The United States federal government should cease its surveillance of foreign diplomats in the United States and at United States embassies

USTR is overstretched now – random Africa trade agreements

Going forward, Congress should pressure the Administration to stop investing in ineffectual Trade and Investment Framework Agreements (TIFAs) and start investing in BIT negotiations. Over the last decade, USTR has focused almost solely on pursuing TIFAs in Sub-Saharan Africa, which provide no binding protections for US investors and do not advance a real reform agenda. This misplaced and non-strategic effort has distracted limited US government attention from pursuing real negotiations with African nations. Put differently, while China, Canada, and other nations have been signing countless legally binding treaties, the United States has been signing TIFAs that provide no tangible benefit to US investors and companies. It is time to stop allocating scarce resources to these inconsequential talk shops and move toward pursuing real agreements that catalyze much needed (and wanted) investment flows.

ustr overstretch now – xt: africa randomness

Africa randomness ensures overstretch

While Beijing and Ottawa have been busy inking new deals, USTR has been pursuing an ineffectual non-legally binding trade and investment framework agreements. It's time to stop allocating scarce resources to these potshots, and start negotiating real agreements that have impact for U.S. investors and on promoting economic growth in the region.

no trade-off

Trade indexes solve

While this report is just a start, it points to the need for the USTR to produce such an index on an annual basis that would include more nations (and ideally the United States) as well as more and better data sets. Doing so would give the U.S. government additional tools to "name and shame" nations that are international trade scofflaws. In addition, it would help U.S. officials better target our scarce trade enforcement resources on the nations that are doing the most damage to the U.S. economy. This, however, points to the other real problem: overcoming scarce resources for trade enforcement. The United States invests just 0.007 percent as much on defending its economy globally as it does on defending the nation militarily. The U.S. government can bring more balance to this by significantly increasing resources for trade enforcement. This includes Congress requiring that USTR create a chief trade enforcement officer and a trade enforcement working group to institutionalize within the agency the function of trade enforcement and significantly increase budget resources for the activity. Moreover, this includes increased funding for additional U.S. trade agencies, including the International Trade Administration, the International Trade Enforcement Center, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the functions in the State Department focused on protecting U.S. economic interests. But we need more than funding for enforcement. It's time for the United States to conduct a major review of the trade policy tools available and to formulate an understanding of the new tools that are needed going forward. We see this need particularly when trying to address systemic challenges from a nation such as China, which is extremely sophisticated in ensuring that its mercantilist policies and practices escape the scrutiny of the WTO. Indeed, this monopsonistic power of China--an ability to institute mercantilist practices while coercing multinationals to not object--points to another key change that is needed. The United States cannot roll back spreading mercantilism and save the soul of the global trading system without building better alliances with like-minded partners, particularly the European Union and Commonwealth nations. We need to do this through trade agreements such as the Trans Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, but also through more joint enforcement actions and combined diplomatic pressure. Toward that end, the Obama administration needs to lead this effort while Europe needs to step up to the plate and stops letting America always be the "bad cop," while it reaps the short-term benefits of being the "good cop."

ustr fails

The USTR doesn’t know what it’s doing

Hersh 6/18 – senior economist at Roosevelt Institute and a visiting fellow at Columbia University’s Institute for Policy Dialogue (Adam Hersh, 6/18/15, “REP. MATT SALMON HOLDS A HEARING ON CHINA'S RISE: THE STRATEGIC IMPACT OF ITS ECONOMIC AND MILITARY GROWTH,” Political Transcript Wire, Lexis)//twemchen

The divisions we saw on last week's historic TPA/TAA vote here in the house reveal how much the rules matter to people. Some point to this outcome is a sign of a broken Congress, but I submit this was Congress doing its work. Rather what's broken is the relationship between Congress and the executive branch, particularly the USTR and how divided constitutional authorities to make international agreements work in practice in our government. When the rules mattered as much, we should take the time to get them right rather than trying to bulldoze through Congress whatever rules USTR and the corporate law these -- that negotiate these agreements with them supposedly on our behalf.

no impact

USTR resilient to resource cuts

Punke and Kind 14 – Deputy Trade Representative in Geneva AND Representative Ron Kind from Wisconsin (Michael Punke, Ron Kind, 7/16/15, “HOUSE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE HOLDS A HEARING ON U.S. TRADE AGENDA AND THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION,” Political Transcript Wire, Lexis)//twemchen

