Will the Trans-Pacific Partnership Help the U.S. and Global Economy?Isabella TilleyCAP 9Blue group10 May 2015

Will the Trans-Pacific Partnership Help the U.S. and Global Economy?

American politicians, such as Senator Elizabeth Warren and Senator Harry Reid, argue that the Trans-Pacific Partnership will eliminate jobs, destroy the U.S. economy and ensure environmental ruin. However, outsourcing ultimately benefits the United States and the rest of the world. The Trans-Pacific Partnership will support the export of American goods, allow small American businesses to benefit from trade, as well enforce environmental protection and fundamental labor rights. Most mainstream economists agree that opening foreign markets through trade agreements is stimulating for economies. The Trans-Pacific Partnership will be incredibly beneficial to the U.S. economy, and efforts to stop this treaty will close off opportunities for foreign trade, which will effectively raise the trade deficit and perpetuate job loss. Outsourcing is the business practice of subcontracting work to foreign or nonunion companies (ProQuest Staff, At Issue: Outsourcing). Outsourcing is a powerful business strategy, and is used by almost all large corporations today. Certain corporations have recently received criticism for outsourcing, most notably Apple, Nike, Zara, and other garment manufacturers such as Forever 21, Adidas, H&M, and Under Armour. Trade agreements typically promote outsourcing. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), or Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement, is a treaty between 12 different countries, the United States, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Chile, Vietnam, Singapore, Malaysia, Australia, Peru, New Zealand, and Brunei Darussalam; together, these countries make up 40 percent of the global economy (Trans-Pacific Partnership Environment Working Group Chairs). The Trans-Pacific Partnership aims to address the export of American goods, the issue of small American businesses in relation to free trade, as well environmental protection and fundamental labor rights (Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Unlocking Opportunity for Americans through Trade with the Asian Pacific). One goal of the TPP is to strengthen the copyright protections of film and music (DePillis). Another goal is to promote healthy growth of the private sector in all member countries, which would be accomplished by limiting public support for companies (DePillis). The TPP would also allow companies to sue governments for not complying with the regulations of the agreement (DePillis). Currently, TPP countries are discussing elements for a labor chapter that include commitments on labor rights protection and mechanisms to ensure cooperation, coordination and dialogue on labor issues of mutual concern (Labor Rights). The TPP also aims to help the environment: the Parties [countries] are committed to promoting and encouraging the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and sharing in a fair and equitable way the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources (Trans-Pacific Partnership Working Group Chairs). All of these aspects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership will effectively promote trade and economic growth, while also enforcing labor standards and environmental regulations.Before World War II, an international economy existed, but it was not as large, interdependent or productive as the global economy that exists today. The 1947 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was created to facilitate international trade, and laid the foundation for the multinational conglomerates seen today. The objective of the GATT, according to its preamble, was to facilitate trade via the "substantial reduction of tariffs and other trade barriers and the elimination of preferences, on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis" (Modic, GATT/WTO). By 1973, imports in foreign or multinational companies began to show that it had a drastic effect on the U.S. economy. The American steel industry dropped from 47 percent to 20 percent, and out of every 10 radios sold in the U.S., 9 had been manufactured abroad. In 1979, the U.S. allowed U.S. technologies to be transferred to China, leading to a rise of American investments in Chinese manufacturing. In 1992, the North American Free Trade Agreement was signed by Canada, the United States, and Mexico. In 1995, the World Trade Organization was created, and removed trade barriers between more than 130 member countries, leading to more global trade. By 2004, despite the benefits of increased world trade, a poll conducted by Marylands Program on International Policy attitudes indicated that high-income Americans were becoming anxious about their perceived consequences of free trade (ProQuest Staff, Outsourcing Timeline). Negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership began in 2008 when Singapore, New Zealand, Chile, and Brunei approached the United States for a goods-only treaty. The United States was interested in adding services and investments to the deal, as well as several other countries, including Peru, Australia, Vietnam, Canada, and Mexico. Originally, Vietnam, Canada and Mexico did not join, but have since come in, along with Japan and Malaysia (Schwab). In the future, even more countries are expected to join the partnership (DePillis). The Trans-Pacific Partnership is part of an American pivot to Asia, after too many years of American foreign policy being bogged down by the Middle East (DePillis). Oddly, one major country that is being excluded from the agreement is China. In an interview with Nina Easton, Susan Schwab said that it would be difficult to include China in the TPP now that negotiations are beginning to wrap up. Furthermore, there has been emphasis on the TPPs high standards, many of which China does not meet (Tiezzi).Despite the stimulus that the Trans-Pacific Partnership will provide for the American economy, critics argue that the TPP will destroy American jobs and does not do enough to protect the environment. In its release of the Environment Chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, WikiLeaks wrote: "When compared against other TPP chapters, the Environment Chapter is noteworthy for its absence of mandated clauses or meaningful enforcement measures" (Sheppard). Critics of the TPP complain that the majority of environmental protection measures listed in the chapter are voluntary, instead of binding. The lack of severity, critics worry, will lead to more environmental ruin, as countries ignore the loose regulations. This fear has been overblown: the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative released a statement saying we [the United States] will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement (Sheppard). According to the Environment Chapter of the TPP text, all countries included in the treaty are committed to policies and practices to improve environmental protection in the furtherance of sustainable development (Trans-Pacific Partnership Environment Working Group Chairs). The TPP also encourages its parties to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption (Trans-Pacific Partnership Environment Working Group Chairs). TPP opponents also often cite job loss as another negative consequence of trade deals such as the TPP. Since the implementation of NAFTA and the creation of the WTO, nearly five million American manufacturing jobs one out of every four have been lost (Expose the TPP). Though jobs have been lost, according to Susan Schwab in an interview with Nina Easton for Smart Women Smart Power, with NAFTA a lot more jobs were created than were lost. Also, according to Schwab, less than 2 percent of those who are unemployed...have been unemployed by virtue of imports. Another common argument that appears to be unique to the TPP is that the TPP will increase the power of global corporations by creating a supra-national [sic] court, or tribunal, where foreign firms can sue states and obtain taxpayer compensation for expected future profits (Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement). However, according to administration officials, the Investor-State Dispute Settlement accords create a fairer environment for American companies doing business abroad, eliminate the possibility of government seizure of property, and ensure access to international justice (Weisman). Lastly, many opponents of the TPP cite NAFTA as having set a precedent of unsuccessful and ultimately harmful trade agreements, but trade negotiators have become more adept at including higher labor and environmental standards in the many trade deals that followed NAFTA (Matthews). In reality, the United States economy would not do very well without free trade. An analysis done by think tank Third Way authors Jim Kessler and Gabe Horwitz found that free trade agreements have lessened the trade deficit (Matthews). Other benefits of free trade include new access to new overseas markets, (an obvious benefit, according to Susan Schwab) and the benefit of better quality, more choice, and less expensive products for American consumers (Schwab). Not only are there benefits to free trade, there are repercussions for eliminating free trade: in 2013, Texas exported $279.5 billion worth of goods to the rest of the world. This export supported an estimated 1.1 million jobs. Without free trade, mammoth amounts of money and jobs could be lost. Free trade is a vital part of the United States economy, as well as the world economy. The Trans-Pacific Partnership will promote free trade, therefore creating millions of jobs and adding billions of dollars to the U.S. economy. The TPP will also put new environmental regulations in place to help global climate change and pollution. Opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership will be detrimental to the economy, as well as the environment.

