Fast Track for the Trans Pacific Partnership Accords with Democracy

Library of Law and Liberty ^ | MAY 29, 2015 | JOHN O. MCGINNIS

[SoConPubbie]

The left and even some Republicans have argued that the procedures for agreeing to the Trans Pacific Partnership are undemocratic. A leading argument is that voting for “fast track” for the TPP violates democratic principles because Congress is changing its rules now in order to later ratify an agreement it has not yet seen.

The arguments are wholly misplaced. “Fast track” simply permits Congress under its ordinary procedures to commit to a future majority vote of Congress to vote up or down on an agreement that the President has negotiated. Representative democracy is thus served by the later vote on an agreement whose text is known.

It is true that fast track eliminates certain procedural obstacles like the filibuster rule in the Senate and the requirements of committee approval. But there is nothing sacrosanct about a set of procedural rules to democracy. The Senate eliminates its filibuster rules for budgetary reconciliation and the House and Senate often pass legislation that has not been considered in committee. Moreover, parliamentary democracies are democratic and the process of ratification for the TPP actually gives more blocking power than is typical in those forms of government, because Congress imposes some requirements that the TPP must meet to get the advantage of fast track.

The comparison to parliamentary government is particularly relevant, because the TPP is an international agreement. Other nations are unlikely to negotiate seriously if they know that any agreement they make can be amended in Congress to the unilateral advantage of the United States. Given the geopolitical reasons for the TPP, making this procedural precommitment is in the national interest.

The complaints of the left are hypocritical on this matter given their enthusiasm for the administrative state. Remember that there Congress also delegates broad power to the executive—often under even more elastic standards than the TPP fast track– to implement regulations that Congress has not yet seen. And unlike TPP fast track legislation, these delegations do not guarantee Congress an up or down vote to approve these regulations to make them the law of the land. If the left was truly unhappy about the lack of democracy in the TTP fast track, it would support the REINS act which requires Congress’s approval of major regulations that administrative agencies promulgate. The left’s opposition to such legislation shows that their real complaint is not about the loss of democracy, but about deregulation. On the whole, TPP is about removing barriers to free exchange and the administrative state is about raising them.

[SoConPubbie]

"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton "We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all." -- President Ronald Reagan "A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792 "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

[familyop]

Sessions: Fast Track Would Lead to 3 Pacts Encompassing 90% of World GDP
Weekly Standard ^ | 6/17/15 | Daniel Halper

Senator Jeff Sessions is worried that the adoption of the Trans-Pacific Partnership would lead to an "historic international regulatory Commission" that would eoncmpass 90 percent of the world's GDP. He's concerned that it would "[create] a self-governing and self-perpetuating Commission with extraordinary implications for American workers and American sovereignty."

“The House is preparing to vote again tomorrow on providing fast-track executive authority to the President. If adopted, it will be sent immediately to the Senate for final consideration," Sessions says in a statement to be released tonight.

"It is essential that there be no misunderstanding: fast-track preapproves the formation of not only the unprecedentedly large Trans-Pacific Partnership, but an unlimited number of such agreements over the next six years. Those pacts include three of the most ambitious ever contemplated. After TPP comes the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the United States and the European Union, followed by the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), seeking as one its goals labor mobility among more than 50 nations. Together, these three international compacts encompass three-fourths of the world’s GDP. Including the nations whose membership is being courted for after enactment, the countries involved would encompass nearly 90 percent of global GDP. Yet, through fast-track, Congress will have authorized the President to ink these deals before a page of them has been made public. Then, the Executive sends Congress 'implementing' legislation to change U.S. law—legislation which cannot be amended, cannot be filibustered, and will not be subjected to the Constitutional requirement for a two-thirds treaty vote.

(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...

[paratrooper82]

Save the stupid arguments for this fast track trade authority and just post the entire legislation on-line for every American to read for thirty days and let the American people decide if they want it or NOT!

This is why the RINO’s are not getting anywhere with their stupid arguments, since the entire legislation is being kept secret from the American people and we are supposed to just [trust] what every comes out of their mouths as the trust!

Really? Go fudge yourselves, I personally don't trust anything that a RINO says period!

[paratrooper82]

Did anyone ever tell you RINO’s this is a “Representative” Government guaranteed to every American under the US Constitution and NOT a “democracy!”

Mob rule democracies are found in socialist countries all over the world, not in the United States of America!

