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 ...
...”they need to do their own research instead of just accepting the statements of someone because they think they trust them”...
Yes...that’s very true. Or at least wait. That doesn’t seem to be the case...rather a huge rush to judgement.
I take issue with your statement “when new facts show that that position is now incorrect”.
The original Senate version of TPA that Senator Cruz voted YES on was not the same as the House version of TPA that he voted NO on.
But because both versions were labeled as ‘TPA’, people think Ted Cruz flip-flopped due to public pressure. He most certainly did not flip-flop. He saw the changes and changed his vote accordingly.
Ted is led by principle, not by public perception. That has been made clear so many times. Just ask the Iowa ethanol producers.
That is a lie.
I voted for him in Texas.
Other's supported him as well.
Had Pelosi not stopped the original bill it would have gone right to the President's desk, as it will now.
What, no more large posts showing how Cruz was right to vote for the TPA and we don't know what we are talking about?
I trust God to move Cruz as needed...including when I’m not sure what he’s doing because I don’t understand nor see what he does.
I don’t believe he made a mistake here...he’s traveling the road to passage of this deal and it’s full of potholes and beasts hiding in the brush...
Heads up should have been when Nacy Pelosi wouldn’t show her hand til the last moment...which itself says they were playing games with Boehnor....
Gee, thank you, I didn’t know you owned FR as well.
I think it’s a bad idea to not allow politicians some room to back pedal. Cruz back pedalled on a horrible bill. That’s good. He waited till the last moment when the damage had already been done, which is not so good.
He already scuttled his campaign, so its not terribly relevant anyway.
Take off the tin foil hat.
Obama was still going to get the power in the first Bill!
> “You think because Pelosi was against it was a good conservative Bill?”
I read through TPA. I saw that democrats would hate it and Pelosi confirmed it with her statement.
So no, I didn’t judge TPA by Pelosi’s reaction. I actually read through the bill and saw there was no grand conspiracies, nothing that liberals would love. And all that thinking was merely confirmed by Pelosi and Warren.
But now the bill contains amendments that Pelosi likes. And who allowed those amendments?
Boehner.
And that’s why I say TPA is not the problem, the problem is Boehner.
But now you’re heckling me and mischaracterizing my thinking and opinions. That’s what liberals typically do. When they can’t in their arguments, they get personal.
...”I think it’s a bad idea to not allow politicians some room to back pedal”...
Especially when the public is responding in mass. After all they are suppose to represent the people.
I don’t think Cruz changed because of people...he waits until he understands the entire game...and that’s never clear until coming down to the wire.
There’s no tinfoil. But there are trolls who try and appear conservative by creating names that appear as conservative monikers, like yours.
And I am pretty sure you are not conservative. Conservatives are smart :)
TPA is not the problem. Obama/Boehner are the problem.
Nope. TPA enabling and fast tracking Obama “trade” “agreements” was and is the problem. 60 votes in the Senate is a much bigger hurdle for Obama than 51 votes, obviously.
...”it is not giving the president more authority.”....
History has demonstrated, the only way to get a trade agreement adopted is with fast-track.
Since FDR, consistently, for 80 years, presidents in both parties have had fast-track. Anytime fast-track has lapsed, trade agreements don’t get negotiated.”
Under the Constitution, there are two ways to make binding law. Number one, you can pass a treaty ratified by 2/3ds of the Senate. Or number two, you can pass legislation passed by a majority of both of houses of Congress and signed by the president.
TPA uses the second constitutional path.” And “it’s been long recognized that the Constitution’s Origination Clause applies to trade bills, which means the House of Representatives has to be involved.
There’s a reason why trade bills have historically not been done as treaties, because the Constitution says that anything concerning the raising of revenues, and trade bills concern tariffs, which are the raising of revenues, has to originate in the House of Representatives.
So, the process of approving a trade agreement ‘through both houses of Congress’ has been the way it has been done for roughly a century..... And it is not giving the president more authority.”
I don’t think $40,000 would cover all the employee costs but even with my numbers there would still be a ‘large’ profit. It is questionable that in todays business world a ‘large’ profit would satisfy the ravenous appetite of so called entrepreneurs.
Bottom line is Cruz should have never voted with Obama.
TPA is not the problem....It’s how it’s been altered and that was done by Boehner .
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.