HEADLINE: IN
MY OPINION FAST-TRACK TRADE AUTHORITY PUTS U.S. ON WRONG COURSE
SOURCE: PETER DEFAZIO
BODY: Summary: The ability to protect our environment and public health is at
risk with undemocratic rules
The Senate is considering
granting new "fast track" trade authority to the president, a move that could
seriously undermine our country's ability to enact strong laws that protect
public health and the environment.
Fast track is an
inappropriate delegation of congressional constitutional authority over trade.
Under fast-track procedures, Congress is limited to voting only yes or no on
trade agreements negotiated by the president, with no opportunity for amendment.
While the Senate approved an amendment this week that
would allow Congress minimal input into trade negotiations outside the
fast-track process for future trade agreements, the provision will likely be
dropped when the conference committee meets to negotiate a final bill.
The threat to our public health and environmental
protections stems from an obscure set of provisions in the North American Free
Trade Agreement, or Nafta. Under these rules, foreign corporations have the
right to bring lawsuits before secret international tribunals against national,
state and local governments.
Many of the cases that
have been brought under these "investor protection" provisions, called Chapter 11 in Nafta, have challenged important public
health and environmental protections.
For example, a
Canadian company, Methanex, is suing the U.S. government for $1 billion because
of a California ban on a highly toxic gasoline additive, MTBE. The additive,
which is manufactured by Methanex, leaked from vehicle and storage tanks,
poisoning California water supplies and putting citizens at risk for liver,
kidney and gastrointestinal damage. In many cases, the water became so
contaminated it was no longer usable.
California banned
MTBE. Methanex sued, arguing that the United States is required to compensate
the company for lost profits. An international tribunal, whose hearings will be
closed to the public and even to California officials, will decide the case.
Under the U.S. Constitution, this case would have almost
no chance of success. But under Nafta's Chapter 11, it's a far
different story. Mexican and Canadian governments have already lost cases
challenging their environmental protections, and are now stuck paying millions
of dollars in fines to foreign corporations.
These
rules were initially intended to prevent governments from seizing physical
property, such as entire factories, from foreign investors without fair
compensation.
However, the "investor protection" rules
are so broadly written that private companies can file suits against countries
solely when laws reduce the value of their property or business interests.
Elected officials then face two lousy options: either repeal the law or pay
through the nose to keep it.
The treaty's investor
rules give private foreign corporations rights that are far broader than any
available in the United States. These "rights" for corporations drastically
erode the sovereignty of federal, state and local governments.
Now the president wants fast-track authority in order to expand Nafta
to the entire Western Hemisphere. Doing so without any safeguards for legitimate
public health, safety or environmental laws is not the right track for trade.
Any trade legislation must ensure that the president will
not replicate these failed trade policies that impair our ability to protect our
Constitution, our citizens and our natural resources. Rep. Peter DeFazio is a
Democrat who represents Oregon's 4th Congressional District. He can be reached
via the Web site www.house.gov/defazio/ or at 2134 Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, D.C. 20515.
Document 22 of 112. 