his 2015 State of the Union address on January 20. The Green Party opposes both agreements.

“President Obama’s claim during his speech that his administration is commited to fighting climate change was undermined and contradicted by his support for new trade agreements and request for ‘trade promotion authority.’ The President didn’t mention that he wants this authority so he can get the TPP and TTIP passed without scrutiny by Congress or the public,” said Audrey Clement, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States.

International trade agreements and authorities have allowed participating countries to challenge each others’ local and national efforts to implement clean, renewable energy technologies and conservation programs and government subsidies for them, because such ventures violate “free trade” rules and constitute illegal protectionism and trade discrimination.

Naomi Klein, in a recent book, documented how trade pacts and authorities like the World Trade Organization have obstructed programs and environmental laws that would lower CO2 emissions in many nations (“Hot Money,” Chapter 2, pp. 64-95, in “This Changes Everything,” 2014).

Examples include legislation against fracking in Quebec, phase-out of nuclear plants and conversion to renewable energy in Germany, and attempts by Peru to hold a mining company responsible for pollution — all of which were nullified by trade authorities (see “Trading Away Our Climate? How Investment Rules Threaten the Environment and Climate Protection,” Sierra Club,http://action.sierraclub.org/site/DocServer/Investor-State-Climate-FINAL.pdf?docID=16661). Greens stressed that allowing foreign nations and corporations to challenge nationally and locally enacted environmental laws undermines the principle of democratic sovereignty.

In his speech, the President said “I’m asking both parties to give me trade promotion authority to protect American workers, with strong new trade deals from Asia to Europe that aren’t just free, but fair.” Greens called this language misleading in light of what is known about the TPP and TTIP.

The TPP is a major international trade pact negotiated in secret by the Obama Administration. Only a group of 600 trade “advisers,” mostly representatives of major corporations, have been allowed to see drafts.

The trade deal has been called “NAFTA on steroids” by public-interest groups warning that it will outsource jobs and threaten labor, environmental, public-health, food-safety, and other protections. Sections of the deal leaked by Wikileaks confirm these warnings (see “Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) – Environment Chapter,” Wikileaks, January 15, 2014, https://wikileaks.org/tpp-enviro/pressrelease.html). The White House has turned down requests by members of Congress to see the drafts.

The Sierra Club has warned that “[t]he TPP may allow for significantly increased exports of liquefied natural gas without the careful study or adequate protections necessary to safeguard the American public. This would mean an increase of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, the dirty and violent process that dislodges gas deposits from shale rock formations. It would also likely cause an increase in natural gas and electricity prices, impacting consumers, manufacturers, workers, and increasing the use of dirty coal power.” (http://www.sierraclub.org/Trade/trans-pacific-partnership)

The TPP was never debated in 2012 because both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney supported it. Green candidates, including presidential nominee Jill Stein, strongly opposed it.

Green Party leaders strongly criticized the TPP and President Obama’s request for fast-track authority during the party’s “People’s State of the Union” and advocated the “Green New Deal.” Green responses to the 2015 State of the Union are posted online for viewing and downloading (http://tinyurl.com/greenplaylist-2015sotu).

The Green New Deal is a plan promoted by Green candidates that would boost ensure financial security for working people and create millions of new jobs by converting to a green-energy economy (http://www.gp.org/GreenNewDeal).

Greens said that top priorities of trade agreements should be fair trade (protections for workers, public health, and the environment) and stemming the advance of climate change.

For more about the TTIP, see “Green Party: Proposed U.S.-European Union trade pact threatens wages, environmental and consumer protections,” Green Party press release, May 27, 2014 (http://www.gp.org/press/pr-national.php?ID=704).

Greens said that President Obama has refused to take the climate crisis seriously, noting that his administration has blocked international proposals to enforce a cap of 2 degrees Celsius as a binding emissions reduction target, and because his domestic energy policies promote reliance on fossil fuels. During his State of the Union address, he said, “We believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil and protect our planet. And today, America is number one in oil and gas.”

