Posted on 06/23/2015 4:29:02 AM PDT by Leto
As a general matter, I agree (as did Ronald Reagan) that free trade is good for America; when we open up foreign markets, it helps American farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers. But TPA in this Congress has become enmeshed in corrupt Washington backroom deal-making, along with serious concerns that it would open up the potential for sweeping changes in our laws that trade agreements typically do not include. Since the Senate first voted on TPA, there have been two material changes. First, WikiLeaks subsequently revealed new troubling information regarding the Trade in Services Agreement, or TiSA, one of the trade deals being negotiated by Obama. Despite the administration’s public assurances that it was not negotiating on immigration, several chapters of the TiSA draft posted online explicitly contained potential changes in federal immigration law. TPA would cover TiSA, and therefore these changes would presumably be subject to be fast-track. When TPA last came up for a vote, both Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)80% and I introduced amendments that would have barred fast-track treatment for any trade agreement that attempted to impact immigration law. Two other Republican senators objected, and we were both denied votes on our amendments. Instead, the House inserted substantially weaker language in related legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I’ve been doing searches for the last4 days, expecting Cruz to change his vote. Watching Boehner is what made me suspect a change was coming.
I agree. Many are too quick to pass judgement. But, that’s they’re right.
However, the only person that will change my mind is Cruz and there is still time to decide for myself.
I hope you understand I am referring to the individual who is constantly bashing Cruz.
He gets really tiresome.
Bingo!
Many people on this thread are attacking the wrong targets.
Wait for the double top secret covert genius strategy reason his supporters had to wait until he voted to figure out what he was for.
Dittos here.
> “Wait....I thought Sen Ron Johnson (WI) had proposed that as an amendment, but that it did not pass. So, they did NOT give up their two-thirds power.”
You’re missing a step. If Congress votes by simple majority to kill the Iran Deal, then Obama vetoes forcing the 2/3’s requirement.
> “I can’t see Sen Sessions offering a vote on something that would force a supermajority to overturn the deal.”
That’s the point. He did not vote to force a supermajority but because of procedural matters he effectively joined an effort that will now take a supermajority to stop.
I’m not saying that Senator Sessions is not a patriot; he is. I am saying that the politics is murky and convoluted. You should know that by now. What I do expect with high confidence that in the days ahead Ted Cruz will articulate more of the rational or irrational aspects on all this confusion which is why I like him so much.
And, if the 2nd round, which he voted against, was ‘cause he finally found out what was in it....Why did he vote for something he (supposedly) had ‘no idea’ of the details (IE: voting w/out reading)?
Either way, something stinks in Denmark....except to the Cruz bots I suspect.
Well anybody can make a mistake. Rick Perry has repeatedly said he made a mistake with the Gardisil deal. So I take him at his word. Ted Cruz has apparently woken up and realized what a mistake TPA is. Even though its going to be passed I am happy to see he voted no.
I have not totally written Cruz off. IMO the only two people who have the force of personality to make any significant changes in this country are Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. I think they are the only ones who can win in a general election with Hillary Clinton.
I’ve seen trick this before...A million times.
It’s safe for him to oppose it as it’s going to pass anyway.
I agree that Cruz changed his mind here, once he realized he was being lied to and that things were added (and not added) to the TPA bill, that he does not agree with. I’m glad to see he is coming out and standing for what is right, now matter how the naysayers want to spin it and try and make it seem like he’s a flip-flopper. But the fact is, Ted Cruz didn’t change...the bill did.
Ted Cruz is a very intelligent, honest man with integrity. There has been nothing that I have seen in his career, or since he came on the scene as a Senator, to make me believe otherwise. He genuinely appears to be a stand up, trustworthy man, standing on principles and American values, doing what he he can to uphold our Constitution and be a good representative for the people. He’s a straight shooter and isn’t afraid to speak boldly and without political correctness, but does so with class.
That said, I wonder...if Cruz hadn’t made his stand on TPA, and explained why he was supporting it, as many times and as thoroughly as he did, meaning....if the discussion about TPA and TPP hadn’t been made so prevalent, would people really understand the difference between TPP, TPA and TIPA, etc? Would there be less informed people about what it is and what it entails and the difference between the bills?
Not saying that’s why he voted nay..., but I look at it as an opportunity, for people to get informed and educated, that might have been missed had he just voted nay.
This is the reason....
It’s safe for him to oppose it as it’s going to pass anyway.
I'm glad to hear that.
I think we’re in for an exciting primary season! It will be interesting - and entertaining - to see how it all unfolds.
It’s safe for him to oppose it as it’s going to pass anyway.
Just the fact his supporters can not figure this out speaks volumes.
Why did Rand block Cruz amendments to TPA and Mitch McConnell then pulled all this double handed deal making “governing”? Didn’t Rand support Mitch’s re-election?
> “You’re delusional. The three major trade agreements near completion have been in negotiations for six years or more. Nothing is going to change what has been largely already negotiated in secret.”
So when these trade deals are sent to President Cruz for signature, he’s going to rubber stamp them? Who is delusional?
> “And you have no clue what trade deals Cruz would or would not support based on his flip/flopping and triple talking on issues of trade and immigration.”
Nonsense! I have more than a clue. Ted Cruz is going to allow for the excess of oil glut in the USA to be exported. And he going to allow the excess in the enormous surplus of NG to be exported as LNG. And there are dozens of other export categories that Ted Cruz is going to promote and approve to create millions of secure high-paying jobs for Americans.
> “And really cheap shots trying to discredit Sessions on issues he has been the strongest on for years. Supporters like you do Cruz no good.”
If it’s a such a cheap shot, then answer the question:
WHY DID SENATOR SESSIONS VOTE ‘Y-E-S’ ON THE ‘S-E-C-R-E-T’ Iran deal.
The point is you can’t have it both ways. If you’re going to call Ted Cruz a traitor, you’re going to have call Senator Sessions one also. And both of them are not. What you lack are the facts and experience, yet you try to chime in with your foolishness. Shame on you.
No sentient American,
with the country raped by traitor Obama and his agenda,
will ever elect another SECRECY-loving, Tyranny-loving,
Obama-supporting, two faced impostor like Toast’ed Cruz.
So, selling out America on these ‘trade’ deals are NOT equal to Jeb/etc. selling out America re: illegals??
Or is only the matter ‘worse’ because the 1st has the name Cruz attached to it?
As it’s been said “At this point, what difference....’, eh?
I’m not tied to one candidate or another...it’s WAY too soon; but, it’s good to see just how much the politics and $$ will sway the candidates, and I WILL use that in my decision process as well.
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.