First of all not one person up there understands more about International Rulings and how they could affect US law...Ted Cruz does and here’s why....
Cruz not only gave oral arguments in a most famous Heller case where he defended the 2nd amendment ‘before the Supreme Court and won’........ He fought the Medelin v Texas case ...is the DEFINITIVE CASE against the UNITED NATIONS ... The BUSH administration and the World Court in the Supreme Court of the USA and won........ That ruling against all the above agreed with him, that (now listen up)..”no ruling or litigation of any international body changes or alters US law... They have no authority whatsoever in the USA....
So Cruz above all up in Washington, knows what he is saying.
3 WAYS TO MAKE AGREEMENTS
Since the days of George Washington, the Constitution and courts have recognized that the President can do what George Washington did.... Negotiate without input from congress..... He can even make executive agreements that are short lived.... but CANNOT change US law.
TREATY:
Which is what Jeff Sessions wanted.... I like Jeff and am glad he is there to bring up anything he thinks needs to be discussed, but you will see why his way is not the best...... To do a treaty, it is STILL legal for the President to negotiate without the Senate..... It always has been because Washington and a long history of experience proved that you cannot allow 100 people to argue for the agreement or to even change them at will,..... IF YOU WANT other nations to ever agree with you...... So a Smart President gets with the Senate on a treaty to make sure that it is something they will pass.... That way when it is made they can decide to say, either Yes OR NO. with 2/3rds of the Senate having to agree.
THE WHOLE CONGRESS.
But unlike ‘Treaties’ which are only voted on by the Senate, the Constitution ‘requires all laws that have to do with tax and revenue to BEGIN in the House of Representatives’.....So what we have here is something different from a Treaty. Now if you want to make an agreement with other nations you have double trouble.
THE MIX UP about TPA,
So they came up over the last 80 years with something called Fast Track; Trade Promotion Authority (TPA)...It has been used for 80 years up and until Harry Reid killed it in 2009.....TPA, is the ‘CONTROL on a president’, when tell the president, this is what you can agree to and what you cannot agree to..... This is what we will accept and these other things will not be accepted.....It sets the goals to be achieved and the limits of what he can negotiate.... This way he is not making a bunch of short term, out of control executive agreements when he is allowed to do BY HIMSELF as head of foreign policy.
Tis has been before SCOTUS and has been long upheld and used since Washington. Thus this is NOT a giving of power to the President but a way to keep him in check!!!!
It does not allow anything to be done in US law about immigration... The TPA REQUIRES that once an agreement is negotiated (the TPP) ...It MUST be put out to the public and the people’s representatives for at least 60 days to even be legal.....Once all the representatives and people who want to read it all, it can be voted on. Up or down.. No amendments for the reasons I stated above. It is nothing new.
TAA (Trade adjustment assistance) failed. It was and attempt to get unions of US companies worldwide a little control of monies to bail out their members when the unions failed to compete with others and loss market share. It failed badly and Obama and many democrats were stopped in their bid for control in a way that could affect US law adversely to the rest of the population.
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), trade agreement, which they have been working on since 2009. has NOT even been agreed to yet. When it is it MUST by TPA control over the President be shown to the public, at least 60 days. Then after all have read it and are satisfied that all the rules laid down by TPA were followed, they can vote for or against it, with just a majority vote in both houses. Nothing in it can change or over come US law as Ted Cruz has fought and won.
WHY NOT 2/3RDS TREATY VOTE?
Treaties are between the President and Senate Only. That takes 2/3rds vote of Senate. They are in the CONSTITUTION and it would take 2/3rds of the senate and president to agree. ...It has the force of Constitutional law.... Check out Federalist #64 to see what the discussion of the seriousness of treaties and their intended binding nature......This is a trade agreement with revenue and tax involved and must involve both houses, beginning according to the Constitution in the House.....So the process of making law is the same and regular law. If Republicans had agreed to a 2/3rds vote in the TPA authorization, they would have been giving power to the Democrats. This way Republicans can control the passage without being blackmailed by Democrats.
****Today China is forming its own trade associations, attempting ‘to take over world commerce’...... There are 11 countries negotiating to be in the Trans Pacific Partnership.......This includes Canada and Australia. China is not a party..... They intend to remove the Dollar as the world’s currency..... We need to get a set of easy rules that allows free and fair trade for all out partners and any one who wants to become i involved. This is Important. We should keep watch but these are the same concerns spoken about in the federalist papers. At the same time it is imperative that in order to make agreement with other nations that they can count on you keeping the agreement as agreed to the length of the agreement. So, since hundreds of Senators and Representatives cannot be a party to negotiating foreign policy. Not if anything is ever hoped to be finalized, since Washington they have not been open agreements, but voted on later....
....Still to get the Senate and sometimes the house to agree, Presidents found that they had to work with them or they would not sign it. Fast track was developed formally about 80 years ago, to allow congress and the senate to write the prescription that they would sign up front; putting all the limits they think is fit to protect the interest of the people and nation.
http://www.examiner.com/article/tpa-taa-tpp-ted-cruz-jeff-sessions-and-you-pt2
Thank you for the explanation. Cruz in one of his speeches mentions some of that - or the gist of it. So the President can negotiate with other countries, and the other countries can deal in good faith, knowing that Congress can’t knock it out from under them.
And one of the “cons” that conservatives are saying is “but it doesn’t allow Congress to change the bill”. But the Congress has already stipulated what it will allow. And this avoids all of the other pork and crap that they add in.
The idea that some of these bills are “secret” from the public was an issue for Thomas Jefferson - he thought all new bills should be public. Do you have any information on how many bills are secret? Are most of them? Just a few? Regardless - this is nothing new. Not that I agree with the secrecy - but I think it is an issue that is being raised to split Conservatives.
caww, have you read the Wikileak documents? Under TPP, the US has ONE vote, the other nations each have one vote. They can make changes. Suppose they go after our guns? Our water rights? What about that “free movement of people?” This is akin to the EU. Fast track will pass it with 50+1. That 1 would be Joe Biden. We know where he will go.
I don’t trust the politicians to make favorable changes. They are saying “trust us.” Why? They’ve proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy by the citizens. They are owned by the COC, international Corporations and Bankers. They do their bidding.
We are submitting our sovereignty to an international body that can make changes. We have ONE VOTE. TPA, TAA, etc. are all steps towards the TPP which will be enabled by our ceding of the 2/3rds vote via TPA.
If any of these tentacles pass, TPP will be our demise. Do we want to be Europe? I don’t think so.
Show me where I’m wrong.