Green Party leaders said that Republican anti-scientific denial of the climate crisis and obstruction of policies designed to reduce fossil-fuel use and lower emissions were even more dangerous to the health of the planet and future generations.

See also:

Green Party responses to President Obama’s 2015 State of the Union are now posted online for viewing, downloading
Green Party press release, January 22, 2015

Howie Hawkins, 2012 Green candidate for Governor of New York, speaks on 100% Green Energy for NY by 2030
Video of a press conference on Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s State of the State address, January 21, 2015

Green Party demands publication of secretly negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact drafts
Green Party press release, December 10, 2014

Flush the TPP!

Stop “Fast Track”

The Largest, Most Disastrous Trade Deal You’ve Never Heard Of
By Robert Reich, Alternet, January 6, 2015

A Year of Opportunity to Combat Climate Change and Transform Economies
By Jim Yong Kim, President of the World Bank Group, January 22, 2015

Text of the 2015 State of the Union speech


Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org

Green candidate database and campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml
News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml
Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers
Ballot Access Page http://www.gp.org/2012/ballot-access.html
Video Page http://www.gp.org/video/index.php
Green Papers http://www.greenpapers.net/
Discussion Forum https://secure.gpus.org/secure/GreenPartyForum
Google+ http://www.gp.org/google
Twitter http://twitter.com/GreenPartyUS
Livestream Channel http://www.livestream.com/greenpartyus
Facebook page http://www.gp.org/facebook

2014 Green Party election results

Green Pages: The official publication of record of the Green Party of the United States

Green Shadow Cabinet http://greenshadowcabinet.us

Dave Schwab


  1. so glad is opposition in usa to this , im really concerned about this idea that companies can sue governements for decisions that cost them money that is the end of meaniful democracy, i do know that arguments agains the treaty that work in europe may be different to ones that work in usa but we all need to link up, european green party websites are in english.
    Obamas stance on lack of scrutiny really underlines the need to revitatlise democracy by refusing to vote for the established parties and just voting for what you want,

  2. Corporate Canada, et al, to Sue TPP Signatories For Expectation of Clean Air in Host Countries; Chinese Style Bribery & Corruption Not Good Enuf.

    TPP, TTIP, et al, ‘Trade’ Treaty Critics to Support Supreme Court Submission?

    Corp.’USA’ to Follow China?


    corp’USA’ & Feds to Prepay $Billions for All of TPP’s, TTIP’s, et al, Secret (‘Death-Star-Chamber) Tribunals’ Punitive Damages to Protect Home State’s Taxpayers? Other States, Municipalities, et al, “…(we) need to control corp. USA’s ‘Contributions'”.
    How Much are You Selling your Right to Sue the Global Corporate Economy for?

    But, If Not PUTIN; ‘The WHITE KNIGHT’, then Who Do YOU Want to Save the harmless NON shareholders from Fast Tracking TPP’s, CETA’s Secret ‘Death-Star-Chamber’ Tribunal Penalties? Will China, Iran, the Muslim World, et al, Support Putin in Suits?

    Higher Taxes & More Cuts to Services to Pay Secret Penalties; NON Shareholders Have to Pay SHAREHOLDERS, corporate USA, Japan, Canada, et al. How Much are You Selling your Right to Sue the Global Corporate Economy for?

    It will be good for, not only the NON shareholders of the enterprises that can be generated by the on-going global “cooperation” of corporate treaties, agreements, partnerships, et al, including the Trans Pacific Partnership, the EU – Canada CETA, the China – Canada Investment Treaty, et al,
    for the potential shareholders, as well,
    who are quite interested to know if President Xi Jinping (China) will support Russia as a co-member of B.R.I.C.S. when President Putin uses his potential role as “The White Knight”.

