Ted Cruz 2016 : TPA Senate Vote Good : TPA is NOT Secret Agrement (TPA & TPP Different) : 2015-06-12

Texas Supporting Senator Ted Cruz ^ | 2015-06-12 | Toby Marie Walker

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


A Note to Conservatives on Trade Agreements


Senator Cruz entirely understands the widespread suspicion of the President. Nobody has been more vocal in pointing out the President’s lawlessness or more passionate about fighting his usurpation of congressional authority.

Senator Cruz would not and will not give President Obama one more inch of unrestricted power.



There have been a lot of questions and concerns about 2the ongoing Pacific trade negotiations. Many of those concerns, fueled by the media, stem from confusion about Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Let’s unpack the issues one by one.



What are TPA and TPP?


TPA stands for Trade Promotion Authority, also known as “fast track”. TPA is a process by which trade agreements are approved by Congress. Through TPA, Congress sets out up-front objectives for the Executive branch to achieve in free trade negotiations; in exchange for following those objectives, Congress agrees to hold an up-or-down vote on trade agreements without amendments. For the past 80 years, it has proven virtually impossible to negotiate free-trade agreements without the fast-track process.



TPP stands for Trans-Pacific Partnership. TPP is a specific trade agreement currently being negotiated by the United States and 11 other countries, including Canada, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. China is not a negotiating partner. There is no final language on TPP because negotiations are still ongoing and have been since late 2009. Neither the Senate nor the House has voted yet on the TPP. There will be no vote on TPP until the negotiations are over and the final agreement is sent to Congress.



Some Key Facts:


· Neither the Senate nor the House has voted yet on the TPP.

· Congress is the only entity that can make U.S. law and nothing about TPP or TPA could change that.

· TPA gives the Congress more control up-front over free trade agreements.

· TPA mandates transparency by requiring all trade agreements (including TPP) to be made public for at least 60 days before the Congress can act on them.



Does TPA give up the Senate’s treaty power?

No. Under the Constitution, there are two ways to make binding law: (1) through a treaty, ratified by two-thirds of the Senate, or (2) through legislation passed by a majority of both Houses of Congress. TPA employs the second constitutional path, as trade bills always have done. It has long been recognized that the Constitution’s Origination Clause applies to trade bills, requiring the House of Representatives’ involvement.



Does the United States give up Sovereignty by entering into TPP?

No. Nothing in the agreement forces Congress to change any law. TPA explicitly provides that nothing in any trade agreement can change U.S. law. Congress is the only entity that can make U.S. law, and Congress is the only entity that can change U.S. law. Nothing about TPP or TPA could change that.



Does Senator Ted Cruz support TPP?

Senator Cruz has not taken a position either in favor or against TPP. He will wait until the agreement is finalized and he has a chance to study it carefully to ensure that the agreement will open more markets to American-made products, create jobs, and grow our economy. Senator Cruz has dedicated his professional career to defending U.S. sovereignty and the U.S. Constitution. He will not support any trade agreement that would diminish or undermine either.



Does Senator Ted Cruz support TPA?

Yes. Senator Cruz voted in favor of TPA earlier this year because it breaks the logjam that is preventing the U.S. from entering into trade deals that are good for American workers, American businesses, and our economy. Ronald Reagan emphatically supported free trade, and Senator Cruz does as well. He ran for Senate promising to support free trade, and he is honoring that commitment to the voters.

Free trade helps American farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers; indeed, one in five American jobs depends on trade, in Texas alone 3 million jobs depend on trade. When we open up foreign markets, we create American jobs.

TPA also strengthens Congress’ hand in trade negotiations, and provides transparency by making the agreement (including TPP) public for at least 60 days before the Congress can act on any final agreement. Without TPA, there is no such transparency, and the Congress’ role in trade agreements is weaker.



Is TPA Constitutional?

TPA and similar trade authority has been upheld by the Supreme Court as constitutional for more than 100 years.



Does TPA give the President more authority?

No. TPA ensures that Congress has the ability to set the objectives up-front for free trade agreements.

Trade Promotion Authority has been used to reduce trade barriers since FDR. When Harry Reid took over the Senate, he killed it. History demonstrates that it is almost impossible to negotiate a free-trade agreement without TPA. Right now without TPA, America is unable to negotiate free-trade agreements, putting the United States at a disadvantage to China, which is taking the lead world-wide. It is not in America’s interests to have China writing the rules of international trade.

Moreover, Obama is going to be president for just 18 more months. TPA is six-year legislation. If we want the next president (hopefully a Republican) to be able to negotiate free-trade agreements to restart our economy and create jobs here at home then we must reinstate TPA. With a Republican president in office, Senate Democrats would almost certainly vote party-line to block TPA, so now is the only realistic chance.



