Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Extreme secrecy eroding support for Obama's trade pact (Classified briefings in basement)
politico.com ^ | 5/4/15 | Edward-Isaac Dovere

Posted on 05/04/2015 5:02:27 AM PDT by cotton1706

If you want to hear the details of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal the Obama administration is hoping to pass, you’ve got to be a member of Congress, and you’ve got to go to classified briefings and leave your staff and cellphone at the door.

If you’re a member who wants to read the text, you’ve got to go to a room in the basement of the Capitol Visitor Center and be handed it one section at a time, watched over as you read, and forced to hand over any notes you make before leaving.

And no matter what, you can’t discuss the details of what you’ve read.

“It’s like being in kindergarten,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who’s become the leader of the opposition to President Barack Obama’s trade agenda. “You give back the toys at the end.”

For those out to sink Obama’s free trade push, highlighting the lack of public information is becoming central to their opposition strategy: The White House isn’t even telling Congress what it’s asking for, they say, or what it’s already promised foreign governments.

The White House has been coordinating an administration-wide lobbying effort that’s included phone calls and briefings from Secretary of State John Kerry, Labor Secretary Tom Perez, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker and others. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz has been working members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro has been talking to members of his home state Texas delegation.

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections; US: Connecticut; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: 2016election; castro; connecticut; election2016; elections; ernestmoniz; freetrade; gatt; hillaryclinton; hitlery; jacklew; johnboehner; johnkerry; juliancastro; nafta; ohio; pennypritzker; rosadelauro; speakerboehner; speakerjohnboehner; tomperez; tomvilsack; tpp
If I were a representative, these types of games would make me an automatic NO on the pending legislation.

The Congress is a PUBLIC institution, and trade is not a National Security issue, where secrecy is warranted.

JUST WHAT THE HELL IS IN THIS DEAL THAT THE DEMOCRATS AND BOEHNER ARE PUSHING??

1 posted on 05/04/2015 5:02:27 AM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Useless complicit EXEMPT RINO:
"The Constitution is now as dead as the GOP, My Master, My beloved King."

2 posted on 05/04/2015 5:05:35 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("When a crime is unpunished, the world is unbalanced.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

I agree with you.


3 posted on 05/04/2015 5:06:58 AM PDT by samtheman ( BushClinton. The Yesterday Candidate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Will Sandy Burglar please pick up the white courtesy phone ...
Sandy Burglar ...


4 posted on 05/04/2015 5:07:59 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (I love it when we're Cruz'in together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

If Boehner’s in favor of it, huge profits for his corporate paymasters.


5 posted on 05/04/2015 5:10:42 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grania; cotton1706
"huge profits for his corporate paymasters"

It all boils down to protections for the investors(corporate paymasters) versus protections for labor, environment, and social welfare.

And then there is the matter of dispute resolution, which is done by the panel, not the courts, and the courts have to honor the panel's decision, which means the trade agreement regulations trump national regulatory law.

So the conflict originates with NAFTA where the prez had fast track authority and negotiated the deal in secrecy, after which the Congress could only vote up or down and had no authority to change the agreement.

Because of that problem with NAFTA, in all subsequent trade deals, the Prez has tried to be more transparent in his negotiations on an FTA, which allows Congress to know what is in the FTA prior to the Prez completing the agreement, which allows the Congress some input.

6 posted on 05/04/2015 5:32:44 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

7 posted on 05/04/2015 5:33:36 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

Article VII of the US Constitution

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.


In 1787 - 1788, following the Constitutional Convention, supporters of the Constitution began the ratification campaign in a few states and then moved on to the more difficult ones.


8 posted on 05/04/2015 5:50:25 AM PDT by SvenMagnussen (1983 ... the year Obama became a naturalized U.S. citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Unlimited immigration in one simple Trade Agreement. If Hussein gets this deal from Congress and completes the Agreement in, say, the next two months we will likely have many millions of new now legal immigrants flooding the country by the end of the year and many millions more instant and voting Democrat citizens before November next year. McConnell will be handing the Democrats total control of the nation that will last until complete economic collapse and invasion. After the Democrats have acquired the Total Democrat State they will try to rebuild the military in order to fend off the inevitable attacks from the likes of Russia and Iran and China but they will be able only to rebuild a minimal amount before they run up against the lack of productivity of their perfect society that continues in decline post collapse. It will be like an accelerated last 20 years of the USSR. The Soviets did not have to face an enemy that wanted to physically destroy Russia or occupy it to strip its natural resources. America faces such enemies.


