USTR Nominee Confuses Transparency With Listening

from the other-direction,-mr.-froman dept

We’ve already explained why were were worried that new USTR nominee Michael Froman would be as bad, if not worse, than his predecessor, Ron Kirk. And, in his Senate approve hearings he provided little to change that opinion:

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) raised the extraordinary secrecy shrouding the Obama administration’s trade negotiations to date.  Wyden has blasted USTR’s incredible decision to keep the negotiating text of the sweeping TPP pact, affecting everything from food safety to Internet freedom, hidden from the U.S. public and even from members of Congress.  Not even the Bush administration attempted that degree of secrecy.  Wyden asked, “If confirmed, will you make sure that the public…gets a clear and updated description of what trade negotiators are seeking to obtain in the negotiations so that we can make this process more transparent in the future?” Wyden further asked that negotiating texts be placed online.  Froman responded by saying he agrees with the principle of transparency.  But instead of committing to a meaningful fulfillment of that principle by releasing the TPP text online (as done under Bush), he reiterated USTR’s general desire to seek input from “stakeholders.”  It is of course difficult for stakeholders to provide meaningful input if they cannot see the thing in which they have a stake.   

Of course, as we’ve explained many times, transparency has nothing to do with seeking input from stakeholders, but the opposite: providing information to the public. Listening is important to understand what’s going on, but that’s not transparency.

It’s pretty simple: information flowing into the USTR is not transparency. Information flowing to select interests is not transparency. Releasing information to the public is transparency. How does the USTR continually get away with pretending otherwise?

Separately, as the article linked above notes, Froman refused to comment on whether he supported investor-state dispute resolution mechanisms that are showing up in trade agreements and which, as we’ve been highlighting, are so dangerous. He’d only say it’s a matter worthy of discussion. But then refused to discuss it. Which says a lot. He also claimed he was going to continue to seek fast track authority, which they renamed Trade Promotion Authority — which basically forces Congress to sign away its right to oversee what’s in TPP. These are all very worrisome statements, because it means we’re getting more of the same: a USTR that wants to make an end-run around the public and Congress, but which is driven by the interests of some of the largest companies.

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “USTR Nominee Confuses Transparency With Listening”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
11 Comments
out_of_the_blue says:

Mike describes Mike on copyright:

“He’d only say it’s a matter worthy of discussion. But then refused to discuss it. Which says a lot.” … Assuming any new here, that’s technically off-topic but an ongoing complaint that I’ll only link to:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130121/14473121743/global-hackathons-prepared-to-carry-forward-work-aaron-swartz.shtml#c377

Tex Arcana (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Wrong.

Secret representations, not of the PEOPLE of the United States; but of a select and secret group of industries, including the *IAA’s, whose sole objective is to corporatize America, and make it impossible for the c̶i̶t̶i̶z̶e̶n̶s̶ slaves to know what’s being done to them.

We are being screwed, any way you look at it; and those abomination is just the tip of the iceberg.

Anonymous Coward says:

while this and other similar bodies exist, there will be nothing done that allows the public to have any input. they get no say in anything, they get to see nothing! the part about ‘driven by the interests of some of the largest companies’ is oh so true! and goes straight to the post above about Orwell’s books. 1984 is so near, although late. if we allow that to happen, for the world to be run by industries and corporations, we will end up in disaster, and we may never recover from that. profit is all they understand and they will go to any lengths to have as much as possible. if that means turning everyone into a mindless moron to get and keep control, that’s what they will do! it has already started. look at what Hollywood and the entertainment industries have done to the people and the ‘law’. look what they are still doing to the people and the ‘law’, just to stop people from keeping control of their own lives, their own things! and it’s spreading fast!!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...