“Cruz’s original support for the TPA was probably an error considering the current President, and what kind of trade deals he’d look to implement.”
From what I understand, the TPA gives the president a frame of reference for what Congress will agree to in negotiations with a foreign government regarding trade. So then the President can make an agreement within that framework, with both him and the foreign government knowing that it will pass. It has been around for 80 years iirc in some form or another.
The trouble is, obama will probably just go beyond the agreed upon framework, and then blame and/or ignore Congress. This already happened with Cruz’s amendment to the Corker Bill, which called for a 60(?) day review of all of material regarding the deal with Iran. He knew obama wouldn’t submit it all in time (obama didn’t), but then when Cruz used that to tell congress not to vote for the deal as it broke the law (the 60 day review), Congress ignored the law, and made the deal regardless.
“The trouble is, obama will probably just go beyond the agreed upon framework, and then blame and/or ignore Congress. This already happened with Cruz’s amendment to the Corker Bill, which called for a 60(?) day review of all of material regarding the deal with Iran. He knew obama wouldn’t submit it all in time (obama didn’t), but then when Cruz used that to tell congress not to vote for the deal as it broke the law (the 60 day review), Congress ignored the law, and made the deal regardless.”
No question Obama loves to break the law. All I’m saying is Cruz shouldn’t be held responsible for Obama’s actions. Nor for the Congressional leadership’s willingness to kiss Obama’s feet.
JSC - Clearly you believe Cruz is just a shill for the Establishment. Just a guy that ‘talks a good game but never accomplished anything’ in the Senate. I disagree, however, I understand your frustration.
At the same time you give Trump credit for paving the way for dialogue on issues that were heretofore more or less off-limits politically. (Namely immigration, and recently muslim immigration) I agree that Trump has absolutely been a force in opening new narratives on these issues, and has been voicing an opinion that most Americans share. And it’s absolutely refreshing.
In the same breath I give Cruz much the same credit, for without him and a few others in Congress like Mike Lee, Jeff Sessions, and Louie Gohmert there would have been almost no voices of Congressional opposition to Obama over the last few years.
It’s for this reason, that I do tend to give those guys the benefit of the doubt on some of the questions you asked.
As for the Iran deal, I think Cruz had the belief that a 60 day review period by Congress would’ve potentially been a long enough time to generate enough public opposition to get the 67 votes necessary to kill the bill. As it was without any review period at all there were still 58 votes against. His floor speech explaining the Administration’s violation of the 60 day review period, and how Congress didn’t need to vote right away, led me to believe he thought the Republican leadership wouldn’t so blatantly ignore the law in an effort to help Obama ignore his obligations. McConnell pushed the vote the next day.
Am I naive to believe Cruz wasn’t just all talk? Maybe. When it comes to politicians, I’ve become very pessimistic and jaded over the years. However, when I look at the totality of his positions, he is still one of only a handful in Congress that I still give the benefit of the doubt too.
If you think I’m an idiot for believing Cruz in these situations, then that’s your right.
Good luck to your candidate, gullible or not, I won’t be voting Hillary.