Posted on 06/22/2015 7:21:56 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
I would need to think it out more, but it sounds like TPA is like buying a car. The president is the salesman, and congress is the dealership. The dealership has worked with the salesman up front how far he can negotiate a deal. (The “Well I don’t know - let me check with my manager” is a ploy). And if the salesman works within those previously set parameters - the dealership okays the deal.
But, without TPA, it would be like me (the foreign country) finally, after three hours of negotiating with the salesman, come to an agreement. And then after another two hours he comes back with the final contract to sign. But the dealership has changed it all. “Okay - I know you wanted blue, but we have all sorts of red cars that aren’t selling, so you have to buy red. And they said no floor mats, and only the V6, not the V8.”
Oh - and they aren’t the only Chevy dealer in town.
That’s why I’m here, ya old fart!
No, I did know what was going on, but it’s gotten super confusing. So he voted yes on TPA? But TPP hasn’t gone to vote?
The following has more on what Meese had to say about it - in 2001!
However, conservatives committed to upholding the Constitution and protecting American sovereignty may take heart from the words of no less an authority than Edwin Meese, who served as President Ronald Reagan’s Attorney General.
In a legal memorandum published in 2001 by the Heritage Foundation, Meese and his colleague Todd F. Gaziano explained “Why Trade Promotion Authority is Constitutional.” Excerpts:
Some critics of TPA have suggested that it might compromise national sovereignty and may actually be unconstitutional…
The concern some lawmakers have expressed, that TPA would somehow diminish American sovereignty, is misplaced. If anything, the opposite is true…
Congress has extended TPA to the previous five U.S. Presidents, and such authority is granted by most other nations to their heads of state. Without TPA, the President is denied an equal footing when he attempts to negotiate trade agreements on behalf of America.
It is extremely difficult for any U.S. President to negotiate significant trade deals if he cannot assure other nations that Congress will refrain from adding numerous amendments and conditions that must then be taken back to the negotiating table…
The only action that will weaken overall U.S. sovereignty is for Congress to hobble the President’s ability to negotiate trade deals with other nations by denying him enhanced trade promotion authority.
While the Constitution gives Congress authority to regulate international trade, it gives the president authority to negotiate with foreign governments. TPA builds on this constitutional partnership by tasking Congress to set negotiating objectives and requiring the executive branch to consult extensively with Congress during negotiations.
Above all, to oppose TPA is to support the notion that foreign markets should remain closed to U.S. exports. To reject TPA is to accept a playing field skewed against American workers and companies.
To boost economic growth and create American jobs, it’s time for Congress to renew TPA and seize the benefits of a robust international trade agenda.
No, he hasn't. Even once.
“If that’s not clear enough for you, then I don’t know what is.”
How about the following, very clear comment, from McConnell:
“We’re in active discussion on TPA,” said McConnell, adding, “It’s an enormous grant of power, obviously, from a Republican Congress to a Democratic president, but that’s how much we believe in trade as an important part of America’s economy.”
Huffingtonpost.com 1/07/2015
Would you care to comment on this? No other Cruz supporter will acknowledge it. It seems clear enough for me. What kind of person would willingly trust Obama with an enormous grant of power but a complete idiot, or traitor. Would you, yourself, vote to transfer to Obama an enormous grant of power? Why would you okay that for Cruz?
The idiots who are going to vote for the GOP version of Bernie Sanders (Trump) aren’t going to waste time with no stinking facts.
They want someone who is going to talk tough even if he will end up screwing them.
“Hundreds of Thosands of foreign workers to steal the Hi-Tech jobs Americans have worked and studied so long and hard to reach”
It is easy to prove that. Basic Math.
IN 1990 it started with 65,OOO FORIGN WORKERS taking Hi Tech jobs
THAT IS 65000 HI TECH JOBS AMERICANS COULD NOT HAVE, EXCLUDED FROM, STOLEN FROM THEM, IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY....65 THOUSAND!
Its called subtraction.
In a Country with 300,000,000 people we couldn’t find 65000 Americans to fill those jobs?
Going on for TWENTY FIVE YEARS!
It called multiplication.
supporting H1B VISAS in the killing off of our brightest future for the profit of our darkest present.
Google..... h1b visas steal jobs
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.