9 posted on 05/04/2015 5:58:31 AM PDT by arthurus (it's true!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

Free mobility of labor.


10 posted on 05/04/2015 5:59:42 AM PDT by arthurus (it's true!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

“If you want to hear the details of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal the Obama administration is hoping to pass, you’ve got to be a member of Congress, and you’ve got to go to classified briefings and leave your staff and cellphone at the door. If you’re a member who wants to read the text, you’ve got to go to a room in the basement of the Capitol Visitor Center and be handed it one section at a time, watched over as you read, and forced to hand over any notes you make before leaving. And no matter what, you can’t discuss the details of what you’ve read.”

Regardless of the contents, that process of secrecy alone would prompt me to fight this deal tooth and nail if I were in Congress.

We’ll see how many lapdogs go along with the None on this.


11 posted on 05/04/2015 6:05:55 AM PDT by SharpRightTurn (White, black, and red all over--America's affirmative action, metrosexual president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

will someone please explain to me why they would have higher security for the details of a trade deal, already available to foreign governments, then we have for classified communications within the state department?


12 posted on 05/04/2015 6:14:28 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sten
Because, if the commons found out all the details now, they would have more time and power to amount a defense against it. Thus, more security and less transparency.

All the outsourcing, immigration, and trade agreements in the world will not save the GOP in the end. The GOP cares not about 'populist'[anti illegals, 'free' trade skeptics] in the GOP.

13 posted on 05/04/2015 6:47:04 AM PDT by Theoria (I should never have surrendered. I should have fought until I was the last man alive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: arthurus; grania; cotton1706
No set asides. It is very common in the US for a certain dollar amount of contracts to be set aside for women and minorities.

But it is most likely under an FTA no set asides are allowed.

We call these things Free Trade Agreement because the eliminate tariffs or harmonize tariffs and harmonizing makes the tariffs self canceling.

But they are really Investor State Trade Agreements. And since the disputes are settled by the arbitration panels, the arbitration panels, over time, are making rulings which develops a body of law(by precedent) which becomes known as Investor State Law.

Do a Google Search of "Investor State Trade Agreement" and/or "Investor State Law"

The premise of this is that an investor can make a deal with the state in which the investor is protected from future taxes by the state.

But the state may try to get around this by implementing regulations/protections for labor, environment, or social welfare. These would be taxes masquerading as regulations. So the investor has to be protected from these by investor protections. In the case of NAFTA, the investor protections were found in Chapter 11.

Some of the big cases that came out of NAFTA were MetalClad, Methenex, and the Canadian Softwoods dispute in which the Canadian Provincial govts were subsidizing their timber industry and workers with low stumpage fees to the detriment of US timber companies.

But, when you implement these investor protections, there is always the possibility that labor or environment will get a bad deal.

Which is why the unions are bashing Obama over the TPP. They say TPP is going to be worse than NAFTA or CAFTA.

14 posted on 05/04/2015 6:47:28 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

Well, John Boner and the RINOs are for the Trade Agreement. They apparently don’t care that it gives Obama Carte Blanche to deal with foreign Governments and Congress canNOT make changes to any agreement the President makes. I think the Speaker is sneaking into Obama’s bed at night when Michelle is away.


15 posted on 05/04/2015 8:48:35 AM PDT by Din Maker (Anyone considering Gov. Susana Martinez of NM for VP in 2016?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sten

Ref. your Post #12: Because they are showing this Trade Agreement to Congress critters on the “down-low”. Why? Because the Obama Administration does NOT want them to know what kind of deals he’s made; he just wants the authority to negotiate all Trade Agreements. Once that authority is given him, by law, Congress canNOT amend or make any changes to it. Obozo will have Carte Blanche. And, guess what? John Boner and the RINOs are ready to sign on. It’s mostly DemocRATS opposing giving the POTUS that kind of power and authority; because DemocRATS and the Unions hate “free trade”.


16 posted on 05/04/2015 8:54:10 AM PDT by Din Maker (Anyone considering Gov. Susana Martinez of NM for VP in 2016?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson