Posted on 01/03/2017 5:38:04 PM PST by HarleyD
House Democrats joined Big Labor on Tuesday in voicing support for Donald Trump's push to renegotiate NAFTA and other trade deals -- while also vowing to hold the incoming Republican president to that campaign promise.
“Trump said he wants to fight for trade deals that put American workers first, and so do we,” said Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio. “We are going to give very strong support for rewriting NAFTA. The momentum for a new direction is very, very clear and growing.”
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Hey guys. This is really important to me. As soon as I can get my cabinet confirmed I will get right on it.
Trumka and Trump. The Union is struggling with cognitive disonance. This is all so much fun to watch. Democrats are coming apart at the seams. Make mine Orville Redenbacher please. Lots of butter.
And best make sure that SCOTUS is confirmed as well, wouldn’t want someone playing games with a shorthanded court.
That is what is called “winning!”
That Spock photo is hilarious!
This is a 9.3 magnitude earthquake in Washington.
Even our honest, diligent and trustworthy Republicans in Congress are shocked by this announcement.
It’s a political realignment.
Ol' Obie from Nairobi's probably going to chit himself before this is all over.
Oh yeah, heard this on local talk from a local Democrat as they scramble to spin like crazy.
“our policies are not the problem, we just did a poor job of communicating them”
ROTFLMAO!
Way to lie through your teeth Dem. Didn’t expect any less.
We should not forget that NAFTA passed in late 1993 with Slick Willie in the WH, and with support from almost all Republicans in Congress and opposition from almost all Dims.
I’m sure many Dims will support changes in trade agreements. Trump and Republicans who are with him should refrain from allowing Dims to use support for trade deal changes for any backing off from other part of Trump’s agenda.
Also, as I recall, Al Gore cast the tie-breaker for NAFTA in the Senate.
NAFTA was ratified with 132 GOP votes plus 102 dem votes in the House(234-200) and 34 GOP votes plus 27 dem votes in the Senate(61-38).
But, in 1992, after GHW Bush signed, sealed, and delivered the NAFTA agreement, there were not enough votes in Congress for ratification.
Because, most dems and many GOPers thought that the investor protections were overly extensive while the protections for labor and environment were lacking.
Rather than kill NAFTA, congress agreed to let incoming Clinton negotiate the side agreements to NAFTA that would contain the protections for labor and environment. These side agreements were: North American Agreement on Labor and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation.
Congress would ratify all three agreements, and Clinton would sign the legislation.
But, the side agreements turned out to be toothless because the arbitration panel said that they were not part of the NAFTA document.
Ever since, the dems, unions, and enviros have been agitating to renegotiate NAFTA and put the labor and enviro protections into NAFTA.
Only partially inaccurate. There was more Dim support for NAFTA than I recalled. With the majorities enjoyed by the Dims in 1993 (256 to 175 and 1 Ind. in the House, and 56-44 the Senate), it still required a huge vote from the Republicans to win in the House to achieve the simple majorities required. Republicans voted 78% Yea in the House and 77% Yea in the Senate.
The Dims voted against NAFTA 28-27 in the Senate and 156-102 in the House. It would have been difficult to pass the bill with any alignment other than a Dim president and huge Republican support in Congress. Without the Dim president, Dim support for NAFTA would have been even less.
I recall how Duncan Hunter, Sr., Helen Bennett and a very few others offered the only Republican opposition in the House, and how Bob Michel said Hunter was living in a bygone era. Also, Newt Gingrich was a big supporter in his role as Republican Whip. Because of that, I was not disappointed that Newt did not land a major role in the Trump administration.
Scanning the vote from 1993, one can see many of the same globalists voting Yea who've given up more bad trade deals and almost open borders since. Though the word "globalist" was not in such common use then.
Thanks for the clarification.
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.