Mrs. Clinton, Why Hurt American Workers?

Which reawakens my mischievous side: Secretary Clinton, why do you want to lose jobs and lower wages?

Same question on trade. Clinton says that her concerns about the TPP involve its failure to crack down on currency manipulation and the agreement's alleged capitulation to pharmaceutical interests.

This is bunk. If anything, the deal is stronger on both pharmaceuticals and currency than it was when Clinton, as secretary of state, proclaimed it the "gold standard" of trade deals and predicted it would "help create new jobs and opportunities here at home."

Then, administration negotiators were pressing for 12 years of intellectual property protection for so-called biologic drugs, the standard in the United States, and, indeed, the standard in a 2008 Senate bill cosponsored by Senator Clinton.

The final deal grants monopoly rights for between five and eight years -- less generous to pharmaceutical companies.

As to currency manipulation, including enforceable sanctions for currency in TPP is a poison pill that as Clinton well knows -- and knew when she was talking about how the deal would create American jobs -- was never going to be part of the final agreement. The new agreement, though, includes a side deal lacking in teeth but that at least requires member countries to report on and discuss currency practices.

"I wish more had been done," said C. Fred Bergsten of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a leading hawk on currency manipulation. "But it is churlish, or worse, to imply that the issue has been left unattended."

Still, let's assume both criticisms are valid. Are they serious enough to justify opposition? As Furman noted in a different Brookings address, the most comprehensive economic analysis of the TPP found that it would increase U.S. incomes by 0.4 percent yearly by 2025, or $77 billion.

Clinton wrote in her memoir, "Hard Choices," that "it's safe to say the TPP won't be perfect -- no deal negotiated among a dozen countries ever will be -- but its higher standards, if implemented and enforced, should benefit American businesses and workers."

What has changed since then? You don't have to be a mischievous columnist to suggest an answer.

========

Ruth Marcus' email address is ruthmarcus@washpost.com.