Ted Cruz "Believe Again" Event at Drake University on Saturday June 27, 2015 in Des Moines, IowaPosted on 06/22/2015 7:21:56 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Ted Cruz "Believe Again" Event at Drake University on Saturday June 27, 2015 in Des Moines, Iowa
It’s time to break with the past. Break from the status quo. Break from the DC power brokers. It’s time to ‘Believe Again’.
Join Ted Cruz on Saturday June 27th in Des Moines to learn more. You do not want to miss this event.
Believe Again
Saturday June 27th, 2015
Doors Open at 9:45am
Program Starts at 11:00am
Drake University
Sheslow Auditorium
2507 University Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50311
A misguided (or misleading) opposition really has no idea what it’s talking about.
The current debate over Trade Promotion Authority proves, once again, that the classic description of the anti-globalization movement—as “largely the well-intentioned but ill-informed being led around by the ill-intentioned and well informed”—still holds true. Despite the tireless efforts of trade policy experts to explain why TPA and the U.S. trade agreements it’s intended to facilitate are, while imperfect, not a secret corporatist plot to usurp the U.S. Constitution and install global government, myths and half-truths continue to infect traditional and social media outlets.
Because these myths—originating with the same old anti-trade bedfellows that have been with us for decades—have duped a lot of good folks who are otherwise predisposed to support liberty and free markets (including some in Congress), and because the House of Representatives is poised to vote on TPA in the coming days, here is one last debunking of the top nine myths about TPA, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and U.S. free-trade agreements (FTAs) more broadly.
To save some time, you can skip to your favorite myth by clicking on the links below.
Myth 1: TPA and U.S. FTAs are unconstitutional and undemocratic!
Myth 2: TPA grants the president new and unlimited powers!
Myth 3: TPA sets legally binding congressional rules for U.S. trade negotiations!
Myth 4: Once TPA is approved, Congress will be powerless to stop TPP or other FTAs!
Myth 5: TPP is being negotiated via a dangerous and unprecedented level of secrecy!
Myth 6: FTAs, completed via TPA, undermine U.S. sovereignty!
Myth 7: TPP is a secret backdoor for a parade of horribles (and TPA lets that happen)!
Myth 8: FTAs (and free trade generally) benefit large corporations at the expense of working people!
There are legitimate (although not horrifying!) concerns about the contents of the final TPP deal, but it’s certainly not a harbinger of an economic or constitutional apocalypse. The American public should scrutinize the final agreement closely, but that won’t happen until TPA becomes law. For supporters of free markets, there’s no legitimate reason why it shouldn’t.
Ted Cruz will be a great POTUS.
He always appeals to the audiences because he is the voice of conservatives.
Nice review. Written in the Federalist by someone at Cato. Neither being high on the listing of Rat/Rino strongholds. Offering recent examples of how TPA haven't always produced rapid rubber stamping of trade deals under it.
Lets see if he still wants to bring in hundreds of thousands of foreign workers to steal the Hi-tech jobs Americans have worked and studied so long and hard to reach.
TPP = THEMOTHER of all NAFTAs
Hundreds of thousands of H1B visas stealing our best jobs from our most productive and brightest citizens and gifting them to foreign born, by the hundreds of thousands.
MANANA we will KNOW.
It's TPA and he is certain to vote AYE!
He needs $1b to make his dreams come true. He believes in the nation and he believes he will be a necessary contributor to it's future.
He needs K Street and Karl Rove.
Sen Trade Cruz.
Cant say it any better than that.
And those who developed those points are liars.
Just as those who promulgate and publish them.
I'm prepared to argue those points if you wish.
Totally false, as Watson and I explained last year:
FTAs embody unenforceable promises governments make to each other. Domestic governments—here, Congress—retain the sole authority to ignore those promises and violate international commitments, and they (unfortunately) do so frequently. Foreign governments cannot force their trading partners to comply with the terms of an FTA—the only extra-national consequence of a violation is that other parties to the agreement may abrogate their commitments in a commensurate amount (e.g., by raising tariffs on imports from the United States from levels that were lowered in the FTA). Moreover, every U.S. trade agreement permits the parties to act outside the agreed disciplines in the name of, among other things, national security, public health and safety, or environmental protection. Thus, the idea that TPA and FTAs violate U.S. sovereignty or regulatory autonomy is patently false.
These principles hold true for the TPP, including its dispute settlement and controversial “investor-state” provisions. Despite what Warren (and some media outlets) would like you to believe, there is nothing—absolutely nothing—that can force the United States to comply with an adverse dispute settlement ruling issued under the TPP or any other U.S. trade agreement. Period.
But, hey, if you don’t believe me, here’s Attorney General Meese again:
Future trade deals would not be unconstitutional, nor would they undermine U.S. sovereignty, if they contained an agreement to submit some disputes to an international tribunal for an initial determination. The United States will always have the ultimate say over what its domestic laws provide. No future agreement could grant an international organization the power to change U.S. laws.
A ruling by an international tribunal that calls a U.S. law into question would have no domestic effect unless Congress changes the law to comply with the ruling. If Congress rejects a ruling or fails to act, other countries might impose a trade sanction or tariff, but they are more likely to impose high tariffs now without any agreement. The fact remains that no international body or foreign government may change any American law. Moreover, Congress may override an entire agreement at any time by a simple statute. Nations also may withdraw from international agreements by executive action alone. That is one reason why such agreements do not interfere with the underlying sovereignty of each nation to chart its own course in the world. In short, the U.S. Constitution and any laws and treaties we enact in accordance thereto are the only supreme law of our land.
If that’s not clear enough for you, then I don’t know what is.
Do you understand that there is a difference between TPA and TPP.
Cruz has voted for TPA. He has yet to vote on TPP, which hasn't even been finalized yet. And he has made no commitment to vote for TPP.
Plus, it is a re-vote on TPA that is due tomorrow, not a vote on TPP.
Get your facts straight before engaging the thread, fer cryin' out loud.
Congress Directs Negotiating Objectives.
1. Without TPA the TPP and two others would be subject to 2/3 majority of the US Senate under Article II, Section II. Any minor hope of passage would require an open and honest process that BY NECESSITY would be completely tuned to the wishes of a super-majority of the US Senate.
2. Even thought the US Congress is "allowed" to make their "feelings" known, Congress has ABSOLUTELY NO INFLUENCE over what the POTUS objectives are. Why would POTUS CARE what some GOP Congressman from the Central Valley thinks about the deal favored by 293 persons (Combined, House and Senate) on the payroll of their political contributors?
POTUS can negotiate all and any thing, and it will be subject to only 50% +1 of both Houses of Congress.
Your turn.
Thanks, very interesting! Where or who is that from? Link? Thank you!!
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.