The EFF obviously is focused on one aspect of the deal, and I don&#x27;t find their arguments about the other aspects to be convincing.  For the economic benefits, they use the same form of argument that global warming skeptics and creationists do, observing that there exists people who disagree with the general consensus.  The fact that they can name one researcher on both sides of the issue does not imply that we should dismiss that issue as &quot;debatable.&quot;<p>The fact of the matter is that &quot;the agreement would reduce 18,000 tariffs. Tariffs on all U.S. manufactured goods and almost all U.S. farm products would be eliminated completely, with most eliminations occurring immediately.&quot; [1]  Furthermore, we can&#x27;t realistically ask for the parties to go back to the negotiating table to try to improve the deal.  This one was 10 years in the making, which is depressing, but does mean that it&#x27;s basically this deal or nothing.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Trans-Pacific_Partnership#Tariffs_.26_other_barriers" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Trans-Pacific_Partnership#Tari...</a>