US exporters want Congress to determine if SOLAS can be revoked or revised

WASHINGTON — Agriculture shippers are asking Congress to determine whether the U.S government can revise or downright revoke a new international container weight rule, ahead of a congressional hearing on the controversial regulation next week.

“We ask Congress to determine if the Coast Guard, as the U.S. representative to the IMO, (can) revisit the IMO SOLAS amendment and gain revisions, if not revocation,” the Agriculture Transportation Coalition said in a statement Thursday.

The group has been a fierce opponent to the International Maritime Organization’s amendment to the Safety of Life at Sea, or SOLAS, Convention that will require all shipping containers be accompanied by documentation detailing their verified gross mass prior to vessel loading effective July 1.

AgTC has said that not only has the new rule left many shippers mired in confusion with less than 100 days before it goes into effect, but the regulation could also handicap U.S. producers that compete against other countries where enforcement may be lax.

The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will hold a hearing next week looking into the impact of the SOLAS rule on U.S. exporters. Congress rarely weighs in on container shipping unless there is concern about export trade — as lawmakers did during the 2014-15 West Coast port congestion crisis.

And, according to AgTC, the SOLAS amendment is “not simply a technical maritime matter, but rather, will have a significant impact on U.S. export competitiveness and the U.S. economy, at a time that the Federal Reserve Board and others are concerned about the health of U.S. exports and the drag on the U.S. economy.”

Due to the strong U.S. dollar and slowing global demand, U.S. containerized exports will only grow 4 percent this year after falling roughly 2.5 percent last year, according to Mario Moreno, senior economist for IHS Maritime & Trade.

AgTC is also questioning the supremacy of IMO regulations over U.S. law.

“We ask Congress to determine how a change in ocean shipping practices of such magnitude as this SOLAS rule, can be imposed on the U.S., without any prior Congressional notice, review or approval,” the group said.

AgTC has been pushing for what the groups calls a “rational” means of implementation ahead of the July 1 SOLAS amendment rollout.

By that, the group means a system in which U.S. exporters certify the weight of their cargo and packing materials, while container lines would certify the weight of the containers that they own, control and manage. The liners would then combine the two weights to create a VGM that  is submitted to the terminal operator before loading. The carriers say they need the VGM days in advance to make stowage plans with the marine terminals.

AgTC has argued that other groups, specifically the World Shipping Council and the Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association, have been pushing an alternative agenda.

“Their approach: demanding that an individual employee in the U.S. exporting company, such as a farmer or food processor, be personally liable to certify the weight of the ocean carrier’s own container and send that certification to that same ocean carrier,” AgTC said.

The shippers group likened that methodology to something out of Lewis Carroll’s book “Alice in Wonderland.”

According to AgTC, the aforementioned “scheme” will impose unnecessary costs and delay shipments. It will also give rise to congestion at U.S. ports, missed sailings, spoiled cargo and angry foreign customers, the group said.

AgTC additionally cited investment bank Cowen & Company that has projected the “overly strict method of compliance” will increase the cost of shipping by container anywhere from $50 to $125 per box and create “massive disruption” at U.S. ports.

What the group means by “personally liable,” however, is unclear. The U.S. Coast Guard has said that it will not be penalizing shippers for noncompliance with the new SOLAS amendment. The federal agency has gone on record to say that compliance with the new rule should be handled as a “business practice” instead of through regulatory enforcement.

Peter Friedmann, AgTC’s executive director, clarified that his group takes issue with OCEMA’s published “best practices.” Those practices state carriers will require the name and a signature of shippers to accompany VGM documentation, Friedmann said.

“To the exporters, that looks like an avenue for the carrier to hold an individual liable, should there be damage, injury, etc.,” he told JOC.com Thursday.

At issue, Friedmann said, is that a shipper’s signature makes him liable for both the weight of his cargo, but also the weight of the carrier’s container.

“Now, I understand the shippers don’t mind signing for and being liable for the weight of their cargo, but they are highly averse to signing for and being liable for the weight of the carrier’s own container,” he said.

WSC responded Thursday that it was surprised that Friedmann’s group, which began asking last fall for more clarification on VGM transmittal methods, now seems upset because carriers have responded to their request. The WSC represents carriers controlling roughly 90 percent of global container capacity and was a major player in the creation of the SOLAS rule.

Both AgTC and WSC will be in attendance at the upcoming congressional hearing.

Although the amendment to the Safety of Life at Sea Convention approved in 2014 has been raised at several congressional hearings, the April 14 hearing is the first time the issue will come front and center on Capitol Hill.

