Interesting Questions: The TransPacific Partnership

Supposing the TPP gets rammed through and American states, counties and cities lose some of their autonomy to the ‘Star Chamber’ of multinationals.  I suspect they won’t like it – and their constituents won’t like it.

0) Can state and local governments practice ‘civil disobedience’ to protest an unjust law?

1) Could a state use this as a basis to secede from the United States since it will be placing the State under ‘foreign rule’ with no way to petition this ‘shadow gov’t’?

2) Could a city or state just ignore the ruling of this ‘court’?  I mean, how much power does that court have?  Who enforces it?  What could they do if a state said “Try to stop us from prohibiting the sale of those products and good luck collecting your settlement from us.”   If the multinational tried to seize state or local assets it could get the citizens mobilized and national guard deployed and even provoke a civil war!   And that probably wouldn’t be good press for that company.

3) Suppose a state winds up paying billions to a multinational and publicizes how many tax dollars went into the coffers of that multinational? (Most of us hate wasting our tax dollars).  And encourages boycotts of all products from that multinational – all with plausible deniability, of course.

4) What about requiring merchants to place ‘consumer awareness’ signs prominently … like those signs: “This Product/Location has chemicals known by the State of California to cause cancer in lab animals.”   It isn’t a ban but it is making customers aware of the chemicals so they can make an informed choice.  (BTW: If that gov’t banned it – chances are more consumers there don’t want to buy it)

5) What about all of those ‘buy local’ programs supported by chambers of commerce and labor groups alike?   What about requiring imported products, American products and local products be separated on the shelves?

from here