Posted on 06/23/2015 6:53:45 PM PDT by GIdget2004
Rubio’s mum posture on Tuesday underscores how divisive the issue has become in Republican presidential politics. While a vast majority of Republicans in both houses of Congress voted to advance the trade agenda, a vocal segment of the GOP base has aggressively attacked the plan, contending it would hurt American workers, change immigration laws and give Obama too much power.
It’s the latest chapter in the intraparty struggle that’s consumed the GOP since the 2010 midterms, as business-minded Republicans battle with the tea party wing over the party’s identity and direction.
The influence of the activist right was on vivid display Tuesday when Ted Cruz, the Texas firebrand who has aligned himself with that segment of the GOP, sharply reversed course on trade. After vocally supporting fast-track trade authority for Obama, Cruz announced that he would oppose the plan. He cited “corrupt” backroom deal-making that, he contended, would weaken U.S. immigration policies and even lead to the extension of the charter for the controversial Export-Import Bank.
“I support free trade and have vocally supported free trade for a long time,” Cruz told reporters after the vote. “But the cronyism and the backroom deals are unacceptable.”
Republican proponents strongly disputed the assertions.
“I imagine that helps him with the far right,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the Finance Committee chairman and co-author of the trade bill. “But it sure doesn’t help him with mainline Republicans. It certainly doesn’t help him with the business Republicans. It doesn’t help him with the free-market, free-enterprise Republicans.”
Hatch added: “The far right is against this. Why? I’ll never understand.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
“Free Trade” is a scam.
Bring back American jobs.
Moreover, a Pew Research Center survey from May found that half of self-identified Republicans believe that trade deals lead to job losses, compared with just 15 percent who believe they create jobs.
Cruz didn’t cite such poll numbers as a reason why he flipped. He said that recently leaked documents from WikiLeaks showed how the administration was trying to change federal immigration law in a separate trade deal it was negotiating — something the Obama administration and Republican proponents have strongly denied.
“I don’t know what he’s talking about,” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, a fellow Texas Republican, when asked about Cruz’s contention that GOP leaders had cut an unseemly deal.
“It is presidential election season,” Cornyn said. “I don’t think we were counting on his vote to pass it, anyway.”
If Hatch said this - he is a disgrace. This is the language of the left Senator. Are you now attacking conservatives who disagree with you on a particular issue by using the language of the left? I guess so if this quite is accurate.
This is all about BIG business and has nothing to do with creating jobs for the American worker. Small business, the backbone of the American economy, is down the drains. Only the giants get to play and to hell with America.
He didn't know all the cronyism and backroom deals that went into TPA? Are you kidding me?
Can anyone name a single piece of legislation that has gone to Obama's desk in the last 6 years that was not the result of "cronyism and backroom deals"?
Every single piece of legislation that gets to the floor is the result of "cronyism and backroom deals." That is how our system has been working lately.
This is just a lame excuse. He should just man up and say "I WAS WRONG!"
I can respect a man who admits when he was wrong.
I don't have a lot of respect for people who claim "I WAS DUPED." That is a lame excuse.
Unless he was duped. And that could easily be taken by some to mean he isn't yet ready for prime time.
Better to say, "I was wrong." Admitting to making mistakes with facts is better than saying you were shystered.
I’m pro trade, pro Cruz, and agree with mark Levin that 0bama cannot be entrusted with any additional authority.
Perhaps you can name a single fast tracked trade agreement that has been a net positive for the people of the United States.
Just one.
Nafta. Go for it.
Nafta gave some Mexicans a reason to stay home. Not enough, mind you, but more than having done nothing.
Nafta has by some estimates resulted in a net loss of 800,000 American jobs.
Is that a "net positive" for anyone other than the crony capitalists and globalists and Wall Street global firms that pushed it through?
“Moreover, a Pew Research Center survey from May found that half of self-identified Republicans believe that trade deals lead to job losses, compared with just 15 percent who believe they create jobs.”
Could it be the boarded up factories spread across the country, the once thriving small manufacturing towns with shuttered main streets, and the stores filled with goods made in China are clues as to what is really happening with free trade? People are beginning to believe what they see with their own eyes instead of what government, the media, and academics tell them.
We’ve had a 25 years experiment with free trade concurrent with the loss of US manufacturing in many sectors. At the same time the standard of living for the average American fell, millions of jobs were created in China, and wealth disparity increased in the USA. Where are the quantitative studies analyzing the impact of free trade over the past 25 years on the US economy? If it was really a good thing, wouldn’t there be numbers to prove it? The absence of quantitative data is evidence enough.
That is because companies like Fender Guitars and GM moved their factories there for cheaper labor and no import duties on the return trip. So the illegals stay in Mexico and the jobs they would otherwise have taken here are moved to Mexico.
Yeah, that's a net positive.
Almost every Trade Agreement screws the United States because the money that goes into hawking and drafting these agreements come from international corporations.
In fact, I’ve read that TPP was intended in part to fix the brokenness of NAFTA. (Instead, they’ve doubled down on the bad stuff.)
But, it was an admission that NAFTA was bad for America. The numbers, such as the 800,000 jobs lost number you posted, say that NAFTA was bad for America.
Ross Perot, like him or not, was right about the “Giant Sucking Sound” that NAFTA represented. America’s wealth, jobs, and manufacturing capacity transported south of the border.
Its seems like Hatch has been around forever, at least since the time of Henry Clay.
Utah could do better, much better.
I’ve asked the Free Traders for such studies, never get them. You can never get specific answers out of them.
They speak in general terminology of how the economy has grown since WW2. As if technology, the recovery of our competitors and population grown had nothing to do with it.
In the Meantime, China has become a superpower because of Free Trade.
In other words-— you got nothing.
F__K the republican party
Rubio screwed the pooch and he knows it. I think he was coerced by the pro-Heb Boosh elements in the establishment.
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.