Posted on 06/20/2015 6:30:18 AM PDT by HomerBohn
I admit that there are always things that seem to be used in order to cover up other things that are being done. Last week the House shot down the Trade Adjustment Assistance bill, but passed the Trade Promotion Authority (both are unconstitutional). With the coverage of the Charleston Church shooting in South Carolina, the House advanced the TPA again, and this time it passed.
In a 218-208 vote (previous vote was 219-211), with 28 Democrats and 50 Republicans voting in favor of the bill, the House advanced the fast track bill which would illegally delegate authority to the Executive Branch to work out trade agreements. As I've pointed out before, trade agreements involve tariffs (taxes). As such, those must originate in the House of Representatives.
Article I, Section 7 of the US Constitution states:
All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives…
This is not a treaty, it's a trade agreement. Too many people are confusing the TPA with the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is a treaty. I do believe confusion is exactly what is being perpetrated on the American people at this point in order to advance the agenda.
The Hill reports:
The House on Thursday took the first step toward resuscitating the White House's trade agenda by passing legislation granting President Obama fast-track authority.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where the White House and GOP leaders are seeking to strike a deal with pro-trade Democrats.
The Senate is now expected to vote on the legislation, but that is presumed to pass since they have already passed before.
"This is a vote to re-establish America's credibility," said Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI).
Previously, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) attempted to justify such actions by saying that the TPA wouldn't give Obama more authority and chastening others that said such legislation would undermine the law. But it does, in fact, do that.
Furthermore, if this is passed through the Senate and the TPP is approved, there is no doubt that American jobs will be lost, which is, in part, why the TAA was also attempting to be pushed through.
All of this is setting America up for the Trans-Pacific Partnership. There is no question about that. RT reports:
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) is a vocal critic of the deal because of a provision called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS). The provision would mediate disputes between foreign investors and a government, which Warren believes will inhibit regulation and pose a threat to American sovereignty.
ISDS is designed to address the problem of uneven national economic policies in an interconnected global economy. Foreign investors have to deal with the risk of having their investments seized if and when a new government comes to power and decides to nationalize the businesses of foreign industries. While this isn't a risk in a stable company with a strong judicial system like the United States, it is a genuine risk in other countries without such stability. ISDS is an arbitration process that uses sanctions to put pressure on governments who have unfairly seized property.
That means that ISDS would allow foreign investors to make complaints against the United States, which is a point that many take issue with. Warren argues that the agreement could "tilt the playing field in the United States further in favor of big multinational corporations."
Many opponents of the TPP worry that multinational corporations could argue that environmental, financial and minimum wage regulations could qualify for a dispute under ISDS, potentially costing the United States expensive damages.
Sorry conservatives, but Republicans are once again selling us out right along with many Democrats. They are selling out American jobs, sovereignty and most of all they are not following the rules of the Constitution they swore to uphold and defend.
The push is on now to see if Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) will take to the Senate floor and provide a filibuster for this unconstitutional legislation.
Didnt ObamaCare start something like this?
You still believe that contacting representatives, 90 percent of whom are automatically reelected, makes a difference. It’s a lot of work to invest in that view.
the only other way to change things is to find a strong Conservative of the Right Wing who will build a third political party that could bury the one party system we now have.
Or, perhaps a benevolent right-wing despot will ride up to the defense of America. If the solution is the later, boot hills will be full of traitors.
Didnt ObamaCare start something like this?
At least Republicans weren’t part of the mess. Wait until the magic flake Republican Candidate votes for this mess.......of course, he will be excused from any responsibility of the vote just like a liberal.
Just FYI, this sentence from the article is clearly incorrect:
++
In a 218-208 vote (previous vote was 219-211), with 28 Democrats and 50 Republicans voting in favor of the bill, ...
++
It should read:
++
... And ALL BUT 50 Republicans voting in favor of the bill ...
The biggest difference it makes is that they can't claim that "nobody said anything" or "I'm doing what my constituents want".
With all of the calls people have made to DC against the trade bills, it's now common knowledge across the political spectrum that the DC crowd DOES NOT represent us.
Those are differences that it's tough to measure, but they're important. This next election trade, the plight of the US worker, and maybe the need to have a president who isn't afraid to "tell it like it is" are more likely.
That's a big difference.
One more nail in our coffin is right.
This is very discouraging. I applaud Rand Paul for (probably) filibustering this on the Senate floor.
He is only one man. I hope and pray he’s not alone on that floor.
And the fact that the Pope, of all people, is bent on becoming part of the problem is reprehensible. How many sould will not be saved because the Pontiff chose the wide road.
“(both are unconstitutional).”
There are many laws that are illegal, unconstitutional, and morally wrong. Affirmative action is just one of them. And what can we do about it?
Yeah. They just stood there and watched it happen.
What are you trying to do? Make Speaker Bonehead irritated and cry again? If so, nothing would make me happier!
From the email sent to constituents by Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, a member of the Republican leadership representing the fifth district of NC:
“As I mentioned in last week’s Foxx Report, there have been many mischaracterizations of what TPA is. The allegation that TPA is something for President Obama is false. Every day I hear from constituents who want me to hold the president accountable. TPA does just that by holding President Obama accountable on trade and is consistent with my ongoing efforts to limit the damage he has done to this nation. TPA requires the president to follow congressional negotiating directives and provides transparency for any negotiating texts and, of course, final agreements that Congress considers.”