“We look forward to discussing the facts about the important safety issue of having accurate weights for packed containers being loaded on the ships that carry the import and export commerce of the United States,” WSC said.

Those scheduled to testify at the hearing include Donna Lemm, vice president of sales and marketing at logistics provider Mallory Alexander and chairwoman of AgTC’s Container Weight Committee; WSC CEO and President John Butler; John Crowley, executive director of the National Association of Waterfront Employers; and U.S. Coast Guard Rear Adm. Paul Thomas, according to their respective organizations and agency.

Reynolds Hutchins, Associate Editor

Advertisement

Ocean AllOcean Alliance leaves eight orphaned lines looking for a home

Betting on the troubled container shipping industry probably makes more sense than investing in it, and a bookmaker would be salivating at the permutations available to the eight shipping lines “orphaned” by the newly formed Ocean Alliance.

CMA CGM, China Cosco Shipping, Evergreen Line and OOCL plan to have their alliance operational in April next year, subject to the relevant regulatory approvals. But in coming together, Drewry said in its Container Insight Weekly that they have created myriad possibilities in terms of what the partner lines left behind by the four Ocean Alliance carriers will do in response.

Only the 2M Alliance of Maersk Line and Mediterranean Shipping Co. remains untouched. The Ocean Three will lose CMA CGM and China Shipping Container Lines, G6 will lose APL and OOCL, and the CKYHE will lose Cosco and Evergreen.

Looking for a seat when the alliance music stops are Hapag-Lloyd and United Arab Shipping Company (reportedly discussing a merger), Korean lines Hanjin Shipping and Hyundai Merchant Marine, Yang Ming Line and the three Japanese carriers, NYK Line, Mitsui O.S.K Lines and “K” Line.

Drewry looked at what the start of the new alliance would mean for the key Asia export trades to North Europe and North America based on the division of market share on those routes. The maritime analyst said as of March 2016, the 2M carriers dominated the Asia-North Europe market with a nominal capacity share of about 36 percent, followed by the CKYHE Alliance at 25 percent and Ocean Three and G6 at 19 percent.

The four alliances were more closely matched in the Asia-North America trade that, unlike Asia-Europe, retained a small non-alliance capacity, with CKYHE coming out on top with a 30 percent share, followed closely by the G6 (26 percent) and 2M (23 percent), while the Ocean Three had 15 percent.

Based on current capacity shares, the Ocean Alliance will take over as the largest vessel-sharing agreement on the trans-Pacific with a share of just under 36 percent, while in Asia-North Europe it will be within 5 percentage points of the 2M with a nominal capacity share of 31 percent.

Drewry pondered whether the alliance orphans would join together to take on the 2M and Ocean alliances, or form smaller cliques to maintain the four-alliance structure.

“A combined Hapag-Lloyd-UASC would give it a 7.6 percent share of the Asia-North Europe market and 6.5 percent of the trans-Pacific, based on current nominal capacity,” Drewry said. “To compete with 2M and Ocean in those routes they would need to bring in other carriers. Outside of those trades, UASC will be very keen to find a replacement partner to CMA CGM to help it fill its 13,000 TEU units on the Asia-Middle East route.”

At the beginning of 2016, there were four global alliances comprising 16 different carriers. By mid-2017, Drewry expects there to be only three main global alliances comprising at the most 13 carriers (following one or more mergers, one or more takeovers and a possible carrier failure, the analyst said).

“In other words, the structural industry change is about fewer, larger alliances comprising fewer, generally larger carriers than ever before.”

Were all eight of the orphan lines to join together into a third alliance, they would be a match for 2M and Ocean in Asia-North Europe and the trans-Pacific. “However, we think it unlikely that all eight will agree to a new integrated alliance, because they have very varied interests and HMM in particular has serious financial problems,” Drewry said.

The analyst also pointed out that there has always been a reluctance for the three Japanese lines to work together and if they did somehow find themselves in the same club it would add further pressure on them to merge their respective liner divisions. It is more likely that some could form a looser, smaller alliance while others will switch to service-by-service VSAs with the two main alliances, Drewry said.

So what do carriers hope to get out of this alliance merry-go round, Drewry asked. “It has created a clear divide between those carriers that are safely ensconced in a club and those that are not and are waiting nervously for an invitation,” the analyst said.

