THE HUSH-HUSH TERMS FOR INDO-PACIFIC TRADE TALKS: The Biden administration will begin negotiating an economic agreement with 13 other nations from across the Indo-Pacific in the coming months, forging a non-traditional trade pact that aims to resolve prickly challenges surrounding supply chains, digital trade, environmental stewardship and government corruption. But the proposals that countries put forth and the compromises they agree to make throughout those talks will be kept under tight wraps, and a document shared with POLITICO shows just how quiet the U.S. expects its trading partners to be. The U.S. and New Zealand have signed an agreement to keep proposals, explanatory materials, written communication and other information exchanged during the negotiations "in confidence" for five years after the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework enters into force or the talks otherwise come to an end. Each country can release its own proposals at its discretion. Those documents must also only be provided to one government official and two outside consultants working for the government, who in turn must agree only to share information with those authorized to be in the know, according to the document, which New Zealand released as part of a public records request. The terms were approved in April by Dawn Shackleford, the assistant U.S. trade representative for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, and William Mark Sinclair, New Zealand's deputy secretary of the Americas and Asia. Adam Hodge, a spokesman for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, called confidentiality agreements a "standard practice to preserve the integrity of trade negotiations." He added that the Biden administration has been "committed to increased transparency" since it took office and has "brought more people to the table as we develop trade policy." "We look forward to releasing additional transparency measures in the near future," he added. Par for the course: Confidentiality agreements do come standard in trade negotiations, though details on timeline and terms vary from deal to deal. Seasoned trade negotiators argue such rules allow government officials to communicate candidly, and to propose ideas or strike bargains that might be politically sensitive at home. Wendy Cutler, a former trade negotiator who now serves as vice president of the Asia Society Policy Institute, says "having proposals in the public domain would undoubtedly lead to vocal opposition, lobbying for more, and overall second guessing, tying the hands of negotiators at critical junctures in the talks." "That said, transparency is important but other ways to promote transparency, short of disclosing proposals, should be pursued," Cutler added. Calls for transparency: U.S. trade officials have faced bipartisan criticism from lawmakers seeking greater insight and input into the administration's trade agenda, particularly the IPEF negotiations. Advocacy groups like Public Citizen, Rethink Trade and Trade Justice are making similar demands. They penned a letter this summer calling on trade officials to forego the secrecy that usually shrouds trade talks, and instead publish proposals and draft texts for public comment. USTR released its negotiating objectives for the IPEF talks last month, but the agency is not obligated to follow the typical guidelines surrounding transparency because the framework is not a traditional trade deal that Congress must ratify. INDUSTRIAL POLICY IS THE DEMS' CLOSING ARGUMENT: It's part of a strategy to double down on blue collar voters in the Midwest — plus Georgia and Arizona — that helped deliver Biden the White House after swinging to Trump in 2016. Here's a sampling of a few recent ads: In Michigan, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is running on the Democrats' $52 billion semiconductor manufacturing package, saying the CHIPS for America Act will bring "the supply chain home" and "create Michigan jobs." She holds a narrow but steady lead over GOP nominee Tudor Dixon in the general election. Meanwhile, the DCCC is running an ad for Michigan frontline Democrat Rep. Elissa Slotkin, striking out at her opponent's record of opposing industrial policy at the state level. The TV spot, run for nearly a month in her district, notes state Sen. Tom Barrett's votes against incentives for GM manufacturing in the state, saying that if he had his way, "those jobs would be somewhere else." (We wrote about this race and another Michigan nail-biter in an on-the-ground report on the Michigan economy this summer). In Wisconsin, Democratic nominee for Senate Mandela Barnes is pledging to rebuild manufacturing in his race with incumbent GOP Sen. Ron Johnson, saying he'll "work to bring manufacturing home." The campaign spent more than $640,000 on that ad over the last month alone. In Ohio, Rep. Tim Ryan has made confronting China a centerpiece of his campaign for the Senate against GOP nominee J.D. Vance, so much that some progressives criticized his early ads as potentially stoking anti-Asian sentiment. More recent ads take a more restrained tone on the same topic, with Ryan slamming "bad trade deals" and fretting that "China's winning" while saying "that's why I voted with Trump on trade." And he strikes out at his opponent on China, saying Vance "made millions" investing in companies that outsourced to the world's second largest economy. In Missouri, Democratic nominee for Senate Trudy Busch Valentine is running an ad accusing GOP nominee Eric Schmitt of allowing "Communist China" to buy farmland in the state and pledging never to do the same. Out West, Sen. Mark Kelly is running on the CHIPS Act as well in a few different digital spots, like a five-second clip that argues the law will create jobs in his state. And so is Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, in a new ad saying the law will alleviate inflation and create thousands of jobs. And down in Georgia, Sen. Raphael Warnock's campaign has touted the semiconductor law as well. More recently, his team turned to a more pro-trade line, running an ad touting his work to expand exports for Georgia peanuts, which comprise more than half of American production of the crop. WHITE HOUSE SANCTIONS RUSSIAN TECH: The Commerce Department enacted another round of sanctions to further undermine the technology and defense sectors in Moscow and punish Russian President Vladimir Putin for his annexation of four provinces of eastern Ukraine . The White House is adding 57 entities from Russia and the occupied Ukrainian region of Crimea to the entity list, which subjects them to trade restrictions. The Treasury and Commerce Departments have said they will impose sanctions and export controls on any companies, institutions or people who support Moscow's war effort. Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security Alan Estevez said: "Russia's attempts to illegally annex Ukrainian territory are a grotesque violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and a blatant effort to manufacture a false reality. This phony act to legitimize the invasion cannot stand." NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER ON DATA TRANSFERS: The Biden White House is expected to publish an executive order this week that will address concerns from the European Union surrounding surveillance practices in the U.S. The executive order is expected to include new legal protections for European and American citizens regarding governments' access to personal data and language that determines specific circumstances under which collection is "necessary and proportionate." Long time coming: European and American officials have struggled to bridge an irreconcilable divide over surveillance procedures ever since EU judges struck down a bilateral data pact in 2020 over concerns it failed to protect Europeans from American surveillance. What's next: The order, which is set to be released this week, will kick off a six-month ratification process that could end around March 2023, POLITICO reports. HOUSING GROUPS CLAMOR FOR CHINA TARIFF RELIEF: Leading voices in the homebuilding industry are revving up lobbying efforts aimed at loosening tariffs on more than $300 billion worth of goods from China. The campaign is taking advantage of a probe from the U.S. Trade Representative's office into the broader inflationary impact of the tariffs. The USTR previously decided to keep the restrictions in place after a prior review. Representatives from groups like the National Association of Home Builders view tariff relief as one avenue to ease continuing supply chain backlogs amid a "perfect storm" of high production costs the industry says could fan inflationary flames.
| 
Comments
Post a Comment