[Fungi]

Nonsense, it rhymes with tyranny.

[SoConPubbie]

This is why the RINO’s are not getting anywhere with their stupid arguments, since the entire legislation is being kept secret from the American people and we are supposed to just [trust] what every comes out of their mouths as the trust!

Myth 5: TPP is being negotiated via a dangerous and unprecedented level of secrecy!

Totally false. Probably the most-repeated myth right now isn’t even related to TPA but instead to the TPP, which is still being negotiated. According to the anti-TPA script, the TPP is so secret that nobody knows what’s in it, and—much like Obamacare legislation—nobody, not even Congress, will know what’s in it until the agreement is passed into law. Once again, however, nothing could be further from the truth:

• First, Obama’s USTR and Congress have been consulting on the TPP since December 14, 2009, when then-USTR Kirk notified Congress that President Obama intended to enter into TPP negotiations. USTR then held initial consultations with Congress in 2010 and, according to a January 2015 fact-sheet, has since held almost 1,700 congressional briefings on TPP alone. USTR also previewed various TPP proposals with key congressional committees before taking them to our trading partners. (Odd that the TPP talks have been going on for six years, but the vast majority of these “secrecy” complaints have only emerged in the last few months, huh?)
• Second, USTR has provided “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.” This access began in 2012, and several House members and senators—both supportive of TPA (like Mike Lee) and opposed (like Sens. Jeff Sessions and Elizabeth Warren, as well as Rep. Rosa DeLauro)—have reviewed the draft negotiating texts. Moreover, the level of security surrounding these TPP texts isn’t part of some scary Obama administration plot; it’s set by Congress (which, as you’ll recall, is controlled by Republicans these days). A U.S. government official confirmed to me that “the Senate and House security offices determine the procedures for viewing classified material in the Capitol reading room where the TPP text is kept for Members—not the administration… some people claim that it’s more difficult to view military or intelligence information, but it’s all subject to the same rules that are set and enforced by Capitol security.”
• Third, USTR has engaged the public on the TPP via published reports and “stakeholder meetings” with groups like labor unions, consumer groups, and, of course, corporations and trade associations. Some of these stakeholders have even reviewed the negotiating texts and US proposals. Admittedly, the official texts aren’t available to the general public, but this is common practice for all FTAs (as a quick Google search reveals) and for good reason: just like other high-value negotiations among private parties or governments, revealing draft proposals before a deal is struck emboldens the opposition, undermines the parties’ negotiating positions, and exposes negotiators to public scrutiny over provisions that might not even be in a final deal. Publishing draft FTA texts would make completing a deal difficult, if not impossible, and it’s thus no coincidence the most vocal advocates for “full transparency” in free trade negotiations are actually those most opposed to free trade.It’s also important to understand just how unoriginal this “secrecy” canard is:
  

  Today's history lesson: Nutty ol' Perot on NAFTA's scary secrecy. Sound familiar? #TPP #TPA https://t.co/YLjlJfusUr pic.twitter.com/l1LGWPftzV
  
  — Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) June 5, 2015

Yes, protectionists have been using the same “secrecy” lines for over 20 years. In fact, if you replaced “NAFTA” with “TPP” in those old Ross Perot commercials, they’d be almost indistinguishable from the ones on our TVs today.

• Finally, unlike the oft-analogized Obamacare legislation, the actual text of any final TPP deal will be required by law to be publicly available (online) for months—yes, months—before Congress votes on it. As you can see from the table below (source), under TPA the president must make the entire text of any trade agreement, including TPP, available to the public for 60 days before he can even sign it.Once it’s signed, Congress will have weeks, maybe months, to scour the deal, hold “mock markups” in various committees, and suggest changes to the agreement before the president sends Congress legislation implementing the FTA for a final vote. Also, within 105 days of the FTA’s signing, the U.S. International Trade Commission must issue a report on the deal’s economic impact—again prior those bills being submitted to Congress. And once the bills finally are submitted, Congress will then have up to 90 legislative days (which is like five months in normal human days) to review the bills and hold final votes.

Bottom line: when or if TPA is passed, the general public will have months—and if the presidential elections interfere, maybe years—to review the TPP before Congress acts on it. Think that’s crazy? Well, it’s precisely what happened to U.S. FTAs with Colombia, Panama and South Korea, which were signed by President Bush but sat around (online) for years before they were submitted to, and passed by, Congress in 2011.

