>I'm simply pointing out that the most common criticism of the TPP --- that it's a "secret" deal --- is both inaccurate and not particularly significant. This

>I'm simply pointing out that the most common criticism of the TPP --- that it's a "secret" deal --- is both inaccurate and not particularly significant. This is an important point. And furthermore, I'd even argue that it was necessary. The lack of transparency in the negotiations was to allow country's negotiators to be able to put their cards on their table without being immediately skewered out of context. For example, if Japan's negotiator proposed eliminating tarries on rice imports into her country as a carrot, the uproar back home would be enormous. But if it resulted in say, a removal on tariffs for exported Japanese cars, then the country could see it as a net win when the final agreement was put forth. The secrecy was only there to let them barter freely before arriving at a conclusion. Otherwise, the negotiations would have gotten nowhere, and free trade would be nowhere.