General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDespite Pressure From White House, Leahy And Sanders Will Vote No On Trans-Pacific Trade Deal
http://digital.vpr.net/post/despite-pressure-white-house-leahy-and-sanders-will-vote-no-trans-pacific-trade-dealIf the president gets this authority, Congress will not be able to amend the trade deal in any way. Instead, it will simply hold an up or down vote on the proposed plan.
Many of the details of the Trans-Pacific Partnership have not been publicly released and members of Congress must visit a secure room in the basement of the Capitol Building if they want to review an outline of the deal.
Sen. Patrick Leahy says he's disappointed that the process has not been transparent. He says there's no way that he'll give the president full power to negotiate a new trade agreement under these circumstances. "I'm not about to vote for something when I have no idea what's in it, he says. Nobody else has any idea of what's in it, so I'm not going to vote for fast track. If they want to bring up an agreement let us have a real debate on it, let us know what's in it whether it is valid or not."
ananda
(28,890 posts)The more no's the better.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
arcane1
(38,613 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Since when?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)We have only the Dems in congress sanding between them and us. Not exactly confidence-building
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)They're big fans of his on this issue :-P
jonestonesusa
(880 posts)when it's time to vote for undemocratic trade pacts. The only question is who's going to speak out against the President's stance on this issue. Will you?
earthshine
(1,642 posts)and I agree with him.
jonestonesusa
(880 posts)Sobering too when it comes to Obama's support for this.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)so this goes against what the people supported.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Also I do not recall TPP being a central point of Obama's 2008 or 2012 campaign. In fact the secrecy around hte deal seems to indicate anything other than an informed populace supporting it.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Sure did SOUND good.
Guess he forgot about all that.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)as his comfortable shoes.
Movers must have lost that one.
beltanefauve
(1,784 posts)but I didn't think at the time he meant the TPP.
pampango
(24,692 posts)were even going on until they were finished. It seems that international negotiations are done in secret.
Neither the Iran nor Cuba agreements were approved by Congress and may well have been rejected if normal ratification was tried.
Trump will tear up the Iran deal and TPP, if ratified, and maybe the Cuba agreement to. Bernie endorses the Iran and Cuba agreements and will renegotiate 'existing' trade agreements. Not sure what Bernie would do with a hypothetical 'ratified' TPP - tear it up since he opposes it or renegotiate it as an 'existing' agreement
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)to get clinton in the white house - come hell or high water - by any means possible.
the tpp will open doors of political power and gold coffers for the corporates and oligarchy to do whatever they want all over the world ... and make slaves and peones of the rest of us.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Not good.
paulthompson
(2,398 posts)I'm very much against the TPP, so I think this is great. However, note that this story is from May 11, 2015, not May 11, 2016!
erlewyne
(1,115 posts)How can year old stuff be posted? I wouldn't
have caught it.
madwivoter
(539 posts)I see the comments are all from the last few hours (today).
a2liberal
(1,524 posts)Maybe it's making social media rounds again or something... Just from the excerpt I'm pretty sure it's talking about TPA, which passed quite a while ago
LiberalArkie
(15,731 posts)By JONATHAN WEISMAN JUNE 23, 2015
WASHINGTON President Obamas ambitious trade push is back on track, after several near-death moments, in large measure because top Republicans stood by him.
The Senate on Tuesday narrowly voted to end debate on legislation granting Mr. Obama enhanced negotiating powers to complete a major Pacific trade accord, virtually assuring final passage Wednesday of Mr. Obamas top legislative priority in his final years in office.
The procedural vote of 60 to 37 just reached the minimum needed, but final Senate passage will require only 51 votes. The House approved trade promotion authority last week.
With congressional support for fast track authority, the president can press for final agreement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a legacy-defining accord linking 40 percent of the worlds economy from Canada and Chile to Japan and Australia in a web of rules governing Pacific commerce. His administration can also bear down on a second agreement with Europe known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership knowing that lawmakers will be able to vote for or against those agreements but will not be able to amend or filibuster them.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/24/us/politics/senate-vote-on-trade-bill.html
TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)Under a Clinton presidency, TPP passage is a given.
It's not about the 99% people - it's all about the establishment oligarchy.
chwaliszewski
(1,514 posts)I see a Clinton presidency as an Obama presidency on steroids & adderall.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)This and other things, I think of the 28 pages being classified that protect the Saudi's but there are other examples, are meant to protect and benefit a class that transcends all national boundaries.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)The United States will cease to exist. We will have something else entirely. Voting won't matter much after that.
And Clinton thinks it's 'the gold standard' . I guess for the Global elite it will be.
kadaholo
(304 posts)Sanders proves that he is willing to speak truth to power in order to protect the American people!
