As you can see, these 'agreements' would have been considered treaties by the Founders.
So, what is meant by a “treaty” as expressed by our Founders?In Federalist No. 64 Jay defines a treaty as a “bargain” . He writes:
”These gentlemen would do well to reflect that a treaty is only another name for a bargain, and that it would be impossible to find a nation who would make any bargain with us, which should be binding on them ABSOLUTELY, but on us only so long and so far as we may think proper to be bound by it.”
And in Federalist No. 75 Hamilton tells us with reference to a treaty, Its objects are CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law…”
Finally, In Federalist No. 22 Hamilton talks about “a treaty of commerce” as follows:
”A nation, with which we might have a treaty of commerce, could with much greater facility prevent our forming a connection with her competitor in trade, though such a connection should be ever so beneficial to ourselves.”
The irrefutable fact is, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Free Trade Agreement falls within the meaning of a treaty as the word was used and understood by our founding fathers, and as such, requires a two thirds vote to become an enforceable contract, or bargain with the nations involved.
So why do the proponents of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Free Trade Agreement, and this includes the snakes at the Cato Institute, pretend it is not a treaty? The obvious answer is, to avoid having to bribe a two thirds vote to accomplish their evil doings!
And if you think bribery is not taking place on this issue, here is the evidence that members of our Senate have sold their vote!
See:Corporations shell out $1.2mn in Senate contributions to fast-track TPP
“What the documents showed was that out of a total of nearly $1.2 million given, an average of $17,000 was donated to each of the 65 “yes” votes. Republicans received an average of $19,000 and Democrats received $9,700.
“It’s a rare thing for members of Congress to go against the money these days,” Mansur Gidfar, spokesman for the anti-corruption group Represent.Us, told the Guardian. “They know exactly which special interests they need to keep happy if they want to fund their re-election campaigns or secure a future job as a lobbyist.”
And, here is a list of dirt bag traitorous Republican Senators who voted to circumvent our representative system of government and allow the president to usurp Congress' legislative functions:
Alexander, Tenn.; Ayotte, N.H.; Barrasso, Wyo.; Blunt, Mo.; Boozman, Ark.; Burr, N.C.; Capito, W.V.; Cassidy, La.; Coats, Ind.; Cochran, Miss.; Corker, Tenn.; Cornyn, Texas; Cotton, Ark.; Crapo, Idaho; Cruz, Texas; Daines, Mont.; Ernst, Iowa; Fischer, Neb.; Flake, Ariz.; Gardner, Colo.; Graham, S.C.; Grassley, Iowa; Hatch, Utah; Heller, Nev.; Hoeven, N.D.; Inhofe, Okla.; Isakson, Ga.; Johnson, Wis.; Kirk, Ill.; Lankford, Okla.; McCain, Ariz.; McConnell, Ky.; Moran, Kan.; Murkowski, Alaska; Perdue, Ga.; Portman, Ohio; Risch, Idaho; Roberts, Kan.; Rounds, S.D.; Rubio, Fla.; Sasse, Neb.; Scott, S.C.; Sullivan, Alaska; Thune, S.D.; Tillis, N.C.; Toomey, Pa.; Vitter, La.; Wicker, Miss.
You are right. It is a lot cheaper and easier to bribe half the Senators than it is to bribe 2/3 of them.
BTW thanks for the link. I hadn't read that stuff before, but the founders obviously agree with me and disagree with Ted.
”A nation, with which we might have a treaty of commerce, could with much greater facility prevent our forming a connection with her competitor in trade, though such a connection should be ever so beneficial to ourselves.”
So, Mr. Hamilton was a rabid free-trader.