First of all, I appreciate your bringing their analysis of it, because I went to the website and read through their technical summary of the environmental chapter. I honestly thought they were referring to a different agreement, because if you actually read the text of chapter 20, you see that it's completely unenforceable and meaningless. It just doesn't make sense. Yet what's written here—I have it right here in front of me—is that it “[p]rovides ambitious environmental obligations” and so on. That's just not the case.
As an ecological economist, let me say that there's good trade and there's bad trade. You definitely need trade happening in the world. I'm not suggesting that you wouldn't want it. You want trade in solar panels going to places that are now burning coal, so that's great, but the TPP has very little about changing the amount of trade by changing tariffs and that kind of thing. It's about throwing in a whole bunch of other things that are deeply problematic, including the fact that you reduce the ability of different states to take action on climate change. That would be my assessment.