She refuses to answer how the TPA changing the Senate hurdle for Senate passage of a trade bill from 2/3 to a simple majority makes the president more accountable. She also refuses to respond to the loss of hundreds of thousands of textile and furniture jobs in her state since the WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, and other “free trade” agreements of the past 25 years were passed. She merely asserts that “free trade” will bring thousands of new jobs to her state.
Foxx, is just another faux conservative who is owned by the globalists and does the bidding of Boehner.
I and you know this, but the people of NC don’t know it. Since Helms they have elected no one that good.
The Dems only allow enough votes to pass this turkey and put another one over on the STUPID GOP
The TPA legislation… is clearly constitutional because Congress retains its authority to approve or reject all future trade agreements. It might be unconstitutional if Congress tried to delegate its authority to approve the final deal–but that is not at issue. Congress may always kill any future international agreement by withholding its final approval. The only difference under TPA is that Congress consents not to kill the agreement by amendment (i.e., the ‘death by a thousand cuts’). The Constitution grants each house of Congress the authority to establish its own rules of procedure, and it makes perfect sense for Congress to limit itself to straight up-or-down votes on certain resolutions, such as base closures and its own adjournment motions.
Constitutional law professor John O. McGinnis also recently reviewed TPA and concluded that TPA “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.” And then there’s the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1890 case of Field v. Clark approving the constitutionality of an analogous law—the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890, which granted the president even more authority than TPA. It was no big deal.
Finally, it’s important to reiterate that, contrary to some claims, FTAs are not treaties (which are typically “self-executing,” require two-thirds approval by the Senate, and have the force of law upon ratification). They are “congressional-executive agreements” that, even after being signed by the president, have absolutely no legal force until they are converted into implementing legislation (which would amend current law), passed by Congress, and signed into law by the president. Such agreements have for decades been used by the United States for many different issues, including trade liberalization, and U.S. courts have repeatedly rejected constitutional challenges thereto.
In short, a constitutional argument against TPA requires you to reject over a century of precedent, the repeated rulings of U.S. courts, and the opinions of even the strictest of constitutional scholars.
With this fast track or trade promotion Authority bill they want to lower it to 51% and no amendments and only 60 days to pass a bill. that’s a dictatorship and the end of America. Obama can basically rewrite USA laws as treaties override USA laws.
It would be ridiculously easy to pass a treaty with only a 51% up or down vote , no debates and no amendments and only 60 days to pass it as the people wouldn't have enough time to get the message to their representatives.
This is unconstitutional. We want amendments that could kill a bad bill as the Constitution allows. We want 66% approval not 51% .Call Congress . Tell them to vote no on TPA (Trade promotion authority).
Treaties override U.S. laws. So these Senators etc. are basically turning the U.S.A into a dictatorship where the input of the people nor of congress is not allowed. Obama will rewrite U.S. immigration laws using this fast track power the idiots in congress are giving him/it. This TPA is the worst thing ever. and politicians supposedly on the side of Americans want to void the Constitution to give dictatorial power to the most evil marxist tyrant who has already abused power many times ,namely Barak Obama. Gowdy etc. you are evil traitors.
It is unconstitutional and basically turns the USA into a dictatorship.
And many Cruz supporters here are pushing this fast track power for Obama just because their candidate supports it.
so they support dismantling the Constitution
The Constitution requires that 66% of the Senate approve any treaty (and amendments are allowed).
With this fast track or trade promotion Authority bill they want to lower it to 51% and no amendments and only 60 days to pass a bill. that’s a dictatorship and the end of America. Obama can basically rewrite USA laws as treaties override USA laws.
It would be ridiculously easy to pass a treaty with only a 51% up or down vote , no debates and no amendments and only 60 days to pass it as the people wouldn’t have enough time to get the message to their representatives.
This is unconstitutional. We want amendments that could kill a bad bill as the Constitution allows. We want 66% approval not 51% .Call Congress . Tell them to vote no on TPA (Trade promotion authority).
The Constitution requires that 66% of the Senate approve any treaty (and amendments are allowed).
With this fast track or trade promotion Authority bill they want to lower it to 51% and no amendments and only 60 days to pass a bill. that’s a dictatorship and the end of America. Obama can basically rewrite USA laws as treaties override USA laws.
It would be ridiculously easy to pass a treaty with only a 51% up or down vote , no debates and no amendments and only 60 days to pass it as the people wouldn’t have enough time to get the message to their representatives.
This is unconstitutional. We want amendments that could kill a bad bill as the Constitution allows. We want 66% approval not 51% .Call Congress . Tell them to vote no on TPA (Trade promotion authority).
Treaties override U.S. laws. So these Senators etc. are basically turning the U.S.A into a dictatorship where the input of the people nor of congress is not allowed. Obama will rewrite U.S. immigration laws using this fast track power the idiots in congress are giving him/it. This TPA is the worst thing ever. and politicians supposedly on the side of Americans want to void the Constitution to give dictatorial power to the most evil marxist anti-American tyrant who has already abused power many times ,namely Barak Obama. Gowdy etc. you are evil traitors.
So you are ok with Obmama and some Muslim dictators writing a 50,000 page agreement and then putting that out for a vote to congress where only a 51% vote passes it into law, with NO AMMENDMENTS ALLOWED and practically no debate as they have only 60 days to pass it . This 60 day limit and no amendments shut out the American people from this process. this is was not a dictatorship but government by the people. Also the Constitution mandates that treaties must have 66% approval from the Senate not 51%
We need Amendments , more than 60 days and 66% not 51% approval. How can they say this doesn't empower Obama. ridiculous this fast track or trade promotion authority just Makes Obama a dictator or the furher . This is Obama’s enabling act.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.