Why Ted Cruz is Right on TPA

Reclaim DC ^ | May 22, 2015 | David Serenda

[SoConPubbie]

It has been said that politics makes strange bedfellows. Well, there is no finer example of that statement than the recent votes on the Trade Promotion Authority. Free trade has long been advanced by conservatives who understand the need to expand our markets beyond our borders. On the other side stands the democrats and the radical left who fear competition and doubt America’s exceptionalism. Yesterday, the Senate cleared the 60 vote hurdle to bring the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) up for a vote. I for one, welcome President Obama to the side of common sense solutions, to help solve the economic disaster that his domestic policies have created. I only wish that he would use that common sense more often.

 

If you have listened to Ted Cruz speak on the economy, you will hear him promote the idea of free trade. One of the many reasons I support Ted Cruz for President is his common sense solutions to solve America’s economic problems. America has experienced a trade deficit for as long as I can remember. A large part of that stems from poorly negotiated trade deals in the past, high tariffs being placed on American products by foreign governments, and currency manipulation. The TPA is a step in the right direction to resolve many of the trade imbalance issues and will provide a set of strict guidelines for negotiations.

 

What exactly is TPA or fast track? I am glad you’ve asked. Trade Promotion Authority, TPA, and Fast Track all refer to the same piece of legislation. First, it is important to note that TPA is not a trade agreement in and of itself, but rather Congress establishing a set of requirements that the President must follow in every trade deal he submits through the TPA “fast track” legislation. By Congress authorizing this legislation they are able to have a part in the terms of the negotiations that take place with foreign governments. In addition to controlling the outline of any trade deal, they are able to force the President to share with them the details of any trade deals as he is negotiating. There are many opportunities for Congress to read and be involved in these negotiations if they really had a desire. There is also a requirement for public summaries to be released throughout the process of the negotiations. Once the trade agreement is completed it must be made available to the public before Congress is able to vote on it.

 

Without the TPA the President is able to negotiate any trade deal without any input from Congress or the American people. Even more alarming the President has the authority to conduct these negotiations in secret and only make them public when he submits them to Congress for approval. Once in Congress the process of buying votes and adding poison pills to the legislation corrupts the entire process. If we know anything about Washington, it is that its corruption runs deeper than the oceans. For these reasons previous Congress, both democratic and republican, have authorized “fast track” legislation.

 

As with anything in politics there are groups who, in an effort to promote their ideology of isolationism, will put out misinformation in order to derail legislation that they oppose. As with anything you read or hear about legislation coming out of Washington, familiarize yourself with not only the facts of the legislation, but any potential bias or agenda the author may be hiding.

 

[Timber Rattler]

I guess you have never heard of the legal term “enabling legislation.”

[Gaffer]

Trust us. Trust a Senate run by a quisling majority leader and a bunch of RINOs.

Cruz is my pick! I can’t emphasize that enough, even with this latest TPA thing. But I am not about to trust McConnell on “not negotiated yet.”

Publish the entire legislation or go home. Trade isn’t something only quisling RINO and Democrat Senators should be aware of, regardless of Cruz’ intentions.

[Erik Latranyi]

The Constitution says these type of deals should require advise and consent by a supermajority in the Senate.

This takes away advise and the supermajority.

[Erik Latranyi]

So, because trade deals were difficult to get passed, Congress slowly eroded the process required to pass a trade deal until, today, not one trade deal loses the popular vote in the Senate.

This is the nuclear option applied to trade deals.

If the Founders wanted everything to be approved by simple majorities, they would not have given us a Representative Republic.....they would have given us a simple democracy.

[Timber Rattler]

If the Senate is supposed to vote on any trade treaty negotiated by the President, how is this bunk?

I guess you missed Hatch's little trick that he wrote into the bill requiring 60 votes to reject a "fast-track" treaty, which will never happen.

[Jane Long]

astroaddict
Since May 24, 2015

Welcome to FR.

