Posted on 06/23/2015 4:29:02 AM PDT by Leto
As a general matter, I agree (as did Ronald Reagan) that free trade is good for America; when we open up foreign markets, it helps American farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers. But TPA in this Congress has become enmeshed in corrupt Washington backroom deal-making, along with serious concerns that it would open up the potential for sweeping changes in our laws that trade agreements typically do not include. Since the Senate first voted on TPA, there have been two material changes. First, WikiLeaks subsequently revealed new troubling information regarding the Trade in Services Agreement, or TiSA, one of the trade deals being negotiated by Obama. Despite the administration’s public assurances that it was not negotiating on immigration, several chapters of the TiSA draft posted online explicitly contained potential changes in federal immigration law. TPA would cover TiSA, and therefore these changes would presumably be subject to be fast-track. When TPA last came up for a vote, both Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)80% and I introduced amendments that would have barred fast-track treatment for any trade agreement that attempted to impact immigration law. Two other Republican senators objected, and we were both denied votes on our amendments. Instead, the House inserted substantially weaker language in related legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Then we wait. Because you NEVER empower a liberal. Ever. No exceptions. We made it 240ish years without this deal. We will survive.
Give liberals power and you get China, Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. You get LA, Baltimore, Chicago and NYC. You get prozaced out psychos murdering everyone in their path. You get your nation given away to other liberals.
Never give a liberal power of any kind. Never aid them, help them or benefit them. Because it will be turned on you and those you care about without fail.
TPA by itself is not a ‘mistake’.
It was in force for decades before its renewal was killed by Harry Reid who didn’t want GW Bush to have use of it.
The version that rocketed out of the House last week is a changed TPA bill because Boehner allowed liberals to attach amendments and denied conservatives from doing so. So Ted changed his YES for the good version to NO for the bad version.
Ted wants to maintain and create millions of secure high-paying jobs using TPA to allow American exports such as Crude Oil and LNG, Beef, Agriculture and Manufacturing and Services. TPA allows him to do that when he’s President.
A President needs TPA to open up foreign markets to US exports. There are nations around the globe begging on hands and knees for LNG, for example. The Europeans want it yesterday because they have to go crawling to Putin and his mafia ring of goons to get an energy deal. The USA has what they need but Obama won’t let it be negotiated.
Foreign nations will not negotiate with 535 arguing members of Congress because the changes never end. It is an exercise in massive amounts of frustration. They won’t do it period. So TPA authorizes the President to be the go-to guy on international trade which is both logical and practical. And that doesn’t mean that the President gets to do whatever he wants. The Congress still gets an up or down vote.
TPA is not the problem. Obama/Boehner are the problem.
But now the TPA bill has been changed by liberals. That’s why Ted Cruz changed his vote.
Cruz votes for a TPA that was acceptable to him, then congress sends it back wrapped around a rotten fish and some people are surprised and go on a frantic tirade afraid he will gain support for his NO vote.
Cruz supporters are not surprised at all.
Cruz 2016
I succeeded in showing other Freepers here by provoking you into showing your mindset.
I no longer need to respond to you. You’ve made yourself obvious.
And trolls love to try and pose as conservatives. With names like ‘Rightward Ho!’ and like your ‘fortheDeclaration’. You guys are amateurs; you’re not fooling anybody.
No. You are a LIAR.
TPA got cloture in the Senate by 1 vote. Ted Cruz's vote.
“We made it 240ish years without this deal. We will survive.”
The last TPA Bill expired in 2007. No trade deal has been negotiated for the last 80 years without TPA.
“He voted against it because of the liberal amendments that were included in the House version.”
He said he would vote for it if they axed the bank, not if they axed the illegal amendments.
Actually, his initial vote on this was a lot less relavant as it passed by a much more comfortable margin. He could easily have voted against it on the previous pass, and not had anything to worry about.
I think he's genuinely a free trader (probably too much so for my personal tastes), that thinks TPA is a tool the president should have at his disposal.
I think it would have been somewhat hypocritcal for him to have voted against TPA legislation, then as President, as for the same thing he'd opposed. This, despite what he knew were going to be negative consequences, as is often the case, when a complex issue comes up and folks on both sides try to reduce it to a bumper sticker.
I generally support free trade if it's not one-sided, but would require any such treaty to be called what it is (a treaty - not a "trade agreement") so it would require the Constitutional 2/3 vote to be implemented.
For that reason, I'd have opposed this legislation, not because of some of it's other provisions, like the requirement for up/down vote without amendments.
I think all the name-calling surrounding this entire issue is counter-productive to reasoned discussion. This issue cannot be reduced to a bumper sticker on either side.
I’m now waiting for an apology from every Cruz supporter that insulted me. Since their Idol has now admitted I was correct from the beginning.
Really? Ted Cruz’s vote? The other 59 didn’t count? You do know that once 60 votes are reached on cloture, they stop voting?
“Fast Track” (and flip flop) Toast’d Cruz
was elected to stop Obama — not empower him.
And the voters are aghast that Obama’s Cruz
also supported SECRECY as plausible deniability (it’s not).
Your posts are so stupid it makes me think you are really an anti-Cruz troll!
Hate to be the first to inform you, but the bill that came back from the House is not the same Bill Cruz voted for the first time. The House version had too many Dem. amendments, which is why Cruz changed his vote.
That those who were critical of the vote had it wrong and we didn't know the facts.
> “Then we wait. Because you NEVER empower a liberal. Ever.”
The Senate version of TPA sent to the House last week did not empower liberals. That is why it was defeated with Pelosi saying “we want a better deal for American workers”. The left was not empowered and was vehemently against that version of TPA. The evidence of that is here clear as a bell:
http://elizabethwarren.com/blog/heres-what-this-fight-is-all-about
So that VERSION of TPA was good for conservatives and that is why Senator Cruz voted for it.
But now there is a new VERSION that was changed late last week by Boehner allowing liberals to amend it and killing any amendments from Conservatives:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3303287/posts?page=34#34
So Senator Cruz changed his vote when it came back to the Senate.
There are TWO versions of the TPA bill. In simplistic terms there is the GOOD version and there is the BAD version. The BAD version is the one that Boehner passed back to the Senate.
TPA is not the problem. Obama/Boehner are the problem.
He said he voted against it because the bill was weakened by amendments.
Yes, the problem with TPA is Obama, that is why Cruz should have been against it from the START.
No apology given from me CCguy..
Cruz stated from the get go not enough was known and he would with hold opinion...pressed then he spoke according to the information he had obtained and read....TPA is not as bad as people are making it...what is bad are the deals being shaped to pass it...and thus Cruz spoke and declined to support it. That does not mean he wasn’t for TPA ....TPA has surpassed and become far more than it’s intial intentions and purpose..
If any need to apologize it’s all those who continually jump the gun BEFORE the facts are presented and we know what the heck is going on ..not only with legislation etc...but behind the scenes and within the halls of happenings.
That is the point!
“Fast Track” Cruz just as likely changed his vote
because it no longer mattered
(ignoring that the 30 million pieces of silver
(or its bonus equivalent) from Goldmann Sach’s
were owed to his wive’s bank).
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.