A group of legal experts question a key facet of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.
It just amazes me how in the face of contrary opinion from so many respected experts, that Obama can still think he is right, they are wrong, and they just don’t understand. I wonder if he has been hypnotized.
One excerpt from the article really makes me wonder what on earth the President has been smoking.
The Obama administration would argue that ISDS does not function as a shadow mechanism outside American courts; it provides a fair, stable mechanism for resolving disputes between American companies and other countries’ governments.
“Part of our goal here is to make sure that there is a neutral process that is legally recognized, so that if an arbitrary burden or tax or tariff is imposed on a U.S. company in these countries, that they have recourse to a fair, impartial venue to resolve it,” Obama said recently. “Foreign countries already have that here in the U.S.”
If his goal is to provide a fair and stable mechanism, then why would he upend centuries of work on establishing just such a fair and stable mechanism. Surely as a lawyer and as a scholar of the U.S. Constitution, he must understand all the effort and experimentation that has gone into making our system as fair and stable a mechanism as we have been able to figure out how to do so far. That’s not to say that we can’t come up with additional ways to make it more fair and more stable. However, President Obama seems to be quite willing to undo all the effort that has been made so far.
Remember the last President who thought that we needed to undo 50 years of precedent on how to regulate banks. The exact disaster that those precedents had prevented from recurring for 50 years were the result of getting rid of those regulations. I am talking Bill Clinton here. Why is President Obama so stubbornly anxious to create a disaster larger than the one Clinton created? Is this some kind of contest?