“The lines with their futures sorted may temporarily benefit from any customer apprehension over those in limbo, but if this does occur it will only be a brief side-benefit. Ultimately, carriers’ end game will be to optimize their fleets and minimize costs. Alliances have thus far have failed to solve the most elusive conundrum of stabilizing freight rates, and we do not expect this to change.”

Greg Knowler, Senior Asia Editor

Forwarders report zero freight on wretched Asia-Europe trade

Forwarders are reporting a growing number of enquiries for zero freight rates on container shipments from Asia to North Europe, even as spot rates on the trade and on Asia-Mediterranean this week matched the lowest levels ever recorded.

Asia-Europe rates hit $205 per TEU, a level it fell to on June 19, and spot rates to the Med dropped to $195 per 20-foot container, the level it hit on Oct. 16 last year, according to the the Shanghai Containerized Freight Index.

Even though March is the slack season, the year-over-year comparisons are ugly. Asia-North Europe is almost 70 percent down on the same week last year, and Asia-Med is down 76 percent. The comparisons can be found on JOC.com‘s Market Data Hub, along with rates and volumes from all major east-west trades.

JOC.com contacted several forwarders, carriers and shippers about the zero freight reports and no one was prepared to go on the record because of the sensitivities around talking freight prices. However, there was widespread concern about falling rates.

A forwarder with offices in Hong Kong and China said two customers shipping about 100 containers a year to Europe out of three cities in the mainland said they had received a quote for zero freight and wanted him to match it.

“It is absolutely ridiculous. I still don’t know if a carrier actually offered this rate, but if zero freight gets into the market, that would be a disaster,” he said.

The head of ocean freight for a top 10 global logistics provider confirmed the trend of customers asking about zero rates and he warned the market was currently so unstable it was heading for a meltdown.

“Something dramatic is going to happen. The question is not if, but when, and it will hit everyone like a ton of bricks with service disruptions as carriers merge or go out of business,” the Shanghai-based logistics executive said.

The Asia-Pacific head of a European forwarder said he was seeing requests for spot and long term rates of between $50 and $100 per container. “We are not taking up this business, but today average rates offered by shipping lines are around $75-100 per TEU and 150 per 40-foot container,” he said.

“We have no intention to go below cost and we still sell with a profit in most cases, but indeed the margins are very much under pressure.” The forwarder said it was clear from meetings with carriers that they are ready to do whatever it takes to raise rates. “They cannot survive at today’s levels.”

With carrier profitability at such precarious levels, he said bankruptcies were becoming a very real possibility. “Imagine what happens to a sailing schedule if one of your alliance partners suddenly becomes insolvent. Looking the situation today, there is a real possibility of this happening. It is not a desirable situation for anyone,” he said.

For forwarders to quote zero freight rates, it would have to either be offered by container shipping lines, or the rate would be low enough to enable forwarders to offer zero freight and recover the difference through excessive haulage and delivery charges. However, it is worth bearing in mind that in China, the Ministry of Transport forbids the offering of freight rates of below $50 per TEU, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange monitoring tarrifs and deals on behalf of the MOT.

The three major container carriers contacted by JOC.com said they had no hard evidence of lines offering rates at such give-away levels. An executive from an Asian shipping line said there were rumors in the market that zero freight was being quoted, but he said such a trend, if real, would not be sustainable and would result in problems for the shipping industry.

“Carriers would be better off laying up ships and shippers would not be in a position to maintain a smooth operation in their supply chain,” he said.

Another carrier executive agreed that rate levels have now reached the point where laying up vessels has become financially attractive. “It is getting quite ugly, but as long as we have carriers going for market share and others are subsidized by their governments, things will not necessarily improve,” he said.

The continued operation of loss-making carriers was also questioned by a major Asia-North Europe shipper, who pointed to new rumors of debt-wracked Hyundai Merchant Marine being merged with loss-making Hanjin Shipping.

“I just don’t understand the reasoning behind that. Why merge a loss with a loss in the hope that it becomes a positive?” he said, expressing frustration with the extreme volatility that has consumed the market in the past two years.

“We contract 70 percent of our cargo for the year and every week the rate drops. That means me, and everyone else in the business, has to continually explain our position and defend the contracts. These days we don’t even know where the vessel will be next week — it could be idled, or cancelled, or even scrapped.”

Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@ihs.com and follow him on Twitter: @greg_knowler.

China Cosco Shipping aims to become third-largest container line

The newly formed China Cosco Shipping Corp. aims to become the third-largest global container line by boosting its fleet by at least 50,000 twenty-foot-equivalent units to more than 2 million TEUs by the end of 2018.