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)the Senate has already passed fast track authority on the TPP.
http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/2015/06/so-who-voted-for-tpp-fast-track-in-the-senate-list/
The next vote will be to ratify it.
Doing so will be a great way to elect the Trumphster.
His campaign is substantially about how rotten these deals have been.
On that, he is correct.
Please check your basic facts prior to posting.
RiverNoord
(1,150 posts)fast track opposition, unfortunately, failed last year.
The constitutionality of such a step is questionable, and the first cases reaching appellate level under the TPP regime will raise the issue.
Right now, the likelihood of the TPP passing is very high...
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)Glad I wasn't missing something
FighttheFuture
(1,313 posts)likely time to push it through. Loosing Senators will be rotating out, and for chump change they will vote to sign away our future. surviving Senators may take a gamble that the rubes will forget in 6 years and also take some payola to fuck us all. It is already signed by Obama (tm) and cannot be filibustered and just needs a simple majority to make it law.
I will be very surprised if Bammie cannot push it through. Only the R's hate of him might stop it. Here's hoping for hate.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)AllyCat
(16,248 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)greiner3
(5,214 posts)She would have voted aye aye aye, all the way to the banks
villager
(26,001 posts)Since perusal establishes this as a former line in the sand, rather than a current one.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)They could be liberal-ish on social issues, too.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Congress cannot amend the deal in any way. Yes or No don't discuss details.
tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)He said it would happen, and thus
Viewing the document in a secure room in the basement? really????
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)not sure you realized that . . .
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Hotler
(11,470 posts)colors of this president. Yes he has done some things positive, but they have been mostly crumbs thrown our way. The man is bought and paid for by the 1%. He had no fight for single payer. I could go on.
TBF
(32,116 posts)appalachiablue
(41,184 posts)*Repost, Oct. 28, 2015, by OS, http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027296534
----
These are the 28 Democrats who voted for 'fast-track'twice & Senate members too
The list of D's that won't be getting $ when they email OR call.
Senate list posted by Shred before below.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/18/1394407/-These-are-the-28-Democrats-who-voted-for-fast-track-twice
On Thursday, House Republicans once again held a vote on the so-called "Trade Promotion Authority" legislationabbreviated as TPA and better known as "fast-track"that would prevent Congress from adding amendments to any trade deals negotiated by President Obama. And once again, the same 28 Democrats voted in favor of it:
Terri Sewell (AL-07)
Susan Davis (CA-53)
Sam Farr (CA-20)
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Ami Bera (CA-07)
Scott Peters (CA-52)
Jared Polis (CO-02)
James Himes (CT-04)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL-23)
Mike Quigley (IL-05)
John Delaney (MD-06)
Brad Ashford (NE-02)
Gregory Meeks (NY-05)
Kathleen Rice (NY-04)
Earl Blumenauer (OR-03)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)
Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01)
Jim Cooper (TN-05)
Rubén Hinojosa (TX-15)
Eddie Johnson (TX-30)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
Beto O'Rourke (TX-16)
Gerald Connolly (VA-11)
Donald Beyer (VA-08)
Rick Larsen (WA-02)
Suzan DelBene (WA-01)
Derek Kilmer (WA-06)
Ron Kind (WI-03)
Last week, when fast-track first came up for a vote, its fate was tied to another piece of legislation called Trade Adjustment Assistance, which helps displaced workers. Since TAA failed, so did TPA, even though the latter received a majority vote. This time, unencumbered by TAA, TPA passed by a 218 to 208 margin, thanks to the support of those 28 Democrats listed above.
Now TPA will head to the Senate for a possible vote next week whose outcome is uncertain. Republicans have promised Democrats that TAA will come up for a separate vote as part of a non-controversial trade bill regarding Africa, but will Democrats in the Senate take that risk and support TPA on its own?
We know that 28 House Democrats were willing to do so, and we aren't going to forget their names.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027296534
mountain grammy
(26,663 posts)Once again ignoring working people, and these are the "good" guys. Good for corporations.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)more.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)zentrum
(9,865 posts)nikto
(3,284 posts)AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)So many recs and replies to a story that is a year old and was likely put mistakenly here...
pampango
(24,692 posts)the 'Obama is a republican' (whom all republicans seem to hate) crowd.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)And why does he act against out best interests?
pampango
(24,692 posts)"our national sovereignty". FDR proposed it; Truman negotiated it; 48 countries signed it; republicans killed it.
I know this happened 70 years ago but this seems to be an "old news" is still news thread.
They'll wind up giving the senate 5 minutes to debate this and all will be well.
I don't have much confidence in this congress anymore. President either as it stands on this issue