Subject: Trade Q&A
From: Dan Schwerin <[email-masked]>
To: John Podesta <[email-masked]>, Jennifer Palmieri <[email-masked]>, Robby Mook <[email-masked]>, Kristina Schake <[email-masked]>, Nick Merrill <[email-masked]>, Jake Sullivan <[email-masked]>, Huma Abedin <[email-masked]>, Josh Schwerin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2015 12:17:56 -0400

Here's a new Q&A that hopefully reflects our conversation this morning:

*Do you support legislation to grant President Obama fast track negotiating
authority?*

·      Last week I laid out the tests that I believe any new trade measure
has to meet: First, it has to put us in a position to protect American
workers, raise wages and create more good jobs at home. Second, it must
also strengthen our national security.

·      I’m focused on what’s going to help crack down on currency
manipulation, improve labor rights, protect the environment and health,
promote transparency, and open new opportunities for our small businesses
to export overseas. And, as I warned in my book, “Hard Choices,” we
shouldn’t be giving special rights to corporations in these agreements at
the expense of workers and consumers.

·      My focus is on what’s in the final trade agreement because that will
directly impact the American people. Now, the TPA procedural measure was
introduced at the end of last week, and I’ll be watching how the
Congressional process shapes this, with an eye to the tests I’ve already
laid out.

·      We should walk away from any outcome that falls short. The goal is
greater prosperity and security for American families, not trade for
trade’s sake.

*If pressed on Hatch-Wyden:*

On TPA, I start with real concerns, including that the proposed authority
extends beyond TPP itself to include other potential future trade
agreements.  So we’ll have to see what emerges here and the details will
matter.

*Aren’t you a flip-flopper given that you have voiced strong support for
TPP in the past, before you started running for president?*

·      As Secretary of State I called for a strong and fair TPP that
strengthens our security and prosperity.

·      This deal isn't done yet.  I’ll judge it when it is, based on the
tests I’ve laid out.

·      These are the same tests I’ve used for past agreements.

·      I’ve voted against trade agreements when they don’t meet my tests,
and for some when they do.  I judge each deal on its own terms and that is
what I will do here.

*What about ISDS?*

·      So-called “investor-state dispute settlement,” or ISDS, lets
individual companies bring cases to enforce trade agreements.  In the past,
ISDS has benefited some American companies by letting them challenge unfair
actions by foreign governments.  But as I warned in my book, *Hard Choices*,
we shouldn’t allow multinational corporations to use ISDS to undermine
legitimate health, social, economic, and environmental regulations, as
Philip Morris has tried to do in Australia.  We shouldn’t be giving special
rights to corporations at the expense of workers and consumers.

·      More broadly, it’s time for openness to become a hallmark of our
approach to trade.  Just as we demand more open markets, we should also
demand more open negotiations.