How can Senator Cruz trust Obama?

He doesn’t. Not at all. No part of Senator Cruz’s support for TPA was based on trusting Obama. However, under TPA, every trade deal is still subject to approval by Congress. If the Obama Administration tries to do something terrible in a trade agreement, Congress can vote it down. And most congressional Democrats will always vote no—because union bosses oppose free trade, so do most Democrats—which means a handful of conservative congressional Republicans have the votes to kill any bad deal. That’s a serious check on presidential power.



Isn’t TPP a “living agreement”?

That particular phrase—a foolish and misleading way to put it—is found in the “summary” portion of one particular section of the draft agreement. That section allows member nations to amend the agreement in the future, expressly subject to the approval of their governments. Thus, if some amendment were proposed in the future, Congress would have to approve it before it went into effect.



But isn’t TPA a secret agreement?

No, it is not. The full text of TPA (fast track) is public. What the Senate just voted for was TPA, not TPP.

Right now, the text of TPP is classified. That is a mistake. Senator Cruz has vigorously called on the Obama administration to make the full text of TPP open to the public immediately. The text being hidden naturally only fuels concerns about what might be in it. Senator Cruz has read the current draft of TPP, and it should be made public now.



Critically, under TPA, TPP cannot be voted on until after the text has been public for 60 days. Therefore, everyone will be able to read it long before it comes up for a vote.



Couldn’t Obama use a trade agreement to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants?

No. There is one section of TPP that concerns immigration, but it affects only foreign nations—the United States has explicitly declined to sign on to that section.

Moreover, Senator Cruz introduced a TPA amendment to expressly prohibit any trade deal from attempting to alter our immigration laws. [LINK to release.]

Two Republican Senators (Lindsey Graham and Rand Paul) blocked the Senate’s consideration of that amendment, but the House of Representatives has agreed to include that language in the final text of the trade legislation. Thus, assuming the House honors that public commitment, federal law will explicitly prohibit any trade deal from impacting immigration.

And, regardless, no trade agreement can change U.S. law; only Congress can change U.S. law.









.

[alstewartfan]

It’s worse that wrong. It’s stupid, and Ted is the smartest man in Washington. I can’t believe that he has a blind spot on this issue which most of his base LOATHES. Politically dumb, maybe fatal.

[jsanders2001]

Maybe ome of you guys that know more about the TPA than Cruz does should call him. I have a friend that is around him pretty often and will know hiw to get a message directly to him.

[xzins]

From Sarah Palin:

The secretive, hugely impacting Obamatrade deal is another behind-closed-doors fast-tracked D.C. deal that screams "don't pass it 'til we know what's in it!" Yet politicians are going along to get along, supporting Obama's pet project while ignoring the public's right to know what's in this monumental international trade deal. This, despite the President's track record proving he hasn't got it in him to put American workers first.

If Congress hands this secretive deal to Obama on a silver platter, admitting to not even reading it first, then shame on us for letting another one slide. This is fast-tracked, friends. Like Obamacare, when we sounded warning bells but too many were too busy to pressure their employees (your elected politicians) to do the right thing and learn it first. Since when is Congress able to halt any bullying administration's fast-track deals? They never have before. Didn't we learn last time?

http://www.breitbart.com/…/blood-in-the-water-34-conservat…/

- Sarah Palin

[RitaOK]

Your mouth just left Tennessee and landed in Cruz territory.

We are ALL for Cruz on this thread, or have been, but we have none of your kool aid mouth stains when it comes to fast tracking a bad deal.

Many of us have already given to his campaign. But that does not mean we are hanging on his every word when we find ourselves at the cliff’s edge. Wake up! Quit insulting everybody because you like grape flavored.

Hunter who? Hunter, why? What vote? Where’s your source? What are you even talking about?

[tanknetter]

What if the answer is “pox on all of you, I’m not voting” ... ?

Or “I’m writing in Sarah Palin”? Or Col. West?

Cruz’s problem here is that he was doing an excellent job of differentiating himself from the rest of the GOP field. If doing this diminishes him, reduces him to just one of the flock, he loses his ability to draw votes from elsewhere.

IOW Cruz needs people to vote FOR him. Just like every other candidate. Someone doesn’t have to vote for someone else, or one of the announced candidates, to help ruin his chances of getting the nomination.

[RitaOK]

Meant to ping you to 164. :)

[Lakeshark]

I am troubled by what Senator Sessions has said, he is the one Senator I trust besides Ted Cruz.