    And, while President Putin’s potential support as “The WHITE KNIGHT” in the development of the CETAgreement, et al, litigation below can dramatically off-set the hundreds of billions of dollars due to the present & future sanctions levelled by American led, et al, corporations & financial institutions via their governments’ signing their global corporate economic treaties/”arrangements”,
    and the potential for making trillions of dollars for the Russian economy over the next 30 – 40 years & beyond,
    are the citizens (SHAREHOLDERS & NON shareholders) of Germany & JAPAN just being prudent in wanting to wait for the outcome of:
    1) The Submission to The SUPREME COURT of CANADA & the highest court in Germany, et al, to make their findings regarding “The Submission”:
    ‘The SHAREHOLDERS & Corporations of AMERICA, France, Germany, Canada, et al
    the harmless Canadian NON shareholders, both; Native & non Native, et al’?
    (see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com)

    2) ‘The MERKEL (Chancellor of Germany) Letter; To Sue, or, Be Sued?’
    (see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com)

    Have the federal representatives of the nations that are the potential signatories of CETA, TPP, et al, willingly provided the NON shareholders of China, Canada, Europe, the Trans Pacific nations, et al, with the aforementioned information? Are the federal representatives, et al, depriving the NON shareholders of Canada, et al, of the due diligence information that enables the family of the NON shareholders of Canada, et al, to make informed decisions regarding their financial planning?

    And, would a reasonable person conclude by a preponderance of the evidence, &/or, beyond a reasonable doubt, that these documents, et al, demonstrate that the SHAREHOLDERS of AMERICA, CANADA , the EU & Trans Pacific nations, et al, really do not care which NON shareholders pay them the punitive penalties, etc., by way of their secret (“Death-Star Chamber”) TRIBUNALS, as long as its not the SHAREHOLDERS who pay & not their corporations regardless of which country the corporations:
    1) operating from,
    2) maintain their headquarters,
    3) use to do their cyber banking, accounting, “taxation”, etc.
    4) et al?

    And, re; the CHINA – Canada Investment Treaty, is it understandable why the “coveted” Hong Kong investor & his associates are “concerned” with the aforementioned findings of The SUPREME COURT of CANADA, et al, & the effects of the potential findings, et al, on the EU, AMERICA, the Trans Pacific nations, et al, treaties with CHINA, et al?

    In regard to arms sales; how about the sale of arms (non nuclear) in general in regard to the “trade” treaties that are continuing to be secretly negotiated and how will the Tribunals, both; B.R.I.C.S. & non BRICS, adjudicate, decide & penalize the NON SHAREHOLDERS for the sale of legitimate, semi- legitimate & “illegal” sales of arms within the signatories nations & the those of others, &/or, unaligned? Of particular, interest is China, which does have an treaty with Canada, which puts China “at odds” with other arms manufacturing & nuclear powers that it (China) does not have any “arrangements” with.
    Are these types of questions that your politicians & the corporate lobbyists calls “forget-me-nots” (“Buyer Beware”) that will be (maybe) worked out after the fast tracked signatures are obtained?

    And, what do you think is the significance of the line in The Submission to The Supreme Court of Canada ‘…And, lest one forgets that the revelation of the present perilous international treaties/’arrangements’ began with the regard for the rights of Native Canadians as per the Treaties/”arrangements” that corporate Canada & the Government of Canada have ‘foisted’ upon Native Canadians…’? What are the various ways that this line will cost the SHAREHOLDERS, et al?

    On the other hand, it may be worth repeating yet again,
    ‘What the TREATY of VERSAILLES was to the 20th century PALES in COMPARISON to the TPP, CETA, C-CIT, NAFTA, et al, in the 21st’.

    And, how will YOUR submission to YOUR highest court IMPROVE upon The Submission that is presently before The Supreme Court of Canada?

    David E.H. Smith
    – Researcher
    – ‘Qui tam…’
    Please consider sharing the enclosed information & questions with 10 members of your family, friends, associates in order that they can use the due diligence info to make more informed decision about their families’ financial planning, & then they can share it with 10 others…
    For more Information & Questions re; The Relationship between Human (Nature) Rights & Economics by way of the C-CI Treaty, the CET Agreement, TPP, et al, and The WAD Accord
    see; davidehsmith.wordpress.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.