Posted on 06/14/2015 9:36:25 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
I suggest you look at some of the links posted on various heated threads on the site and do a lot of reading.
The TPA is a fully available bill and has been posted publicly with analysis for some weeks while under consideration. It was never secret or classified. It is a renewal of a process that has been in place for most of the last 75 years. It was being renewed to modify it by the Republican majorities from when it was last issued under Democrat majorities.
The key is that either House can change its rules through Majority and deal-kill anything done through the TPA at any time. Nancy did it to Bush.
Like Base closures, it is simply a way for the two Houses to establish a procedure to handle a contentious issue without endless debates and hold ups and then reach an agreement with a simple majority. Almost every trade agreement the USA has put in place in the last 75 years used this process.
The TPP Pacific Trade deal, is not been finalized to even come to the debate stage and Cruz has said he has no position on it yet. It is classified as it is an on going trade deal with only outlines being circulated.
Sessions of Alabama spoke of how steel mills were really concerned about the TPP. Steel is big in Alabama. Sessions said that instead of waiting for the TPP because the Obama administration would answer none of his questions about where the TPP was headed he wanted to kill the renewal of a TPA process to completely kill the possibility of any trade deals of this scope until Obama is out.
In the mean time, Cruz wanting free trade which comes with trade deals to benefit consumers (and I suppose Bilderbergers or some such nonsense according to some) wanted a TPA passed with conservative tweaks. He knows how the TPA can be killed by the majority of either house if an administration goes nutty so he is just trying to put the next six year deal in place.
Now confusion about the differences between the similar program names, about which is being approved, what is public and what is not begins to take over internet discussion boards. and the fringe candidate supporters start saying that “I knew this guys was a secret globalist all along”, or “it really comes down to getting rid of this guy because he and others are all squishy on the Constitution” or “if people really look at the Rand Paul positions they will see he is the answer” and all sorts of crap like this getting everyone’s panties in a wad.
Pretty soon in reading the posts of others filled with questions that don’t actually apply to the facts at hand at all makes it impossible to tell if the poster is (1) merely alarmed and genuinely concerned, (2) truly working against others correctly understanding because they support someone else, or/and (3) a “concern troll” wanting to spread confusion.
We have watched this sweep across this board over the years for similar issues and the only thing odd today is that so any days are passing before people take the time to read all the way through all the links that posters post — we are all getting lazy and expecting people to tell us how to vote.
I specified that I was a female because you called me “sir”.
I don’t know what alternate universe you live in, but in the USA, when a bill does not pass Congress, that sucker is DEAD!
Obama does not dictate treaties. TPP is a Trade Agreement. NAFTA was a Trade Agreement. There have been hundreds of trade agreements. They all have to be approved by Congress or they don’t go into effect.
Ok good luck with that.
It’s not a matter of Luck. It is the Constitution and how our system works. Bills do not become Law unless they are passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by the President. It has been that way since the beginning of our country.
Except in the trade bill! It is totally unconstitutional. Ask any one. It is beyond doubt,. Good Luck.
The Supreme Court disagrees with you and has done so repeatedly. Guess we’ll have to go with their multiple decisions on this.
You had to go and complicate deception with facts.
How dare you post what the Constitution actually says regarding agreements and trade. [sarc]
What you said is actually true.
so are most of us...so are all the talk show hosts....almost everybody. Damndest thing I’ve ever seen.
You are right!! Wow didn’t know that!! When the business taxes were revealed by Brietbart they were exposed!! The phone lines were jammed and they were losing votes!! Ryan is a traitor!! He needs to get out of politics!!
Quite the opposite actually. There are two ways to constitutionally get a trade deal: law or treaty. TPA makes the trade deals a federal law (originating in the House on to the senate and signed by the president), not a treaty (approved by 66 senators, no House involvement). Treaties, which is the route Sessions wants to take on trade deals, are what hand over sovereignty to international bureaucrats, not federal laws. TPA insures everything goes through both houses of congress. Treaties are dangerous. TPA insures we are not under treaty.
EXCLUSIVE — TED CRUZ: OBAMATRADE ENMESHED IN CORRUPT, BACKROOM DEALINGS
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.