Showing posts with label Felicia Bruce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Felicia Bruce. Show all posts

Sunday, February 16, 2014

SECRETIVE TRAD AGREEMENT NEEDS OVERSIGHT

from Felicia Bruce
Letter  to the Editor, Thursday, February 13, 2014: 
Secretive Trade Agreement Needs Congressional Oversight

      The Trans-Pacific Partnership, also known as the TPP, is a proposed agreement between the United States and 12 multinational corporations doing business in the Pacific Rim. For five years, 600 corporate trade advisers and industry trade associations have had unfiltered access to the working texts. But every word has been kept secret from the public. 
      Now Congress is faced with a choice: Fast track the trade agreement, which would limit debate and exclude amendments, or refuse to fast track it, thus allowing public scrutiny and Congress’ constitutional oversight of foreign trade.
     Twenty years after all the promises of the North American Free Trade Agreement have been broken, we have seen how bad these deals can be for the American worker and economy. 
      This trade agreement has been described as NAFTA on steroids. Among its travesties: It may swap democracy for corporate rule by relinquishing our right to regulate within our own borders and it would subordinate U.S. law to the decisions of a global business tribunal. It would also create special protections and remove any remaining global barriers for “too big to fail” banks, potentially making the activities of some community banks illegal. 
     The net effect would also be to encourage U.S. companies to offshore more American jobs and lower wages. 
     As if all that was not enough bad news, it would also exempt foreign companies from environmental regulations and affect consumer protections for food safety. Leaked terms further reveal provisions for encouraging fracking and drilling and allowing corporations to sue governments that “inhibit” profits. 
     Luckily, two of our own elected officials, congressmen Alan Grayson and Patrick Murphy, are opposed to fast-tracking this deal and favor bringing its details into the light of day. They need to know you support them and oppose the TPP.

Sunday, November 17, 2013

WHERE WAS INFORMED DISCUSSION ON PLAN SEVEN50?

from Felicia Bruce
Letter to the Editor
St. Lucie News Tribune
Sunday, November 17, 2013

SHOOTING DOWN SEVEN50? Can reason, research be dismissed so easily?

Sharing the common goal of making the world better for our children is at the heart of progress. Yet at a St. Lucie County Commission special session one would have thought that it was only “us” vs. “them.”

The few who called for sharing a vision of a better county, for a collective approach to problem-solving, were ridiculed, mocked, interrupted and rudely received. Civil discourse was not the mood of the evening. And it was the 80th hour of such public commentary.

The controversy sparking this: a research document that required no vote.

The group standing up to be counted against compromise is a property rights association calling itself AC4PR.

Using buzz words to inspire fear, dozens of speakers claimed a global conspiracy inspired by socialists, communists and the United Nations. They offered conclusions derived from pseudo science and expressed their collective fear of a changing region.

Change may be inevitable, but it can be difficult, and cooperation can be a challenge for anyone but that makes partnering more compelling.

Expressing views in negative, judgmental terms, giving inaccurate evidence and making arguments emotionally makes for a suspect debate.

Add outrageous claims of global conspiracies; disparage all dissent, and it is only more difficult to find the common ground, do what is right for all who live here.

As presented, the Seven50 Plan was a stark contrast. It was competent, professional, statistical and all-inconclusive. Every constituency was represented. Every priority included: education, business, agriculture, recreation and leisure.

It would mean a regional perspective for protections for the quality of our air and water. It would be a comprehensive vision reflecting the uniqueness and preserving our quality of life.


If reason and research could prevail, the commissioners would have used this research document wisely. Instead, they voted to defeat reason and research.