That's disappointing, given Obama's repeated public support for transparency. Calling it a national security issue is absolute rubbish. What scares me is that

That's disappointing, given Obama's repeated public support for transparency. Calling it a national security issue is absolute rubbish. What scares me is that this will impact people's lives in a significant fashion, and yet the public doesn't really understand the ramifications. I don't think that most people in the United States know that treaties are considered the law of the land under the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, negotiation of treaties is a "presidential monopoly". Just like an ordinary contract, the details are hammered out in negotiations between the signatories long before a presidential pen signs the treaty. (http://post.ly/T22n http://post.ly/T22n) This is the phase where the "meat" of the treaty is decided. After it's been signed, congress is only involved through ratification. "[The executive branch] alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation, the Senate cannot intrude; and Congress itself is powerless to invade it". What that means is that treaties can be enacted, and U.S. citizens can be constrained based upon negotiations that take place between the President and the heads of state for other nations. Normally, when laws are passed in Congress, the public has the ability to comment, lobby, and become involved in the process. It doesn't always work, but on big-ticket items, people have a chance to at least voice their concerns to their representatives before a bill is passed. An example is the pending health-care bill. Whether you're for it or against it, the issue has been debated in public and voters can hold their representatives accountable if a bill is passed that doesn't reflect the majority of voters is any given congressional district. There's no such accountability in the ACTA negotiation process. Of course, with copyright and MPAA heavy-hitters deeply ensconced in the DOJ, I'm not surprised. (http://www.p2pnet.net/story/20865 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/20865)