Look, we pride ourselves on being lean and mean at USTR. And we will always make do with whatever resources we are given, and live off the land, or do whatever else is necessary to make sure that we are fulfilling our mission. I think Ambassador Froman was asked this question a couple of months ago, and noted the fact that there had been recent months, particularly during the sequester, when we were perhaps a little bit leaner than we wanted to be. I think we're in a slightly better position as of the last couple of months. And it's been gratifying, I think, to have the ability to field the teams in the places that we need to field them, in order to engage robustly in all of the negotiations that you described. So we appreciate your support. We will make the most of the resources that we were -- are given, and we know that in the type of budget environment that we're in, that all of us have to be very accountable in terms of how we spend scarce resources. But we will continue the conversation with you about resources in USTR.

tpp fails

TPP failure inevitable

Parameswaran 6/24 – staff writer at The Diplomat (Prashanth Parameswaran, 6/24/15, “Finishing the TPP: It’s Not Just About the US Congress,” http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/finishing-the-tpp-its-not-just-about-the-us-congress/)//twemchen

Much of the commentary on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in recent weeks has understandably focused on the U.S. Congress, where the Obama administration has been working hard to get the necessary votes to pass Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), also known as “fast-track.” But even as we wait to see whether Washington can get its act together on TPP, a mammoth free trade agreement which represents nearly 40 percent of global GDP, it is also important to remember what it will take for all 12 TPP countries – not just the United States legislature – to get the agreement past the finish line. Congress’ approval of TPA will of course be an essential step to get things through. TPA is important because it would effectively ensure that Congress can only have an up-or-down vote on the pact, rather than opening up and amending specific provisions which could delay or kill the deal. But beyond Washington, securing TPA is also important for the other 11 countries – Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam – as well. This is not just a question of American credibility, which Singapore’s foreign minister K Shanmugam emphasized quite starkly during his visit to Washington last week. Some of these countries had understandably been waiting to see if TPA will be approved to lock in what has been agreed to so far before buckling down for the final stretch of negotiations. TPA now looks set to pass, although it is still not yet finalized. As The Diplomat reported earlier today, the U.S. Senate got the necessary votes to move standalone Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to a final debate, days after the House passed standalone legislation on TPA on its side. Provided a final vote is cast and other outstanding issues – including Trade Adjustment Assistance – are ideally sorted out, TPA can then be approved, granting the Obama administration the ability to negotiate TPP without legislative amendment. But that’s just the beginning of the end. Though the negotiating countries have said that they have gotten through most of the tough issues, the final stage of trade negotiations also tends to be a time to sort out lingering divergences, stubborn demands, and knotty issues. Even though the specifics of the agreement are still secret, we do know that while technical matters have mostly been resolved, there are still some pending issues to be negotiated between TPP members. Much attention of late has been paid to the rather optimistic recent comment by Australian Trade Minister Andrew Robb that the parties are “literally one week away” from completing the deal. Yet looking beyond deadlines, the bigger question is what kind of issues need to be worked out and at what level. At a Tuesday event on the TPP at the Atlantic Council, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, Chile’s ambassador to the United States, Juan Gabriel Valdes, said that while some issues were simple and could be resolved quickly, others were not so and would require high-level attention from leaders. “I have the impression that political leaders will have to get involved in the process,” Valdes said. Last but not least, all 12 TPP members will need to get the agreement ratified by their legislatures. This is no small feat. In some of the negotiating countries, like Malaysia, there is strong opposition to specific issues, as might be expected in a 29-chapter agreement that takes on sensitive issues like intellectual property and state-owned enterprises. Others, like Peru, are also at sensitive stages in their electoral cycles as well, just like Washington is with elections coming up next year in 2016. “Getting the actual TPP once it is finalized through our own congresses is not going to be easy,” Peru’s ambassador to the United States, Luis Miguel Castilla, warned at the Atlantic Council event. In the United States, too, much work remains to be done with the elections fast approaching. Even given the ideal scenario where every step of the process is completed at its earliest date – with TPA becoming law by the end of June, TPP concluded by the end of July, and U.S. President Barack Obama signing the deal after November 1 following necessary procedures – including notifying Congress and making other preparations – TPP would only be implemented by December 1, Daniel Ikenson of the CATO Institute opined in a recent commentary. A more realistic scenario, which adds in time for debates in Congress and other delays, Ikenson says, is between May and July 2016. The assumption that it will take a month to finalize the TPP is also an optimistic one, and it could in fact take longer. If it takes too long, that begins to bump up against the 2016 elections in November, which could affect the vote count once it gets back to Congress. With so much still left to do by so many players, a little perspective is in order even if we do see further advances on the TPP in Washington in the coming weeks. As Ambassador Castilla aptly put it, for all the attention on Capitol Hill over the past few weeks on TPA, “this is just round one” on the TPP.

Directory: file -> view
view -> Western Europe after wwii
view -> Author study: paul fleischman
view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide
view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg
view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh
view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce
view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy
view -> Table of Contents Lesson #
view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad

Download 0.83 Mb.

Share with your friends: