[ColinDabritz]

This definitely feels like a political end run, going back on humanitarian progress we've recently made such as on generic drugs. Treaties as a way around that pesky will-of-the-people thing. "Oh we can't go back on that, we signed a treaty. Sorry about your justified outrage."

[acqq]

Sounds really dangerous:

https://wikileaks.org/tpp-ip3/pharmaceutical/Pharmaceutical%...

"Marketing exclusivity for new forms and uses of old medicines could be considered a form of evergreening. Since marketing exclusivity applies regardless of the patent status of a drug, even off-patent medicines presented in the forms and uses described below would not have a generic competitor."

[ColinDabritz]

Yes, I don't think it's any exaggeration when they say that the TPP agreement will kill people. Medicine vital to survival will be priced out of reach of some of the less fortunate, and some of them will die. This bill is not safe for public consumption.

My hope is that this particular issue will be bigger than they thought it would be due to the recent price issues around Daraprim (from $13.50 a pill to $750).

[FilterSweep]

It won't just kill people on the Pharma side.

It will also kill people on the Corporate externality side with its Corporate Sovereignty provisions [0]

Suppose TPP-Protected Corporation XYZ moves its manufacturing to Town F in impoverished country ABC. This is allowed because, look at all the jobs XYZ creates! XYZ finds it much cheaper to dump excess waste products into the local river. Many citizens of Town F die from the numerous poisons it dumps in the river. Local Government of Town F would like to stop XYZ's pollution, but XYZ is now allowed to override local laws and take Country ABC to a private tribunal to "deal" with the pesky citizens complaining about dying.

[0] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150325/17151130431/corpo...

[hwstar]

You can always decide to exit a treaty. If enough people voted in representatives willing to exit the treaty it would be done.

The TPP isn't a real treaty as that requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate its what's known as a trade promotion authority.

Constitutional amendments trump treaties. If anything is found to be unconstitutional in the treaty by SCOTUS, then the treaty may need to be broken.

[bediger4000]

All of your points amount to equivocation.

True, the US can decide to exit a treaty. How likely is that, in this case? Not very.

TPP is not a real treaty, but it carries the force of a treaty.

Is the SCOTUS likely to find something unconstitutional? Again, it's true that SCOTUS could dump the TPP, but I think it's highly unlikely, given court's deference to intent of legislation, will of the legislators,etc etc.

The TPP just reeks not only of end-run around the will of the people, but manufactured consent as well.

[hwstar]

I'm not trying to argue that the TPP isn't bad. It is. Nor am I trying to conceal the truth on anything regarding the mechanisms of government. I just wanted to state that there are ways to control the TPP should it get voted in.

[bediger4000]

Spoken like a true gentleman. But your points needed rebuttal, so that consent isn't further manufactured, at least.