Posted on tedcruz.org:
Does TPA give up the Senate’s treaty power?
No. Under the Constitution, there are two ways to make binding law: (1) through a treaty, ratified by two-thirds of the Senate, or (2) through legislation passed by a majority of both Houses of Congress. TPA employs the second constitutional path, as trade bills always have done. It has long been recognized that the Constitution’s Origination Clause applies to trade bills, requiring the House of Representatives’ involvement.
Tariffs are taxes. Hence, the House needs to be involved.
More boilerplate talking points from TedCruz.org.
Regardless of what is in a treaty, if it is an international agreement that binds the United States, then it needs 2/3 of the Senate to agree on it.
Just because a treaty mentions taxes and tariffs does not make it something other than a treaty.
All the other nations in this agreement have to go through their own processes to ratify this as a treaty and those countries all refer to this as a “treaty.”
At least one commentator called this a “MEGA-TREATY”.
If Congress doesn’t want to abide by the 2/3 requirement, then they should amend the constitution rather than redefine the word “treaty.” Calling TPP anything other than a Mega Treaty is dishonest.
Don’t tell this to those people who think they understand the Constitution better than the Former Solicitor General of TX.
Don’t post stuff like this...
Those “Constitutional scholars”, aka, agenda driven trolls, will say you are wrong and they are right.