Search Result(s)

GATS Annex on Financial Services

This document potentially endangers the US's Social Security, Medicare and other safety net programs if they are partially privatized and compete with commercial entities. It is part of the GATS and its explained well by Patricia Arnold in her essay on GATS and Financial Regulation (Public Citizen). It contains a slightly different definition of 'services supplied as an exercise of governmental authority' than GATS Article 1:3 does, which applies in certain situations. To understand it you should also read Nicholas Skala's 2009 paper in the International Journal of Health Services and the Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services. You can also find a bit more material online if you search on the phrase "Fu Lung" or "Fu Lung Group" in the context of financial services+WTO or the Uruguay Round. It seems an effort is made to make information on FTAS difficult to find for outsiders.

GATT-PUNTA DEL ESTE DECLARATION

This is the declaration -made on September 20, 1986 - in Punta Del Este, part of the Uruguay Round, where services were officially inserted into the GATT talks that were to become the WTO. So its when the US began to lose its regulatory autonomy. Despite its brevity, in retrospect, this became in every sense a deal between the world's oligarchs to put aside democracy and lock down the future. Note that this meeting and document were also referenced in UN document A/RES/44/232 "Trends in the transfer of resources to and from the developing countries and their impact on the economic growth and sustained development of those countries"

A/RES/44/232. Trends in the transfer of resources to and from the developing countries and their impact on the economic growth and sustained development of those countries

Note Paragraph F, which refers to the meeting in Punta Del Este, Uruguay that established the process that led to the creation of the WTO and begun a "standstill" during which time Member nations were to stop making regulations of any kind which impeded this goal (thats how they frame the expansion or especially creation of what we call public services.) So after that point, we were legally bound not to create a public healthcare system, a problem that continues to this day. So, all around the world, often politicians promising changes that are blocked by these treaties. Instead, a great many countries including (especially) the US and the other countries that made commitments in those areas are bound.

A Cautionary Tale for David Brooks and Others What, really, was Jim Cooper’s ‘Clinton Lite?’

It should be noted that the GATS negotiations - part of the Uruguay Round, which "made services tradable", and took them off the table as something domestic regulations are supposed to be able to change, were wrapping up at the same time this was all going on. Making it qualify as something other than a "debate" over future policy. Instead, its more of a simulacrum. This is still the case today, one should understand. Still, its all worth reading. Note: There is a companion article to this one, which can be found at (Use archive.org) https://web.archive.org/web/20080607133503/http://backissues.cjrarchives.org/year/94/2/clinton.asp

The Selling of "Clinton Lite"

It should be noted that the (WTO) GATS negotiations - part of the Uruguay Round, which "made services tradable", and *took them off the table as something domestic regulations are supposed to be able to change*, (in order to give international investors 'certainty'), had been going on for several years and were wrapped up by 1994. That's a VERY important, easy to verify, fact that most Americans (and Britons it seems as well) have trouble digesting. Also note: There is a companion article to this one, "A Cautionary Tale for David Brooks and Others: What, really, was Jim Cooper’s ‘Clinton Lite?’" URL:https://archives.cjr.org/campaign_desk/a_cautionary_tale_for_david_br.php - Also interesting is an article What's The Matter With NAFTA by Elaine Bernard Harvard School of Law. , especially the portion (also entitled "A Cautionary Tale") starting at the bottom of page 8 Also use Archive.org URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20150611163515/http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/nafta.pdf

The Genesis of the GATS (GATS' beginnings, through one set of eyes)

"The Uruguay Round services negotiations saw the light of day amidst pressures from lobbies in developed countries, unilateral retaliatory actions, and ideological struggle in the developing world. The final outcome, the GATS, certainly characterized by a complex structure and awkward drafting here and there, is not optimal but is an important first step towards the liberalization of trade in services. This article traces the GATS negotiating history, from its very beginning in the late 1970s, paying particular attention to the main forces that brought the services dossier to the multilateral trading system (governments, industries, and academics), and the interaction between developed and developing countries before and during the Uruguay Round. We will follow the actions, positions, and negotiating stances of four trading partners – Brazil, the European Union, India, and the United States – that were key in the development of the GATS. Finally, we will, indicatively at least, try to attribute a ‘paternity’ (or, rather, a ‘maternity’) to some key features and provisions of the agreement."