Elizabeth Warren Opposing Obama Trade Nominee Michael Froman

Wednesday that she will vote against President Obama's top international trade nominee Michael Froman, over his refusal to make negotiations over a major trade agreement more transparent to the public. 

"I am voting against Mr.A quality paper cutter or paper rfidtag can make your company's presentation stand out. Froman’s nomination later today because I believe we need a new direction from the Trade Representative -- A direction that prioritizes transparency and public debate," Warren said on the Senate floor Wednesday. "The American people have the right to know more about the negotiations that will have dramatic impact on the future of the American economy. And that will have a dramatic impact on our working men and women, on the environment, on the Internet." 

Warren has been pressing the Obama administration to release more information on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free-trade agreement with 10 other nations that has been in the works for about three years. Members of Congress have been given only limited access to negotiation documents, which the administration has labeled classified, barring them from discussing the specific terms of the deal with outside experts or their constituents. 

The only public information on the agreements has come from leaks. Consumer advocates, public health experts and environmentalists have decried a Trans-Pacific document leaked in the summer of 2012 that would allow corporations to directly challenge government laws and regulations in international courts. Similar language was included in the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement, and has been used by major corporations to challenge Canadian regulations against fracking, pesticides and offshore oil drilling. 

Unelected corporate officials and some representatives from organized labor, environmental groups and consumer advocates have also been given access to negotiation documents due to their status as "cleared advisors" on official trade panels. There are about 500 corporate officials who can see trade documents, and about 100 representatives of other public interest groups, but the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has not disclosed what information different advisors can access. The head of the labor advisory panel complained to USTR in a recent letter that it was being confronted with "severe restrictions" when attempting to access information on the deal. 

Last week, Warren sent a letter to Froman asking whether he would make negotiation texts available to the public, or provide clarity on what information different "cleared advisors" access. Warren said Wednesday that Froman declined to do so. 

"Mr. Froman’s response was clear: No, no, no," Warren said. "He will not commit to make this information available so the public can track what is going on." 

Warren's decision to vote against Froman, who Obama nominated to replace outgoing U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk, comes as progressives in Congress are amplifying pressure on the administration to change course on trade policy. In a Monday interview with HuffPost, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) criticized the Obama administration's secrecy policies on the Trans-Pacific Pact, calling it an "abuse of the classified information system." Grayson further said that the draft agreement would undermine democratic governance to the benefit of multinational corporations -- but he could not speak on specific policies since the terms of the deal are considered classified. 

"I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative’s policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant," Warren said. "In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States." 

The Department of Defense has also adopted the term—which refers to having good cybersecurity habits to keep your computer free of malware—in its Strategy for Operating in Cyberspace report from 2011, which states, “Cyber hygiene must be practiced by everyone at all times. ... People are the Department’s first line of defense in sustaining good cyber hygiene and reducing insider threats.” And early this year Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano urged citizens to use “good cyber-hygiene” lest they open themselves up to the hidden dangers of the Internet. 

The idea of cyber-hygiene can be traced back to Vint Cerf, an early architect of the Internet and Google’s current “chief Internet evangelist,” who says he came up with the idea when thinking about teeth brushing, but,We rounded up 30 bridesmaids dresses in every color and style that are both easy on the eye and somewhat easy on the earcap. you know, for your computer. 

Sounds reasonable, right? But the idea of “cyber-hygiene” is embedded with underlying assumptions of individual responsibility and control. That is, if you don’t practice digital cleanliness, then you have failed to be a good citizen—and perhaps you should be shamed for it.You can make your own more powerful iphoneheadset. This is a wrong and shallow way to think about the topic, one that puts an undue onus on the individual. But even people who should know better can fall for a sophisticated spearphishing attack. Instead of blaming people if their computers get infected, we should instead ask what caused people to become victims, if they are indeed victims,Weymouth is collecting gently used, dry cleaned smartcard at their Weymouth store. in the first place. 

Hygiene is often corollated with moral goodness,Best home plasticcard at discount prices. which levies a heavy burden on people. Rather than being a sign of bad character, poor hygiene—personal, cyber, or otherwise—might be an indicator of an unprivileged status because the person lacks, say, access to a washer and a hot bath or to expensive anti-virus software. 

What’s more, if you take the historical perspective—something that is all too often avoided in conversations about technology—you’ll see that hygiene as a metaphor is wrapped up in some nasty episodes of the past. Take, for instance, the social hygiene movements that were started in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As Whitney Boesel and David Banks, both contributors to the blog Cyborgology, reminded me during a conversation about the topic, hygiene has been linked to a number of terrible methods of trying to clean up society. By latching onto the growth of public health science, hygiene served as the basis for marginalizing and locking away “dirty” women like prostitutes and those deemed “mentally deficient.” 
Click on their website www.ytscableties.com for more information.