Posted on 06/12/2015 12:41:58 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Texas Senator and GOP presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) argued Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) “is not giving the president more authority” and that Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) is “not accurate” in some of his claims regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) on Friday’s broadcast of “The Kuhner Report” on Boston’s WRKO.
Cruz argued that he had been the staunchest opponent of President Barack Obama in Congress. He then separated TPA (Trade Promotion Authority) and the TPP (the Trans-Pacific Partnership). He touched on TPA first, stating that “history has demonstrated, the only way to get a trade agreement adopted is with fast-track. Since FDR, consistently, for 80 years, presidents in both parties have had fast-track. Anytime fast-track has lapsed, trade agreements don’t get negotiated.” He later added that it was a “misunderstanding” to say TPA gave away the Senate’s treaty power. Cruz stated that “Under the Constitution, there are two ways to make binding law. Number one, you can pass a treaty ratified by 2/3ds of the Senate. Or number two, you can pass legislation passed by a majority of both of houses of Congress and signed by the president. … TPA uses the second constitutional path.” And “it’s been long recognized that the Constitution’s Origination Clause applies to trade bills, which means the House of Representatives has to be involved. There’s a reason why trade bills have historically not been done as treaties, because the Constitution says that anything concerning the raising of revenues, and trade bills concern tariffs, which are the raising of revenues, has to originate in the House of Representatives. So, the process of approving a trade agreement through both houses of Congress has been the way it has been done for roughly a century. And it is not giving the president more authority.”
Regarding TPP, Cruz said
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
He’s not getting away from us in my opinion,he walked away.
Of course you’re not going to agree with any candidate about everything. But this a very serious matter. Giving Obama more power regardless of any short term or long term gain is unacceptable. We the people,by the people,for the people. Congress,the Senate,the Executive, and judicial branches of our government are tyrannical. I had high hopes in him and Gowdy as well. Not anymore. That’s why I’m not putting any “hope” in people anymore. Hope in God and prayer is all I’m interested in now.
Cruz is probably for it because he is running for POTUS. Big donors want it. I can have some sympathy for him in this regard, because the moneybags control things.
My assumption is Obama is doing this to help either himself, or his colleagues, financially in the future.
It’s not a reach. And don’t call me Shirley.
Putting all your hope in a human being and expecting him to be perfect was your mistake. Sulking and throwing a tantrum and refusing to vote for him because of one disagreement affects us all.
I have no patience with such simple-minded thinking.
this has been the most miserable political week I can remember.
Yeah, whatever, troll.
Go entertain yourself with fantasies of people who’ll never run. I’m sticking with Cruz, no matter how many of your type show up pushing an agenda.
BTW, about your posting history. You’re glaringly obvious and transparent...almost cartoonish.
Rub that crystal ball, CatherineofAragon, rub it...
:) Just kidding.
Lil Flower, thanks for the well-spoken, non-emotional post.
I agree...this IS a very serious matter...and, that we should NOT be giving 0bama ANY more power...regardless of the length/term.
I don’t see any sulking or temper tantrum throwing in your post...just grace. Nothing simple minded about that.
Let’s leave the insults to the lefties. We’re better than this, here.
The Senate can still amend any fast-tracked item, but they need 60 votes to do so.
“I’m just not going to pretend that giving 0bama any inch is a good idea. Ever.”
If Obama was for motherhood and baseball, I’d have to rethink my positions. Yes, that bad.
What an intelligent, well thought out reply. Typical.
This is not a mere disagreement. Secrecy and government=disaster for American citizens. This is merely a “cult of personality.” I was very guilty of that when GW Bush was running for office. We all know how that turned out. I will not make that mistake again. I’m not the one throwing the temper tantrum. The people on here who can’t convince everyone to be sheep are the ones unable to handle it. Blind followers are intimidated by people who think for themselves.
I know. It’s upside down world, on this issue, here :(
> but I haven’t seen any worshipping of Cruz.<
Then you’re not looking hard enough. Or, you choose not to see it. It happens every election.
Oh and trusting in God before man is not simple minded, it’s called wisdom.
>I would say people need to get a grip, also. They need to stop emoting all over the place as though they got dumped by their girlfriends just because they disagree with a politician.<
I’m not acting that way. You need to direct this post to someone else.
I’m sorry its just embarrassing to see an adult acting like their “candidate of choice” is the coolest kid in school and will do or say anything to get their attention.
Not sure who will control this stuff. Isn’t it a way for companies to violate anti-trust restraints? Isn’t this going to replace the Supreme court, extending the powers of the RIAA?
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.