The company wants to grab market share from its European rivals by upsizing its fleet and expanding outside its core Asia, Africa, China and Southeast Asia coverage specialties into the oversupplied Asia-Europe and trans-Pacific trades, executives told state-media outlet China Daily.

If the company realizes its goal, and depending on just how far above 2 million TEUs the fleet goes, it would displace CMA CGM as the world’s third-largest shipping major and possibly even the second-place spot currently held by Mediterranean Shipping Co.

Maersk Line sits atop the global fleet with 14.7 percent of the total and a little more than 3 million TEUs. MSC is in second with 13.1 percent of the fleet or, 2.7 million TEUs, and CMA CGM is in third with 8.8 percent, or 1.8 million TEUs, according to Alphaliner.

Currently, the combined fleets of China Shipping Container Lines and Cosco amount to 1.58 million TEUs, according to China Daily, which places it in fourth place among the world’s leading container carriers.

Cosco in November ordered 11 mega-ships at a cost of $1.5 billion while Maersk and CMA CGM, which three shipbuilders told JOC.com sister publication IHS Fairplay is in talks for more mega-ships, have also placed mega-ship orders in 2015. Meanwhile, work on 20 mega-ships totaling more than 700,000 TEUs for MSC is ongoing. The competition between carriers to amass fleets of larger and larger ships is so intense it has been likened to an “arms race.”

The global fleet presently amounts to 19.85 million TEUs, with 1.3 million TEUs set to enter service this year, 1.4 million TEUs in 2017, and 931,000 TEUs in 2018, according to the IHS Orderbook.

The company hopes its ambitions will be aided by new free trade agreements in the works including the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, Wan Min, general manager of China COSCO Shipping, told China Daily. Together, the deals will lower tariffs and trade barriers for thousands of goods among some of the world’s top economies.

Contact Dustin Braden at dustin.braden@ihs.com

Port of New York and New Jersey set cargo record in 2015

The Port of New York and New Jersey set a new cargo volume record in 2015, surpassing the previous high-water mark recorded in 2014, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) announced on Monday.

Photo: Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

During 2015, the port handled 6,371,720 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) or 3,664,013 cargo containers, an increase of 10.4 percent compared with 2014. The record volumes allowed the port to maintain its position as the East Coast’s busiest port, with nearly 30 percent of the total market share, PANYNJ officials said in a press release.

ExpressRail — PANYNJ’s ship-to-rail system serving New York and New Jersey marine terminals — also set a new record, handling 522,244 containers, an increase of 12.2 percent compared with 2014’s total, the previous best year for rail activity. In 2015, the port also handled 477,170 vehicles, a 21.5 percent increase compared with 2014.

China remained the top import country serving the port, with 1,013,669 import TEUs; India was second (196,956 import TEUs) and Germany third (189,622). The top import commodities were furniture, apparel and clothing, and machinery parts.

“The significant infrastructure investments we have made in our port continue to drive job growth and economic activity in the region, and have set the table for continued long-term growth,” said PANYNJ Executive Director Pat Foye. “Moving forward, we will continue to work in partnership with all port stakeholders so we can efficiently and effectively handle greater volumes of cargo in the years to come.”

Advanced EDI Documents You Should Be Using

The first one is a bit silly. 95% of all EDI users are spokes and they use what their hubs tell them to use. So the only companies that this can possibly apply to are Hubs. But perhaps there is a little bit more. The one that specifically comes to mind is the 820 Remittance Advice. It can be used to both inform your trading partner that they are getting paid and it can instruct the bank to make the payment (SWIFT or ACH).

 

It really completes the supply chain process and removes any need to cut checks. Of course, the bank routing and account numbers will need to be shared. It is actually something that spokes could implement independently of their Hubs for their own benefit. They should contact their bank and see what is possible. But now we have another one that will grow to several transactions.

Advanced Commercial Information (ACI), also known as eManifest, Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) for Highway Cargo and Conveyance. Not just like the old days when you just downloaded a form like the 850 Purchase Order and gave it too your support staff to figure it out, This is like a whole set of systems specifications. It comes from the Electronic Commerce Unit (ECU) of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) which will endeavour to provide as much advance notice as possible of major system changes and will notify clients of upcoming changes via e-mail. ANSI map is based on Version 5050.

