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.
So everything I’ve done in life is disreputable, including military intelligence? Should I go grab a gun and blow my brains out? Would you even criticize me after that?
Cruz has jumped the shark on this and is not a credible candidate.
No.
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.
That's just incredible. I take it that it's true because I've seen if posted several times. If TPA removes the 60 vote hurdle in the Senate for passage of subsequent trade agreements (such as TPP), then any senator who supports TPA is just playing a game with the public when it comes to the final, 51 majority vote to pass a major trade deal.
Haven't heard many, or any senators getting up and pointing out that handy little feature of TPA to the voters.
Thanks for posting, clears up a few things.
Nobody wants to discuss why the new majority in both houses that we all slogged through a rainstorm to get there won’t even pass legislation lowering the highest corporate tax rate in the world to put our business’s on a level playing field and bring billions of offshore money back into the US. No they just want a NWO trade bill that puts 750 thousand people out of work.
Lol, why are showing me Sessions voting record? I’ve never said I agree with him or anyone else on every issue. But he’s right on immigration and on this particular TPA and the TPP.
I’ve never seen anything like it. It’s as though they were waiting with bated breath for something, anything, to give them the opportunity to launch into their outraged keening.
I predict a purge soon.
For later. Thanks.
And according to Senator Sessions and others, it's also proven impossible to defeat any so-called free trade agreement WITH the fast track process.
-------------
As an "opponent" of TPP why is Cruz enabling it's passage with his strong advocacy for TPA? The answer to that question is he really doesn't oppose TPP but doesn't want his fingerprints on its passage. Cruz is playing here the worst sort of McConnell two step. After supporting him without hestitation for the past two years this gives me a feeling of betrayal. Was Cruz really fighting the good fight for us the past two years or was he just strutting about trying to create a donor list?
We should be very, very troubled by the half truths in this piece. This isn't debate club here. This trade deal is an historic event unworthy of such talking points. Cruz is destroying his credibility with this incessant Boehneresque dissembling.
Cruz needs to stop this "moderate" preening and pandering to big donors or he can forget being POTUS.
Nicely argued by the Cruz team. Would have been interesting to be a fly on the wall as they were putting this release together.
I can pretty much guarantee most of the anti-Cruzers won’t read this. Settled science and all.
I’ve dealt with several of his people as a bundler and haven’t run across a dullard yet.
VERY helpful
Yep, and he has recently said that the real vote in the senate is the 60 vote hurdle to end debate. He even used that to explain why it didn't matter that he had left town before a final, majority only vote on a recent bill.
If he eventually votes no on TPP as if it's some principled opposition, he will really look like the hypocrite of the year, or maybe the decade.
We should be very, very troubled by the half truths in this piece.
I could comment on several other assertions in this Cruz staff paper, but there are other things to do.
My understanding is that there is a nasty section of either the TPA or the TPP that would give Obama vastly expanded executive powers with regard to immigration. Is this part of TPA and if so then why is Cruz voting for it?
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.