issue than me, being on the ground inside the Beltway and on top of TPP every day. Through mergers and mobilization, the council is as strong and effective as it or its predecessor organization has been in more than 20 years in Washington, and I’ve written as much here.
I’m only concerned about the absurd level of secrecy around the trade deal and the questions that arise as a result of such surreptitiousness. I have had several textile industry colleagues ask me why the industry, through its national lobbying association, is even supporting a trade bill that could potentially harm our industry, which is finally beginning to regain its footing. My reasons, as written above, hardly appease them but do seem to be a sensible explanation to the “why” question. As one voice, I certainly don’t have all the answers.
Let’s hope that whatever becomes of TPA, TPP, TTIP and the rest of the tongue-twisting alphabet soup issues in Washington, that the outcome isn’t harmful to another “T” word – textiles. As such, I implore the administration to remove the veil of secrecy around legislation that effects nearly 40 percent of the world’s GDP, including the livelihoods millions of hard-working Americans.
Posted May 27, 2015
If I’m being honest with myself – and you – I must admit to having some reservations about fully supporting the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), given the cloud of secrecy in Washington surrounding the 12-country trade deal. As you probably know, federal lawmakers are allowed to read the text of the TPP only in a secure room, the basement of the Capitol Visitor Center, and be handed it one section at a time – and they are forbidden to bring staffers with them unless they have the “right” clearance. Aides with expertise in certain relevant areas generally are not cleared, according to reports. And, to boot, members of Congress aren’t allowed to record anything or take notes from the room, and are prohibited from telling anyone what they’ve read.
Such a clandestine process makes you wonder just what’s in the pact, doesn’t it? It does me. It leaves room for concern that language is lurking in the classified text that could be harmful to American manufacturing, especially the textile and apparel sector. Does it indeed include provisions urged by the National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO) that could help buffer the textile and apparel sector and their suppliers in the Western Hemisphere? Those provisions, of course, are a strong yarn forward rule-of-origin; reasonable duty phase-outs on sensitive textile and apparel items; and strong Customs enforcement provisions.
For an administration that touts itself as the most transparent in history, the hush-hush nature of the process surrounding dispersion of the deal’s contents is unsettling. What is it hiding? To quote Sen. Nancy Pelosi, do we “have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it?” This certainly isn’t the way international trade agreements that affect millions of people in many ways should be negotiated. One thing we do know is the TPP lacks rules against currency manipulation, which is a huge bugaboo to many global companies whose employees already are exposed to a surge of underpriced foreign imports, especially from China.
Which brings us to Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), the measure that subjects any international trade pact to only an up-or-down vote in Congress, with no amendments or filibusters allowed. TPA, which passed the Senate overwhelmingly Friday and is now in the House, could facilitate passage of the TPP and, at a later date, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). If problems are found in a deal, with TPA, little can be done to stop it without voting against the bill entirely, as the administration tries to box out Congress from any meaningful input.
In a continuing show of cooperation with the administration, the NCTO has lent its support to legislation to renew TPA, after already working with the administration to support a TPP only if it includes the council’s suggested provisions.
Now don’t get me wrong: In no way am I questioning the NCTO or any other industry party of representative for working with the government to ensure a “reasonable” trade agreement. I certainly concur with their strategy to try to work with rather than against lawmakers and negotiators on such matters. I’ve seen the result of opposing just about everything related to trade in the past, and, as you know, the results were not good. The council’s staff and elected officers from the industry have been diligent on this issue, and I commend the hard work and tack they’ve taken. And they undoubtedly know more about this
The disconcerting veil
of secrecy around TPP
This page proudly sponsored by Frankl & Thomas, Inc.