There are four options for Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) clients to transmit electronic commerce data to CBSA’s host system. To participate in EDI, one of these methods must be implemented:

Read more: http://www.ec-bp.com/index.php/articles/industry-updates/11177-advanced-edi-documents-you-should-be-using#ixzz3iOB6CtMD

Why VANs are Important To The Transportation/3PL Industry

Customers turn to logistics services providers (LSPs)/third party logistics (3PLs) companies because they expect them to be able to run their warehousing and transportation operations more efficiently and cheaply than they can run it themselves. These companies need to incorporate new service offerings and respond to new market requirements quickly and easily, while keeping IT costs low.
Third party logistics provider’s offer outsourced services to support supply chain management and the delivery of shipper’s products to customers in an on-demand fashion with real-time information. Standardized electronic data information exchange (EDI) will increase the efficiency for business partners. Moreover, it significantly reduces manual intervention, paper work and improves cycle time and better supports a high volume transaction environment. It provides direct electronic communication between shipper and 3PL computer systems using national and international telecommunication networks and requires agreements between trading partners. The communication is typically done through a VAN (Value Added Network) using international EDI standards such as the American National Standard Institution (ANSI) or EDI for Administration, Commerce and Transport (EDIFACT).

Customer uses the following EDI transaction sets in the typical load tendering process:
– 204 (Motor Carrier Load Tender) – Customer will transmit to the carrier a 204 transaction set. The 204 will include all information as to the pick-up and delivery of the load.
– 990 (Response to Load Tender) – The carrier will transmit to customer a 990. It is used to accept or decline the load tender.

– 214 (Shipment Status Report) – The 214 is sent by the carrier to customer to inform customer of pickup appointment information, delivery appointment information, actual pickup information and actual delivery information. See a typical load control center procedure.

 

Communications can be via traditional VAN or AS2, or more freeform FTP. Outside of the common 3PL EDI 940 Warehouse Shipping Order, EDI 945 Warehouse Shipping Advice and EDI 856 Advance Ship Notice, there are documents such as the EDI 214 Transportation Carrier Shipment Status, EDI 300 series ocean container, EDI 100 series air or EDI 400 series rail related documents as well.

All of the data is passed using one of several methods of data transport, some of the most common are:
– Value Added Network (VAN): A go-between for trading partners to pass files.
– File Transfer Protocol (FTP): This is used to pass files from one computer to another using a login, but still passes that data as clear text and is not encrypted. File Transfer Protocol Secure (FTP/S) provides an extra level of security.
– EDI-INT: This is a set of standards for transferring EDI files through the internet more securely. Those standards are defined through Applicability Statements using AS1, AS2 or AS3. AS2 is the most common and defines the standards for sending files using HTTP (web browser).

The name of the game is data, lots of data.
VANs are the “lowest common denominator” They are available to all. No special equipment needed. Remember, most 3PLs are not big companies like FedEx and UPS. So the VAN became “standardized” in the 3PL industry.

Read more: http://www.ec-bp.com/index.php/articles/industry-updates/11176-why-vans-are-important-to-the-transportation-3pl-industry#ixzz3i1M57Jkd

EDI and Global Commerce Make A Perfect Pair

It might seem odd that EDI, data exchange technology that’s been in existence for more than two decades, is the saving grace for global commerce. But, according to James H. Davis, director of sales for Amosoft, an EDI services and solutions entity, a vast majority of all commerce utilizes EDI. “EDI is older technology that continues to be significant in today’s global supply chain,” says Davis.
EDI is integral to the execution of global commerce because it matches newer technologies with international markets governed by their own EDI requirements, says Davis. While EDI itself is not a new offering, it continues to be integral to the way players in the global commerce marketplace communicate with one another, including suppliers, warehouses and manufacturers.
Since EDI plays such a major role in the global supply chain, companies seeking to join the chain “need to understand the elements of supply chain including data requirements,” says Davis. For example, if a company is going to sell their wares over the Internet, matters to be considered include:
• Deciphering various web service options available, such as Shopify, BigCommerce or Magenta
• Understanding the various players in a supply chain, like drop shippers vs. 3pl warehouses

• Deciding whether to outsource a company’s EDI needs to experts

Read more: http://www.ec-bp.com/index.php/articles/industry-updates/11175-edi-and-global-commerce-make-a-perfect-pair#ixzz3huwtIv23

Ten Ways Big Data Is Revolutionizing Supply Chain Management

Bottom line: Big data is providing supplier networks with greater data accuracy, clarity, and insights, leading to more contextual intelligence shared across supply chains.