I do hope the explanation comes from Cruz soon, the fact that our very dvisisve and destructive preezy (who has not done one right thing to date) wants this badly strikes me as a very bad omen.

[TNMOUTH]

Do your homework before you speak. Last night, there was a vote in the House that almost killed TPA before it made it to the floor. 34 Republicans voted to kill it...Duncan hunter wasn’t one of them. I ask why...

There are people who constantly bash Cruz. I support Cruz...you think he made a mistake, I do not. I will continue to support him. I don’t give up because I get my panties in a wad.

[tanknetter]

There is room to debate. It may be limited, but it’s there.

What isn’t there is the ability to filibuster the thing. Thats the real problem area.

[TNMOUTH]

Then people are stupid. His record speaks for itself. I am not so naive as to believe a candidate is perfect...but to say he hasn’t distinguished himself, is bull crap.

Those who won’t vote for him or the BEST Conservative remaining at the end of the day, deserve Hillary.

[Lakeshark]

I've seen her statement, it's a good one. She is echoing Senator Sessions and come down on his side.

I hope they vote this down and try to make a more transparent and less problematic smaller bill that is a good one.

[cripplecreek]

I think it was Steve Scalise who says that TPA actually excludes China as a means of weakening their control of smaller Pacific rim nations.

Bobby Jindal’s trade mission to Asia a while back seems to back that up with his concentration on nations outside China like Malaysia and the Philippines. At that time he called it an encouraging sign for TPP but I don’t think TPA was on the radar at that point.

[WIBamian]

I would vote for Allen West, also.

He is anti-ObamaTrade.

Methinks that if Sessions or Palin do not jump into the ring, then we could ask him to represent us against the Transnational Progressivists.

[WIBamian]

* wink *

[tanknetter]

Apparently his office isn’t answering calls. And his voicemail inbox is full.

So if you can get a question to him through a friend, please ask the following:

“Senator Cruz: as a Senator and leader in the Conservative Movement you have repeatedly used the filibuster to good effect, including shutting down the government. Given the level of concern over TPP, particularly it’s still-secret provisions, why do you think removing the filibuster as TPA does is a good approach to ensuring that only a bill thats in the interests of the American public passes into law?”

[RitaOK]

Actually it is not your panties that are of much concern.

The concerns are pretty obvious, and it’s all over the net that those voting on this dog are quoted as under pressure, conflicted and divided about what this damn vote actually means and how it affects the subsequent TPA.

You don’t know either.

[Lakeshark]

Thank you ma'am, I'm trying to figure this out like you.

If this is a bad thing I'm not going to defend Cruz, Walker or any other candidate who tries to convince us it's not what it appears to be. If they have a good explanation, I'm ready to listen. Right now, I'm believing Sessions, and what I've seen leaked on Drudge and other fairly reputable sites.

This does not seem to be a good bill, not at all. I just want to know the truth, so I will wait and let the dust settle on the explanation.

In the meant time, we need to call our reps and ask them to scuttle this bill.

My 2 cents.

[TNMOUTH]

Can you tell me WHY Duncan Hunter wasn’t on this list?

I thought he was one of the ones against it?

Hmmm...

[bert]

yes but you see, you have discounted principle and self esteem

orientals call it face

Having made such a strong investment in “principled belief “ viewed through a paper towel tube, self esteem will not allow contrary thought. To accept such thought is to lose face.

It is better to huff and puff and stomp the floor and cop out of the presidential election than to lose face

[Rashputin]

Passing TPA doesn't just empower Obama, it empowers the democrats down the road the first time they regain a simple majority in both houses rather than a two thirds majority.

I remember when some people said reconciliation couldn't possibly be used to pass BarryCare because that's not how it's supposed to work. Weeks later, reconciliation was used to pass BarryCare and to Hell with "how it was supposed to work". The Majority can interpret these things as giving whatever power they want something like TPA to give them if the stakes are high enough.

Not only is the damage TPA can do next week when with TPA passed it would be possible to pass TPP without any amendments and with a simple majority, the damage from passing TPA is also how the next democrat paper thin majority in Congress could manipulate TPA to pass other things simply by calling them a "trade agreement". Basically, it makes a razor thin majority in both houses as good as a two-thirds majority in both houses.

Opponents of something are usually anxious to have a straight up or down vote as are proponents who know they have the votes. There's no rational reason to require that something be handled that way unless it's to deliberately avoid the public knowing the details of what Congress is voting on.

If Cruz can't see that someone needs to wake him up and explain it to him. On the other hand, the big money that's pushing Cruz to support this absolutely can see that fact which makes me believe that if Cruz is as smart as people say he is, Cruz knows it, too.

Either way, passing TPA is extremely dangerous and totally uncalled for.