If we look at the proposed legislation, it says it will ensure that trade and environmental protection are mutually supportive, and it in fact even serves to limit consideration of the environment to foreign government policies and practices regarding the environment that are directly related to trade. It limits the ability of the United States to deal with environmental issues by requiring that negotiations take place through the World Trade Organization. My point is that if we look at the language of what is being proposed, not only does it not adequately protect the environment and guarantee that the environment is addressed directly in these subsequent agreements that are negotiated, but it may even limit the ability to do that. So it does not in any way satisfy our concerns.
Frank Pallone: “If we look at the proposed legislation, it says it will ensure that trade and environmental protection are mutually…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of proposed legislation on trade and environmental protection.
Share
More from Frank Pallone
This $9.6 million investment helps to put another vessel on the water and takes cars off our overcrowded roads. That is exactly what federal infrastructure dollars should be doing.
Naming the nation’s traumatic brain injury program in Bill Pascrell’s honor is a meaningful tribute to my dear friend, who believed people living with traumatic brain injuries deserved a voice in the Congress.
With strong coastlines, our residents, businesses, and communities are better equipped to face extreme weather events.
Donald Trump is stiffing New Jersey taxpayers out of $84 million in disaster aid that his own government determined we qualified for.