[P-Marlowe]

So Con, are you telling everyone here on Free Republic that YOU SUPPORT TPP, even though you have no idea what is in it?

You keep posting these thread touting the TPP and yet it is top secret and probably strips most of us of many of our rights as American Citizens. Yet you just keep posting these Pro TPP threads as if you think that it is the greatest piece of legislation since the Declaration of Independence.

What provisions of the TPP are you so in favor of? How will the TPP improve your life or mine?

If you can't answer that, then you have no business hawking a piece of legislation that pretty much guarantees its implementation.

[RitaOK]

The proponents and defenders of this stinker can’t overcome the timing.

The fact of Barack Obama sitting in the drivers seat for 15 more months is the end of the hunt on this discussion. Our government is corrupt. Period.

[Always A Marine]

It is true that fast track eliminates certain procedural obstacles like the filibuster rule in the Senate and the requirements of committee approval. But there is nothing sacrosanct about a set of procedural rules to democracy.

Democracy? We are not a democracy! We are a Republic, and those "procedural obstacles" are the very teeth of the separation of powers which underpin our Republic.

The comparison to parliamentary government is particularly relevant, because the TPP is an international agreement.

Yes, and based upon Senator Sessions' three readings of the secret TPP draft, this sweeping "international agreement" is more like a treaty -- which should require a two-thirds vote of the Senate. TPA's "fast track" provisions would only require a simple majority vote to pass TPP and any other trade treaties over the next six years.

Why is Congress in such a panicked rush to cede its Constitutional authority? Experience shows that whenever one side is in an unexplained rush to get something passed, it is hiding something which would scuttle the deal.

[familyop]

"Myth 5: TPP is being negotiated via a dangerous and unprecedented level of secrecy!"

The first four links under that gigantic-sized font are links to Obama's office.

[P-Marlowe]

The first four links under that gigantic-sized font are links to Obama's office.

These people are grasping at any straw they can find.

It's funny but the more these people keep posting these pro-TPA threads in order to justify Ted Cruz's stupid vote, the more people realize how stupid that vote was.

So Con thinks he/she is getting people over to his/her side, but the fact is the more light he/she puts on it, the more Freepers become opposed to it.

Ted Cruz needs to backtrack instead of doubling down. He's lost a lot of support. He lost me and I don't think I'm the only one here on Free Republic. If Ted Cruz loses Free Republic, then he has lost the base entirely.

I think SoConPubbie needs to take a break from trying to help Ted Cruz. The more of these thread he/she posts, the worse it get for his/her candidate.

[TomasUSMC]

If this passes we must go THIRD PARTY. We are left no choice.

[SatinDoll]

So sad.

What you’re not telling people is why these so-called ‘trade agreements’ are being done: these are not agreements but rather treaties that will subvert the sovereign rights of U.S.citizens. Those sovereign rights are stopping the NWO cartel from seizing our guns.

We will not be truly free until every bankster is strangled by the intestines of the last member of Congress.

[TomasUSMC]

seeking as one its goals labor mobility among more than 50 nations.
/////
WHAT IS LABOR MOBILITY?

[familyop]

That's probably in regards to the plan to speed up the international slave trade.

White House confirms immigration is in Obamatrade
OBAMATRADE

A White House news conference on April 28 with President Obama and Japanese Prime Minster Shinzo Abe confirms the TransPacific Partnership will impact our immigration laws. PM Abe described the TPP as “a new economic sphere in which people goods and money will flow freely.”

[More info and a link to the video behind the link.]

[eyedigress]

Sessions lays it out. It’s a treaty anytime, anywhere without the people or Congress.

[TomasUSMC]

If these republocrats pass TPP .....it may end up being more well known as..... TRUMPS PROAMERICA PARTY.

Because we won’t stand for it. We gave the GOP the House ....then the Senate......they gave us promises ....then they lied....and gave us.... Son of NAFTA.

[Tzimisce]

If it’s so innocuous, why are they hiding it from us?

[MarchonDC09122009]

Is Con a Lobbyist?
Why the shilling posts condesending that there’s nothing to worry about, don’t impede, just support and pass TPA & TPP?

What’s so hard to understand that citizens of a Free Republic rightly expect a trade agreement / treaty ‘ s details have Full disclosure and deliberation before passage?

Does Con sign financial documents without reading or understanding the fine print?