Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Don't Sanders, Warren, or Grayson have Staff That Can Read the TPP? (Obama was Correct.) [View all]
Last edited Sat Apr 25, 2015, 05:55 AM - Edit history (1)
I just noticed something very interesting....for all our fellow Democrats complaining that they haven't been able to read the TPP, or have their staffers read it---note this--apparently, the TPP is available to EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS to read. At the Capitol. It is also AVAILABLE TO STAFF WITH APPROPRIATE SECURITY CLEARANCE.
WORKING HAND-IN-HAND WITH CONGRESS, THE PEOPLES REPRESENTATIVES
The administration has worked closely with the peoples representatives in Congress as we pursue our ambitious trade agenda. This has included:
Providing access to the full negotiating texts for any Member of Congress, including for Members to view at their convenience in the Capitol, accompanied by staff members with appropriate security clearance.
Holding nearly 1,700 Congressional briefings on TPP alone, and many more on T-TIP, TPA, AGOA and other initiatives.P
Providing Members of Congress with plain English summaries of TPP chapters to assist Members in navigating the negotiating text.
Previewing U.S. proposals with Congressional committees before taking them to the negotiations.
Working with Congress to update them on the state of the negotiations and get feedback every step of the way.
https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2015/january/fact-sheet-transparency-and-obama
So Warren, Sanders and Grayson don't have staffers with a high enough security clearance? And now, they don't even have to go to the trade office---they can stay at the Capitol. So how is this deal not transparent? How is it secret? How....when the progressives we trust the most can read it? This is how representative democracy works---our elected representatives protect our interests. When they don't, we show up at elections and vote them out.
Heck---the question Democrats should be asking right now is why so many of our elected reps apparently haven't availed themselves of the opportunity to read what is available.
EDITED TO ADD---For all those wondering why elected members of Congress must sit with their staffers???? Thank Rep. Grand Theft Auto for getting his staffer to steal, then post the entire IP draft on his website. And shame on any Democratic Congressperson who didn't try to censure him then, and hold him accountable, now.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/darrell-issa-trans-pacific-partnership-trade-deal_n_1521035.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
173 replies, 8762 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (22)
ReplyReply to this post
173 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Don't Sanders, Warren, or Grayson have Staff That Can Read the TPP? (Obama was Correct.) [View all]
msanthrope
Apr 2015
OP
Below is the link of Rachel maddow's interview with Elizabeth Warren on this issue
diabeticman
Apr 2015
#1
She's incorrect. Staff members with appropriate security clearance apparently can...per the Trade
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#2
Of course. I can't imagine either Warren or Sanders not wanting to be there. They also get plain-
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#9
Plain language explanations are availble for all chapters. Further....are you kidding me? If you
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#18
If Ted Cruz made these complaints, we'd laugh so hard we'd all pee ourselves.
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#38
Plain language. In other words, someone else's selective interpretation of selected parts.
GoneFishin
Apr 2015
#49
Would you sign an important legal document based soley on a summary created by the
GoneFishin
Apr 2015
#57
How is the US trade Office the opposing party? And if I thought they were, then I'd
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#108
It's called an Executive Summary, and heads every complex document that ever crossed my desk...
Hekate
Apr 2015
#95
Correct. But that is generally not an adversarial process. This clearly is. I know many here are
GoneFishin
Apr 2015
#148
The "plain language" issue has already been addressed by other posters. It's a non starter.
merrily
Apr 2015
#113
Consider the fact that the trade representative weasels have had years to craft exactly the
GoneFishin
Apr 2015
#60
Oh please.You get all the staffers together from a bunch of Senators&Reps & give them each 100 pages
Hekate
Apr 2015
#68
Except they can't. Only staffers of Congress members on the Finance Committee
riderinthestorm
Apr 2015
#69
Any staffer with security clearance. Any member of Congress....that's how Grayson
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#109
That approach does not work with a long, complex, technical document. I'm not even sure it would
merrily
Apr 2015
#84
Actually, distributive proofreading works quite well when you set your mind to it
Hekate
Apr 2015
#90
you did that with international treaties of thousands of pages in legalese, with tons of
merrily
Apr 2015
#91
Why is it so unfeasible in your mind that a motivated group could do this research?
