A big organizing thing lately for left-leaning groups has been opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership, a supposedly “secretive” trade agreement between countries, that will give corporations unlimited power over governments and individuals. It’s an absurd and paranoid notion.

All big deals have to be negotiated in secret. Without secrecy, involved parties can’t freely pass around ideas without fear of retaliation from the folks back home. Theoreticals need to be asked and weighted, without fear of being punished for laying an unpopular idea on the table.

No treaty can limit the power of Congress (or any other sovereign government) to pass new laws. It’s true that a treaty when ratified can have the effect of amending existing law, but it’s can’t bind new laws.  See the Head Money Cases. 

Most trade treaties contain retaliatory provisions against “discriminatory” trade laws. So-called bilateral investment treaties typically include provisions calling for fair and equitable treatment, protection from expropriation, free transfer of means and full protection and security.

Such retaliatory provisions are generally pretty minor, as if they were too severe, punished countries would just quit the treaty. They are “parking tickets” for bad behavior on behalf of countries — typically relatively small and meaningless fines to encourage compliance with free trade provisions.

In the United States, the president alone can “quit” a treaty without Congressional approval, as seen with George W. Bush leaving the previously ratified ABM treaty. No other law but a treaty, can the president simply repeal without Congressional approval.

More about the Trans Pacific Partnership on the Washington Post.

We shouldn’t fear progress, or more free trade.