Works Cited"FACT SHEET: Dallas Workers and Businesses Supported by Exports." Office of the United States Trade Representative. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2015. .

DePillis, Lydia. "Everything You Need to Know about the Trans-Pacific Partnership." Washington Post 11 Dec. 2013: n. pag. Print.

"How the Trans-Pacific Partnership Would Impact Off-Shoring of American Jobs." Expose the TPP. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2015. .

Matthews, Chris. "Maybe the Obama Admin Is Right about Free Trade after All." Fortune. N.p., 13 Feb. 2015. Web. 31 Mar. 2015. .

ProQuest Staff. "Outsourcing Timeline." Leading Issues Timelines. 2015: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 15 Mar. 2015.

ProQuest Staff. "At Issue: Outsourcing." ProQuest LLC. 2015: n.pag. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 15 Mar. 2015.

Schwab, Susan. "The Fraught Politics of Free Trade." Interview by Nina Easton. Smart Women Smart Power. CSIS, n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2015.

"Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) - Investment Chapter." WikiLeaks. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2015. .

Sheppard, Kate. "WikiLeaks Exposes What Obama's Secret Trade Deal Would Do to the Environment." Huffington Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2015. .

Trans-Pacific Partnership Environment Working Group Chairs. "Environment Chapter: Consolidated Text." WikiLeaks. N.p., 15 Jan. 2014. Web. 30 Mar. 2015. .

Weisman, Jonathan. "Trans-Pacific Partnership Seen as Door for Foreign Suits against U.S." New York Times. New York Times Company, n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2015.