Forward-thinking manufacturers are orchestrating 80% or more of their supplier network activity outside their four walls, using big data and cloud-based technologies to get beyond the constraints of legacy Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Supply Chain Management (SCM) systems. For manufacturers whose business models are based on rapid product lifecycles and speed, legacy ERP systems are a bottleneck.  Designed for delivering order, shipment and transactional data, these systems aren’t capable of scaling to meet the challenges supply chains face today.

Choosing to compete on accuracy, speed and quality forces supplier networks to get to a level of contextual intelligence not possible with legacy ERP and SCM systems. While many companies today haven’t yet adopted big data into their supply chain operations, these ten factors taken together will be the catalyst that get many moving on their journey.

The ten ways big data is revolutionizing supply chain management include:

• The scale, scope and depth of data supply chains are generating today is accelerating, providing ample data sets to drive contextual intelligence. Source: Big Data Analytics in Supply Chain Management: Trends and Related Research. Presented at 6th International Conference on Operations and Supply Chain Management, Bali, 2014
• Enabling more complex supplier networks that focus on knowledge sharing and collaboration as the value-add over just completing transactions.  Big data is revolutionizing how supplier networks form, grow, proliferate into new markets and mature over time.
• Big data and advanced analytics are being integrated into optimization tools, demand forecasting, integrated business planning and supplier collaboration & risk analytics at a quickening pace. These are the top four supply chain capabilities that Delotte found are currently in use form their recent study, Supply Chain Talent of the Future Findings from the 3^rd Annual Supply Chain Survey (free, no opt-in). Control tower analytics and visualization are also on the roadmaps of supply chain teams currently running big data pilots.
• 64% of supply chain executives consider big data analytics a disruptive and important technology, setting the foundation for long-term change management in their organizations.
• Using geoanalytics based on big data to merge and optimize delivery networks.
• Big data is having an impact on organizations’ reaction time to supply chain issues (41%), increased supply chain efficiency of 10% or greater (36%), and greater integration across the supply chain (36%). The Big Data Analytics in Supply Chain: Hype or Here to Stay? Accenture Global Operations Megatrends Study found that companies are achieving significant results using big data analytics to improve supply chain performance and gain greater contextual intelligence.
• Embedding big data analytics in operations leads to a 4.25x improvement in order-to-cycle delivery times, and a 2.6x improvement in supply chain efficiency of 10% or greater.
• Greater contextual intelligence of how supply chain tactics, strategies and operations are influencing financial objectives.
• • Traceability and recalls are by nature data-intensive, making big data’s contribution potentially significant. Big data has the potential to provide improved traceability performance and reduce the thousands of hours lost just trying to access, integrate and manage product databases that provide data on where products are in the field needing to be recalled or retrofitted.
  • Increasing supplier quality from supplier audit to inbound inspection and final assembly with big data. IBM has developed a quality early-warning system that detects and then defines a prioritization framework that isolates quality problem faster than more traditional methods, including Statistical Process Control (SPC). The early-warning system is deployed upstream of suppliers and extends out to products in the field.

TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP (TPP): RIGHT FOR THE U.S.?

CONTROVERSIAL! CONFUSING! CORRECT?

Sounds  like something from the Koch Brothers or the Bush Family?
Nope, right out of our Democratic President, Barack Obama.
Let’s make sense out of nonsense!

With help from Brooklyn Senator Chuck Schumer,
we have assembled a virtual armada of information.
Other experts included like political economist, professor, author, and political commentator Robert Reich.

This event is open to all Americans, our members and guests.  We welcome you all to come and interact with fellow Americans in the region and engage in American political discussions.  We will give a brief presentation on a current topic particularly where the issue stands in the Washington political discourse.  Join us to formalize our viewpoint as Americans living abroad before our summer holiday.  The next Political Wine is scheduled for October.

Political Wine

03 June (last one before summer holiday!) / 18h30 – 20h00

Price: order at least 1 drink at the bar.

La Canne à Sucre / Sports 11

11 promenade des Anglais 06000 NICE

Parking: Palais de la Méditerranée or Palais Masséna

Public Transport: several bus lines serve bus stops: Congrès/Joffre, Grimaldi, Congrès Promenade (all in walking distance)

There is no formal entry fee to participate except to support our host, La Canne à Sucre, by ordering 1 drink minimum.  To help DAF – Riviera coordinate this event, we ask that you reply to this e-mail as an RSVP – even if you are a ‘maybe‘!

This message is paid for by the Democratic Party Committee Abroad

Democrats Abroad

PO Box 15130
Washington, DC 20003
United States

Telephone: +1-202-621-2085 +1-202-621-2085