Hekate
Apr 2015
#92
"proofing" or annotating any document by definition requires mark-up with pen/pencil or software package
zazen
Apr 2015
#134
Wait....lets not go there they said the same thing about health care bill....
Historic NY
Apr 2015
#132
Do you really think Issa was the one uploading? We aren't talking about car theft.....
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#158
And who do you think was responsible for the leak the year before? Or do you just believe that
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#171
Why do you need a security clearance in this instance? Currency manipulation, counterfeiting, and
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#131
They've complained about transparency---specifically, about not having staffers be able to read it.
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#6
Jeez, I had that rating in 2 or 3 jobs just by virtue of working for the Big Boss. It means keeping
Hekate
Apr 2015
#93
Thank Rep. Grand Theft Auto---after he leaked on his website, the USTRO imposed that measure.
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#120
It's Ratfucking, 101. The Republicans do wrong, the Democrats blame the President, who, at this
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#126
Wouldn't you expect frequent OP writers on the TPP to know this? I've written 2 OPs on the TPP, and
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#128
If it is classified "Secret," you would need a "Secret" clearance and "a need to know."
Agnosticsherbet
Apr 2015
#153
Wrong, Sherrod Brown explained all this regarding their Staff. Special clearance, unprecedented
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#10
I quoted the Trade Office itself. If Brown doesn't employ people with high enough security
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#13
Which means staff does have access. Is Brown really complaining about having to show up for work?
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#27
Re-read the thread. Msanthrope is not being defensive but trying to make people see reason....
Hekate
Apr 2015
#96
He's confirming that staff has access. Unfortunately, he has to show up to work that day, too. nt
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#30
If Ted Cruz complained he was too busy to read a bill, we'd savage him. If Brown cannot show up to
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#42
So all our elected officials have to do is set in a secret room all day so that their staff can do
jwirr
Apr 2015
#70
Wait a second...if I were a Senator complaining about the TPP, I'd want to read
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#110
And what about all the other things they need ot do. What is reguired to read this thing is the
jwirr
Apr 2015
#141
Work isn't one issue, is your assertion that he should blow off all other responsibilities
TheKentuckian
Apr 2015
#111
Shouldn't he be reading it, too? At least the summaries? Especially if one is
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#114
Well, now Alan doesn't have to go the USTR--he and his aides don't have to leave the Capitol.
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#15
Indeed--what I find most surprising is that Bernie apparently doesn't have a staffer who can read
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#19
Didn't seem to me that Bush had much trouble getting that unconstitutional POS passed.
merrily
Apr 2015
#89
You mean our elected representatives, and those with the proper security clearance?
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#29
The Cuba & Iran deals were NOT written by greedy Mega-corporate Lobbyists & lawyers
99th_Monkey
Apr 2015
#62
So you agree that members always had the ability to review? And now that staff with the proper
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#36
Yes. You must have missed this (it even has an oblique Snowden reference)
riderinthestorm
Apr 2015
#47
I was promised proof that President Obama "personally threatened" members of Congress. Cite it,
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#54
I was promised proof that President Obama "personally threatened" members of Congress. As proof,
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#116
Wow, that's awesome of you to realize that you overstated your initial point and apologize
Number23
Apr 2015
#170
Money. You raise funds as you can....and the FDL wing always opens their coffers
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#46
The 151 Democratic House members that signed a letter opposing Fast Tracking the TPP must
think
Apr 2015
#59
If it's "human lives", as you claim, then shouldn't our Senators be reading it? Apparently Grayson
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#118
This isn't the plans to prevent WWIII. So why is it being so protected and secret?
Cleita
Apr 2015
#83
Yeah, you better invoke the BOG 'cause you have nothing. When all else fails.. blurt out the BOG.
Cha
Apr 2015
#102
Desperation. His term is ending and they desperately need a colossal clusterfuck.
great white snark
Apr 2015
#136
Absolutely. Are you upset that the Administration did not provide you a copy of the Iran deal
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#117
Please provide a link to the text in the agreement that supports your point.
KeepItReal
Apr 2015
#152
The agreement isn't online yet. But if you look at the IP chapter that Darrell Issa
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#154
You claim all this stuff is the TPP but can't link to the original source material
KeepItReal
Apr 2015
#172
It's no secret, then... Guess you've read it. I've read it, haven't you read it? Oh yeah,
Kip Humphrey
Apr 2015
#104