Pacific Trade deal would allow US president to travel to Malaysia and other countries enforcing regulations for excess CO2 that only exists in China-NPR interview, June 3, 2015

"In a speech on the Senate floor on May 22, Democratic senator Ron Wyden of Oregon ridiculed those who thought climate change regulation would be part of Obamatrade."
 
6/3/15, "President Obama says China open to joining trade partnership," NPR, Marketplace.org interview by Kai Ryssdal

Response to second to last question:
...
"OBAMA: One of the basic premises for me in pursuing this, is that we can't just draw a moat and pull up the drawbridge around our economy. We are completely woven into the global economy....So, the question is, how do we construct a set of rules, but then, also, how do we make sure that we're adapting and using the incredible advantages we have to the best of our ability....How do we make sure that the laws, and the tax rules, and how companies compensate their workers versus their CEOs, how are those rules fair? And, if we do that well, then we can address those issues....We're not going to address those issues by pretending that the global supply chain doesn't exist. The same is true when it comes to environmental issues. If we want to solve something like [human-caused] climate change, which is one of my highest priorities, then I've got to be able to get into places like Malaysia, and say to them, this is in your interest. What leverage do I have to get them to stop deforestation? Well, part of the leverage is, if I'm in a trade relationship with them, it allows me raise standards. Now, they have to start thinking about how quick they're chopping down their forests and what kinds of standards they need to apply to environmental conservation. So, we have to engage, not withdraw. And, I think the big mistake that some of my progressive friends make when it comes to trade, is not the values they're pursuing, or the very legitimate concerns they have about some past trade deals."...via Drudge

=====================
..
Two among comments
.

===================
.....
"Jon Ralston June 4, 2015 

Let's try this again since my first post didn't appear on this forum for some reason. This interview was a beautiful piece of propaganda. It was a mile wide and an inch deep. Aside from a throw away statement at the end of the broadcast few if any of the legitimate criticisms of TPP were even addressed. There is ISDS, where countries give up their sovereignty and allow themselves to be sued by multinational corporations for "expected" loss of revenue due to a country's labor, environmental, regulatory standards. These disputes are litigated in front of a tribunal of corporate attorneys that are paid by the corporations. There is no appeal process and essentially the tax payers are on the hook for compensating corporations that want to challenge a country's laws. In regards to the improved labor, environmental standards, etc. in the TPP how can we know when the treaty is secret? President Obama and the rest of the countries can put all of the criticism to rest by simply releasing the text of the document for the public and for public officials to analyze. The parties involved refuse to do that instead saying "trust us." Well given the outsourcing, flat/declining wages, and decreased standard of living experienced by a great deal of Americans over the past decades due in part to "free trade," guess what, I don't trust you. I hope Marketplace has Lori Wallach of Public Citizen on the program to provide context for the criticisms that many of us have about the TPP. Hopefully, this post makes it past the Marketplace censors." 

=================================
.....
"Peter Lambert June 4, 2015 

...
Kai, I may know even less about radio interviewing than I know about trade deals, but I think you should have asked the question about the deal's secrecy as one of the first questions, and pushed for specifics regarding the assumed 'losers'. Those questions, methinks, would have been much more difficult for [our apparently misguided President] to side-step as eloquently..."

. 
======================
.
6/4/15, "Obama admits that climate change will be in Obamatrade," American Thinker, Howard Richman .

"In a speech on the Senate floor on May 22, Democratic senator Ron Wyden of Oregon ridiculed those who thought climate change regulation would be part of Obamatrade:

We’ve heard suggested, for example, that it’s a backdoor route to immigration reform or action on climate change….My sense is that the rate these hypotheticals are going, you’re bound to hear that a future president working on a trade deal might have second thoughts about the Louisiana purchase.

But in an interview on NPR’s Marketplace yesterday (June 3), President Obama said that enforcing climate change regulations will indeed be part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Obamatrade pact that he is currently negotiating with Malaysia and 10 other countries. He said:

• If we want to solve something like [human caused] climate change, which is one of my highest priorities, then I’ve got to be able to get into places like Malaysia, and say to them, this is in your interest. What leverage do I have to get them to stop deforestation? Well part of the leverage is if I’m in a trade relationship with them that allows me to raise standards.

In December, Obama will negotiate a multi-country climate agreement in Paris. We already know from Obama’s joint announcement with China that he will commit the United States to a huge reduction in carbon emissions of 26%-28% from 2005 levels, but he will let China, already a much larger carbon emitter, continue to expand its carbon emissions until 2030.
Obama would not need to get Congress to approve the unfair climate change treaty terms that he negotiates. Instead, he could get the Commission set up by the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to add those terms to the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
..... 
After that, the Investor-State Dispute Settlement Provisions, set up by that agreement, could enforce Obama’s terms through the threat of multi-billion-dollar fines upon the U.S. government."


 

.