Posted on 05/14/2015 12:32:13 PM PDT by dware
In a burst of bipartisanship, the Republican-controlled Senate put President Obama's trade agenda back on course on Thursday, clearing the way for likely approval within days for legislation allowing the administration to negotiate global deals that Congress could support or reject but not change.
The 65-33 vote to resurrect the measure capped two days of political intrigue in which Democrats on both sides of the legislation initially joined forces to block action, then reached agreement with Republicans for votes on other enforcement measures to protect workers who lose jobs as a result of exports.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
No, he approved of the president negotiating trade agreements and Congress getting an up-or-down vote, which is exactly what is being done here.
We have Article V. That’s the last line of defense. After that there’s nothing.
No details have been released about what Obama is negotiating, but that isn’t what is being voted upon by the Senate. Whatever Obama signs would require approval by both houses of Congress; trade-promotion authority merely permits agreements that follow the requirements set forth in the law to be subject to an up-or-down vote without a bunch of kooky amendments by Elizabeth Warren.
Article V is the only recourse, the ONLY recourse:
Hear Levin lay it out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdZuV8JnvvA
Show me where he supported closed door secrecy with armed guards on congress to even read the damn thing.
“We know now what was not known then.”
What, that free trade works even better than we thought?
I can’t believe that self-described conservatives can be as protectionist as Russ Feingold.
So, who do we vote for now? Well played, treasonous GOP, well played..
Reading what, the trade agreement that Obama is negotiating? THAT IS NOT WHAT IS BEING VOTED UPON!
The president can negotiate whatever agreement he damned well pleases, but it can’t go into effect without congressional approval. NONE OF THAT changes with trade-promotion authority.
I want the next president to be able to negotiate free-trade agreements and have them voted up-or-down by Congress without a bunch of “labor rights” and “transgender rules” amendments from Democrats making them worthless; if the agreement signed by the president is moodified by Congress, it wouldn’t be binding on the other countries that signed it *even if their legislatures already ratified it*, since they would have ratified something different. The only reason to oppose trade-promotion authority is if one opposes free trade, which is something that I thouhgt only Marxist Democrats did, certainly not FReepers.
Republicans have supported free trade; conservatives have always supported trade. There has always been a difference.
3rd party. I'll be voting straight 3rd party in 2016, unless Cruz gets the nod. If he does, I'll vote for him, and the rest will be 3rd party. I'm done with the GOP.
If the Fast track bill passes then the USA is over.
the Senate needs to vote no on cloture to stop this bill.
Fast track reduces the 66% needed to pass treaties to 50% . And no amendments can be added with fast track . Treaties override U.S. laws and the Constitution. Obama can then flood the USA with hundreds of millions of 3rd world immigrants.
Senators have not put up resistance to Obama here nor have they informed the public on this evil scheme. If this bill passes and it looks like it will then ALL Senators are to blame as well as Obama too.
Funny that many here are more worried as to how Cruz voting on this bill will make Cruz look not how this bill will destroy the United States of America.
Maybe if you paid a little more attention you’d see there is not a single part of this fiasco that isn’t bad, corrupt, UnAmerican and illegal/unconstitutional.
Another freeper said it best. We are a nation, not a market. And if you want to toss MANY aspects of what used to be law, constitutional separation of powers and more to get a bastardized agreement, using Reagan’s name to do it no less, your priorities are well and truly screwed up.
If Scott Walker or Ted Cruz is elected president and has to fill three Supreme Court vacancies (including Ginsburg and Kennedy), Ron Johnson will support such president’s conservative nominees, while Russ Feingold not only would vote against them but would do everything possible to sink their nomination.
Ron Johnson has a career American Conservative Union rating of 98 (i.e., only 2 points below Ted Cruz’s perfect 100, but you’d be willing to throw away the possibility of finally getting a conservative majority in SCOTUS just because Ron Johnson cast a couple of votes that you didn’t like? Talk about retarded.
I’m completely willing to toss people that can’t be trusted. I am totally fine with the whole thing going to hell rather than having/living in a liberal run country. Which is the same thing.
See Alexander Hamilton and Co. for why.
Yep, I’ve gotten the “even Breitbart said ‘if you don’t stand with us you’re working against us’” nonsense when I said I would not vote for Rick Scott this past election after he signed the law that allows illegals to qualify for in-state tuition rates. Pfft. We see over and over and over again what Republicans do when we vote for them.
“And if you want to toss MANY aspects of what used to be law, constitutional separation of powers and more to get a bastardized agreement ....”
What the hell are you talking about? Trade-promotion authority *prevents* “bastardized agreements” by ensuring that any agreement signed by a president during the term of the law (which will last far longer than Obama’s remainign 20 months) will be subject to an up-or-down vote in Congress instead of an endless amendment process that would bastardize the agreement. It is an example of Congress exercising its power to regulate commenrce with foreign nations and is absolutely consistent with the Constitution. Go back to your Teamster propaganda.
Not GAFing what liberal freepers think of your decisions is the path to enlightenment. They are the evil within and should be treated with the respect their statements earn them. None.
People that vote for evil are themselves evil. If they offends them, I haZ a happy. There is a right and there is a wrong. Always was, always will be.
Yup. You GOP battered women syndrome voters might do well to accept the fact that if Cruz ain't the guy in 2016, we're gonna get Hitlery. And yes, I am ok with that, seeing as how that will only speed up what is headed our way. With the R's, it's still coming, because they are pretty much all liberals in sheeps clothing, but with the D's @ the helm for another 8 years, it'll just get here quicker, which is good, because I ain't getting any younger, and I want it to get here while I can still put up a fight. Anyone still willing to defend, fight and vote for the R's, just because SOMEHOW, they are "better" than the D's, is the problem.
“I am totally fine with the whole thing going to hell rather than having/living in a liberal run country”
If a Senator Feingold blocks a PResident Walker or Cruz from naming three conservatives to the Supreme Court, it would have been that would have turned America into a liberal-run country. You are either a useful idiot for liberals or a liberal yourself (and given your opposition to free trade, it sure sounds like it is the latter).
Ron Johnson: 98 career ACU rating
Norm Lenhart: 98 IQ (at best)
You need to go back to the basics. Why don’t you learn what this is about before spouting off? EVERY thing in this is a cluster. You want a house built on sand, distortions, illegal activity and usurpation. All the ‘right’ in it is being corrupted. THATS what ‘the hell’ I’m talking about.
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.