Posted on 06/13/2015 4:07:12 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
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 the 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.
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.
How can you take a position pro or con on something that doesn’t exist in final form?
Ted Cruz has said that while he voted for TPA, he has not taken a stance on TPP since it is still being negotiated.
Article II Section II of the Constitution gives the Executive the power to negotiate treaties and agreements. It is still being negotiated.
Why the secrecy about TPP and not making it available to the public?
If you play poker, would you want to tip your hand to your opponent in the midst of a game? If you have bought or sold a house, would you let the party you are buying or selling the home from know what your “settle for” price point is if it differs from your proposed price is?
I don’t support giving the Communist in the White House a fast track to the out house, let alone trade treaties
.
How do you know what TPP will do if TPP is still under negotiation?
No law can be changed through a trade agreement unless made by Congress. A foreign government or foreign body cannot make, change or amend US law. Only the US Congress can do that.
Moreover, the publicly available TPA bill states that no trade agreement can alter US law.
With TPA, you like everyone else will have 60 days to review the proposed trade agreement before Congress can take any action on it.
It is foolish to suggest you know the content of TPP or any other proposed agreement without having to actually review it yourself (during that 60 day window granted by TPA)
Sen. Jeff Sessions blasts Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/sen-jeff-sessions-blasts-obamatrade/
Mark Levin Opposes Fast Track – and Congress should, too!
http://obamatrade.com/mark-levin-opposes-fast-track-and-congress-should-too/
Eagle Forum: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/eagle-forum-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
TheTeaParty.net: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/theteaparty-net-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
American Family Association: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/american-family-association-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
Obamatrade: A gift for Sharia regimes
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-a-gift-for-sharia-regimes/
Alan Keyes blasts Obamatrade and those who love it
http://obamatrade.com/alan-keyes-blasts-obamatrade-and-those-who-love-it/
Allen West: Obamatrade is a disaster
http://obamatrade.com/allen-west-obamatrade-is-a-disaster/
Center for Security Policy: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/center-for-security-policy-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
Americans for Limited Government: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/americans-for-limited-government-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade-2/
More Power for Obama !?!?
http://obamatrade.com/more-power-for-obama/
Lou Dobbs & Ed Rollins blast Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/lou-dobbs-blasts-obamatrade/
Sen. Jeff Sessions slams “trade” deals promoting immigration
http://obamatrade.com/sen-jeff-sessions-slams-trade-deals-promoting-immigration/
Obamatrade = Unrestricted Immigration
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-unlimited-immigration/
Obamatrade weakens rule of law, encourages outsourcing: CATO
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-weakens-rule-of-law-encourages-outsourcing-cato/
Obamatrade destroys national sovereignty – as planned
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-destroys-national-sovereignty-as-planned/
The very fact that it is under secrecy to our representatives tells me all I need to know. This is Obamacare redux in re trade.
Why are you so willing to TRUST the overlords?
I don’t trust Obama, Democrats, or Republican leadership.
But Obama doesn’t get final approval on trade agreements through TPA. That puts tremendous pressure on Obama’s negotiators to propose an agreement that can be accepted in Congress.
Aside from that, (1) Obama has roughly 18 months left in office, (2) TPP negotiations started in 2009 and is no where near being concluded.
The question, I guess, comes down to whether or not you will ever be in favor of international trade as Ronald Reagan and Milton Freidman were.
“Don’t waste your time. Others at FR and in other places are far more rational. I’m finished dealing with the dead enders. I just won’t respond to them any more.”
Catherine, Cripple is right about this. Some of these Freepers complaining about Cruz just joined days/few months ago so they are likely plants as we get those when candidates/elections come around. Those will eventually get the zot as they are for no conservative candidate - they are here to make trouble.
Some others complaining about Cruz are mostly complainers about most everything and everybody - it makes them feel lofty and clever - they wouldn’t believe or support Cruz if he was Jesus Christ.
Cruz has proven himself over and over to be a constitutional conservative in his adult life; as Solicitor General for Texas he won case after case in the Supreme Court to protect states’ rights and freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
Cruz will do what he thinks is right for this country and that will be evident in the debates. It will be the grassroots across this country who will elect Cruz and not the complainers here. I had a conversation with another Freeper and neither of us would ask anyone to come to FR and read or join now as the climate here is too caustic. Perhaps that will change as the debates begin to happen.
Texas has moved their primary date to an earlier date in order to make a difference earlier in the primary process. Cruz will take the primary in Texas and that will give him a big boost in number of delegates.
I have seen that attempted comparison before and still think it is terribly weak.
TPA or other trade agreements -
Trade agreements still in negotiation have to be held in confidence or else you tip your hand to the other government’s negotiators. If you want to strike the very best deal for US interests, you don’t publicly divulge your position. That would be like a foreign government hacking into a US database and being given privileged and confidential information.
TPA —
Unlike Obamacare, TPA is being debated in the Senate and House by both parties, it has followed the entire constitutional process in formulating legislation. There is no “have to pass it before you can see it” — the TPA bill has been publicly available since May 22, 2015. TPP or other trade bills under TPA will be publicly available for viewing for at least 60 days before Congress can act.
Tell me why as a Cruz supporter who is now on the fence why I should trust him when he is enabling Obama? You cannot, because Cruz has not explained his position to those of us who want clear concise explanations.
Exactly right.
Ted:
(1) Always tells the truth
(2) Does what he said he would do
If FRs are single issue voters who can’t accept the explanations Ted has given in two radio interviews and on this press release, I pity our County.
Not weak at all. You choose to blindly follow GOPE style politics, I do not.
Ted is not enabling Obama.
Ted IS enabling Congress to have the final approval on a trade agreement.
Before TPA, the President is empowered by the US Constitution to negotiate treaties and agreement with foreign governments (Article II, Section II).
Before TPA, all the President needed to do is tell Congress what he had agreed to and get their advice and consent.
It is weak. I have explicitly given you the obvious differences between Obamacare and TPA.
There is no commonality. Sorry
That is BS.... He is giving Obie exactly what he wants.
You are sadly misinformed.
I’m done.
I wish you well.
There is no need to debate if after I give you an explanation you simply come back with personal accusations.
All the best
Best to you as well. Still waiting for the person I was supporting for President to adequately explain his position.
“But 2nd Division. You are his greatest supporter against all comers on FR. You should know the answer.”
No, amihow, you are wrong. 2nd Division, Catherine of Aragon, Cripplecreek, I, and others on this thread are ALL Cruz’s greatest supporters.
As was I ... He needs to explain clearly what he is supporting in this...looks like the same GOPE shell game to me.
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.