TPP Hits Resistance in Congress as Members Vow to Scrutinize Text
President Barack Obama formally notified Congress of his intent to sign the Trans-Pacific Partnership on Nov. 5, setting off a 90-day, statutorily-required period of public disclosure before he can follow through on that pledge. The notification comes just a day after TPP parties released the text, which outlines a set of measures to speed up goods flow at ports of entry in member countries and boost transparency in rule-making (see 1511050020). TPP will slash export barriers for U.S. manufacturers, agriculture producers and other businesses, the White House said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
A range of lawmakers vowed to thoroughly scrutinize the terms of the pact, which includes 30 chapters and additional annexes. Critics pounced on the agreement immediately after its release, and even expected supporters to caution that the deal may not live up to the demands of Congress.
Staff at the office of the U.S. Trade Representative may need to renegotiate the terms of the pact in order to pave the way for passage, said Senate Finance Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, in a speech to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Nov. 6. Since TPP parties closed the talks in early October, Hatch has lashed into the agreement’s language on data exclusivity for biologics. The pact will jeopardize U.S. intellectual property, he said. “I understand that renegotiation may be difficult, particularly with so many parties involved,” said Hatch. “But at the end of the day, the alternative to renegotiation may very well be no TPP at all.” USTR Michael Froman said the U.S. won’t revisit the terms it agreed to (see 1510190005).
As chief of the Finance Committee, the Senate body that oversees trade policy, Hatch's stance will prove critical in moving implementation legislation through Congress. Trade Promotion Authority outlines a range of measures for Finance and the House Ways and Means Committee to forego expedited legislative processes for an implementation bill (see 1504230001).
The pact (here) would undermine U.S. law of 12 years of biologic exclusivity and deliver a critical blow to U.S. investment, Hatch said. "Sadly, while we’re still reviewing the text, we already know that this is one area where the current version of TPP falls short,” he said. “The agreement appears to include a standard for only five years of data exclusivity for biologics, apparently with the possibility of an additional three years based on factors that are, as of right now, unclear at best. On top of that, officials from some of our negotiating partners have publicly stated that the agreement gives them years to implement their commitments related to biologics.”
Hatch touted his long-time support for trade liberalization. “I think you’d be hard pressed to find anyone in this town who has spent more time touting the potential benefits of the TPP than I have over the past few years,” he said. “However, while the prospect remains intriguing, I am very concerned that, particularly with regard to intellectual property, the administration may not have gotten the best deal possible. Obviously, now that the text is public, I want to take the time to review it, talk with my colleagues, and consult with all of you and other stakeholders but, as it stands right now, I’m afraid that the current draft of the TPP agreement may fall short.”
The release also set off a wave of criticism from expected opponents. House Democrats, such as Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., lashed into the agreement, as did conservation and labor groups. “We will be examining the text line by line in the coming days to understand the deal's full implications for working people in every sector from manufacturing and agriculture to public and private services,” said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka. “But from what we have already seen, it is clear that the threats of this expansive new agreement outweigh its benefits -- for good jobs, for democracy, for affordable medicines, for consumer safety, and for the environment.”
But many TPP supporters applauded the administration for closing the deal and urged public investigation into the terms. Newly-minted House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., echoed those calls on Nov. 5. “I continue to reserve judgement on the path ahead,” he said. “But I remain hopeful that our negotiators reached an agreement that the House can support because a successful TPP would mean more good jobs for American workers and greater U.S. influence in the world." Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis., the chief House Democrat supporter of Trade Promotion Authority, also gave his backing to a transparent examination of the agreement.
The National Council of Textile Organizations jumped on board as well. “We believe that many of the U.S. textile industry’s key objectives have been met, including a yarn forward rule of origin for most products and reasonable duty phase-outs for sensitive textile and apparel items,” said NCTO. “While we need to thoroughly familiarize ourselves with the fine details of the agreement, we feel that the U.S. government was able to achieve a well-balanced outcome for all parties, including U.S. textile manufacturers and our partners in the Western Hemisphere.”
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest urged Congress to move quickly on implementation legislation on Nov. 5, dismissing suggestions that Congress will have to wait until the lame-duck sessions following next year’s elections. “We've made clear that it's not necessary to wait that long,” he said. “That would mean waiting for almost a year -- a day or two short of a year, at least. We don't believe it's necessary to wait that long.” Earnest repeated the administration claim that U.S. exporters will see cuts in roughly 18,000 duties in TPP countries.