Posted on 06/20/2015 10:28:05 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
“The right wing are crazy! What they’re saying about getting rid of the IRS is insane, and I think almost traitorous…”
Hardball June 19.
* The following clip has been edited to make Chris Matthews look as bad as possible as per MP’s loose journalistic standards.
Confusing TPA and TPP methinks....
Really, MSNBC is now clearly what it has been all along. A sheltered workshop for the (intellectually) disabled.
Chrissie is still crazy as hell. I’d bet a lot of people just laugh in his face.
I don’t think that’s right at all. And stick your attitude.....we’re having a discussion here, a potential disagreement, and in your paranoid childish rant you almost accused me of intentionally trying to confuse the topic.
Ted says he wants to replace it with something else with deductions and everything.
I think they’re crazy for not going after the IRS and the Federal Reserve while people are listening. Get rid of them both!
IRS can’t be abolished? Ok then, Cruz, et al. should be saying they will abolish the current tax code and replace it with a simple, fair and/or flat tax. Streamlining the code along with modernizing/privatizing tax return processing would allow IRS headcount (~100K) and overhead to be drastically cut. Rename it the Taxpayer First Support Service!
It’s the IRS who is the traitor. One scandal after another. Inability to perform even their basic functions. Harrasment of law-abiding citizens.
= :^)
i respect your opinion, but we fund everything by printing money. since we abandoned the gold standard and adopted fiat currency, the irs is nothing but a control and confiscatory arm of the federal government.
the tax code also enables corporations to pay for all business related expenses with 50 cent dollars.
i agree we’ll never see it go away, but it serves no useful purpose except enforcement of police state activities.
From MSNBC Hardball with Chris Matthews (transcript)
March. 21, 2006:
KRISTINN, FREEREPUBLIC.COM: We have kids that wear Che Guevara shirts here in the United States.
MATTHEWS: Yes, but they're kind of cute at this point, aren't they? They're not about somebody out to get us now. I think there's a difference. I mean, that's kind of camp almost, isn't it?...is Che Guevara the symbol of hate in the United States anymore?
KRISTINN: Yes.
MATTHEWS: I don't think so. I mean, a lot of our kids wear them. I see kids wearing them all the time, even my kids wear them. It's like a Robert Marley T-shirt at this point.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11943459/
It's how we fund our Army and government, etc etc..
Give it up. Just admit that Cruz blew his chance at the nomination.
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:
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.
Blah, blah, blah. Cut and paste propaganda.
That is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.
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.