Does the author or anyone else who feels aggrieved know what 'fast track' is or why it's important in a treaty deal? It means that the treaty can only be debated and voted on in its final form, and it's important because of the deal is modified, then every country has to go back to the drawing board. That doesn't mean congress or the people won't see the text. We have limited access, because treaties are almost always negotiated in secret. This is because all parties have to give something up to get something they want. Nobody wants to be seen giving things away, so everyone agrees to do it in secret. When the final treaty is drafted and went for a vote, it will be public. If it's distasteful or counterproductive, the senate can reject it. That's how treaties work.

This deal will probably bring many people out of poverty in the world, especially in Latin America and Southeast Asia. What is the humanitarian argument against it? No detractors will address that question. All I keep hearing is 'NAFTA!!!' and 'Internet piracy!!!' Neither of those are arguments, and anyway American IP is stolen at alarming rates overseas. It's funny that the left always tries to portray itself as the humanitarian side, but nobody ever wants to acknowledge that liberalism is what has caused the dramatic reduction in world poverty since the end of the Cold War.