Obama’s Fast-Track Trade Bill Passes House in Second Attempt

Montecresto · Jun 19, 2015

donsutherland1 said:
From Bloomberg.com:

Obama

It should be noted that the legislation in question is not a trade agreement. It concerns a process under which a trade agreement would be considered by Congress. In substance, it is similar to a closed rule, as there would be no amendments permitted and it would be subjected to a vote as is. Currently, negotiations remain underway and there is no Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement.

It doesn't matter what little hiccups happen along the way. Both parties are party to all trade bills that come down the pike which have always been beneficial to big business at the expense of American workers. Nothing will change.

Objective Voice · Jun 19, 2015

sawdust said:
Very disappointed in the republican house.

Why?

From Bloomberg.com:

“This is a vote for a stronger economy and higher wages. This is a vote for our system of free enterprise. This is a vote for American leadership,” said House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, on the floor before the vote.

The measure, known as trade promotion authority, would let Obama submit trade agreements to Congress for an expedited, up-or-down vote without amendments. It would give the authority to Obama and the next president for six years as part of a package that revamps U.S. trade policy into the next decade.

If all this bill does is allow Congress to give an up or down vote on trade bills related to the TPP (which ultimately is the role of the Senate), why would you have a problem with it or House Republican's approval of this particular process measure?

Objective Voice · Jun 19, 2015

Hicup said:
The only thing these trade agreements end up trading is American jobs, and debt. I challenge anyone to show me otherwise. To show me how any trade bill EVER has made our country better off. Stop trading away our country you political assholes!~

Tim-

If you really feel that way, then the thing to do IMO would be vote for Congressmen who will change tax law that provide incentives for American corporations to out-source jobs overseas. IMO, that's where the problem lay with our trade deficit and our ability to retain competitive jobs here in America.

Montecresto said:
It doesn't matter what little hiccups happen along the way. Both parties are party to all trade bills that come down the pike which have always been beneficial to big business at the expense of American workers. Nothing will change.

See my post above.

sawdust · Jun 19, 2015

Objective Voice said:
Why?

From Bloomberg.com:

If all this bill does is allow Congress to give an up or down vote on trade bills related to the TPP (which ultimately is the role of the Senate), why would you have a problem with it or House Republican's approval of this particular process measure?

Once again congress voted for something without having congress critters familiar with the details of the bill. I don't for a second believe that Bloomberg knows the details and the details of the bill were not made public prior to the vote. This is a matter of the leadership not being responsible to the people. Republicans, Democrats, make no difference. It's disappointing if you believed their might be a difference.

Objective Voice · Jun 19, 2015

Samhain said:
Wouldn't this legislation return the rule to what it was from 1977 to 2007?

Sounds like it would to me. The 6-year trade limit is still there post-Nixon as MMC points out in post #7, but it seems to me that if Congress (Senate) has the authority to give such fast-track trade bills an up or down vote As-Is, you don't have this empirical president-like behavior taking hold again.

Simply put: If Congress (Senate) doesn't like a trade bill proposed by the Executive, they can simply vote to reject it. Of course, the problem is how to avoid a party-line vote for or against?

Objective Voice · Jun 19, 2015

sawdust said:
Once again congress voted for something without having congress critters familiar with the details of the bill. I don't for a second believe that Bloomberg knows the details and the details of the bill were not made public prior to the vote. This is a matter of the leadership not being responsible to the people. Republicans, Democrats, make no difference. It's disappointing if you believed their might be a difference.

So, it's not the bill itself you have a problem with. It's the process whereby this particular fast-track authority was given.

sawdust · Jun 19, 2015

Objective Voice said:
So, it's not the bill itself you have a problem with. It's the process whereby this particular fast-track authority was given.

I dislike the process and I don't know what's in the bill. There is no reason for me to support it.

Objective Voice · Jun 19, 2015

sawdust said:
I dislike the process and I don't know what's in the bill. There is no reason for me to support it.

Then perhaps you should read it. Here's a link to the Trade Promotion Authority bill (H.R. 1314). I couldn't find a link to the Trans-Pacific Partnership bill, but here's a white paper that attempts to summarize all the fine points of the legislation.

donsutherland1 · Jun 23, 2015

Senate update...

From Bloomberg.com:

The U.S. Senate advanced legislation that would give President Barack Obama enhanced authority to complete free-trade deals including a landmark agreement with Pacific nations.

The 60-37 vote Tuesday paves the way for final passage later this week. Because the U.S. House has already passed the bill, H.R. 2146, it would go to Obama for his signature if the Senate agrees. The trade legislation is one of the president’s top second-term goals.

Obama