Congress does not micromanage the nation's affairs. It delegates it to agencies it creates. It retains oversight of these agencies, but it becomes the Executive Branch's constitutional obligation to enforce those laws enacted by Congress.
What the Commerce Department is doing is following those instructions. That includes negotiating trade agreements.
You need to separate your objection to trade agreements from a philosophic and economic standpoint from that of a constitutional objection. The latter, no matter what you think about the wisdom of such agreements, has no merit.
Guys, What IS "oversight" when Congress can't even debate the issues on the floors of the house, much less amend these, according to it's proponents, necessary "free" trade agreements?? Keep bumping the thread. Thanks! Peace and love, George.
Excuse me, but 'it delegates' what exactly? Do you mean that, having no constitutionally granted power to micromanage the affairs of the nation, Congress may then delegate their legislative powers to departments and agencies so that those agencies may issue regulations with the force of law which effectively micromanage everything the people may do? That's what Congress has done, to be sure, but there is no constitutionalgrant of power for any such thing.
One problem with lawyers is that you boys base everything on a pharasaical examination of two centuries of commentary on the law rather than on the text of the law itself. You ridicule anyone who dares to suggest that the text itself is the law. This is the main reason that your profession is universally despised and distrusted.
No offense intended to you personally, of course.