Projection, name calling and snarkiness don’t go very far when trying to make your point.

btw...do you happen to work in any way/or are affiliated with the TPP? After lurking for 10 years, you decide to sign up three days ago - primarily to pipe up on this issue?

[Timber Rattler]

Senator Sessions needs to bone up on the constitution and treaty law.

So you know more about the constitution and treaty law than Jeff Sessions?

Seriously?

[ek_hornbeck]

Then you are dooming our economy and killing off jobs.

The US had protective tariffs during much of the 19th and early 20th century up until Woodrow Wilson. According to you, that should have "doomed" our economy and caused mass unemployment. Instead, the US had the fastest growing economy in the world during that period.

[Timber Rattler]

Please stop repeating lies.

Welcome to Free Republic, noob.

[SoConPubbie]

So you know more about the constitution and treaty law than Jeff Sessions?

Try reading what I posted, besides that comment, and find the holes in the logic and/or facts posted.

Don't take the easy way out.

[Lucky9teen]

Putting Congress in Charge on Trade

‘Fast track’ authority will give lawmakers more say over agreements that are vital for economic growth.
By Paul Ryan And Ted Cruz

[SoConPubbie]

The US had protective tariffs during much of the 19th and early 20th century up until Woodrow Wilson. According to you, that should have "doomed" our economy and caused mass unemployment. Instead, the US had the fastest growing economy in the world during that period.

Is anything about our economy now, even marginally related to the economy in the 19th and early 20th century?

[Timber Rattler]

‘Fast track’ authority will give lawmakers more say over agreements that are vital for economic growth.

And we all know that this is complete and utter bullcrap under the Obama Regime.

[skeeter]

I'd like to know what specific problem this bill corrects.

Speeding up trade legislation is not a problem that needs addressing, BTW.

[Gaffer]

Frankly, I’m just not disposed nowadays to give lawmakers any more say so over anything, really.

The “By Paul Ryan and Ted Cruz” is supposed to mean something?

I remember Ryan’s capitulation budget last term where my own quisling Congressman voted along with John Lewis and Hank Johnson for it. I’m supposed to laud his take on TPA?

As for Cruz. He is my first and likely only choice. That doesn’t mean I have to lock step in behind him on everything he does. I invite you to peruse.

http://truthinmedia.com/ted-cruzs-tpa-amendment-wont-stop-obamatrades-backdoor-amnesty/

[Jane Long]

Senator Sessions needs to bone up on the constitution and treaty law.

---

I’ve contacted Sen Sessions office and asked them to review this article...and the points you listed (again, for me ;).

It’s interesting that this article’s linked website is a Ted Cruz donation site. Not saying that’s good or bad, but just making note.

[ek_hornbeck]

The point is that this refutes the "free trade" dogma that tariffs and other forms of trade protection cripple a nation's economy.

One aspect of today's economy which does resemble that of the 19th century, and the motives of 19th century "protectionists," is that in the absence of tariffs, cheaper foreign labor and goods lead to a systematic de-industrialization of America. Then it meant regressing back to an economy based solely on agriculture and natural resources, today it means having little more than a service sector.

[Jane Long]

As for Cruz. He is my first and likely only choice. That doesn’t mean I have to lock step in behind him on everything he does.

---

As am I. I’ve supported my Sen Cruz since he first ran for Senator. I am trying to make sense of this TPP agreement and why Sen Cruz would back something that 0bama wants...or, why Sen Cruz would team up with Lyin’ Paul Ryan to back said agreement or ANYTHING (per your excellent reminder about Ryan).

[ek_hornbeck]

There will be no free trade deal enacted where the details aren't known.

Since TPP gives Obama fast track authority, he will have no reason to provide the details of the trade deal he negotiates until after the fact. Even if you support free trade (or rather, unilateral free trade agreements at our end), you ought to oppose this because it gives Obama executive authority to sign any deal he wants without any oversight.