Posted on 06/23/2015 10:15:22 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Later this afternoon, the Senate will hold a procedural vote on Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) in an attempt to reach cloture and guarantee a floor vote on fast-track authority for Barack Obama on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free-trade agreement. On its first go-around, TPA barely made it past this procedural hurdle, with only 13 Democrats coming along for the ride — and that package included Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), a key Democratic priority to buffer the effects of globalization for American workers. Without it, even those few Democrats may take a pass on TPA, which would once again put fast-track into park.
With the vote just hours away, Obama spent yesterday twisting arms, The Hill reports. He got Oregon’s Ron Wyden to commit to supporting the bill, but other former Ayes are holding out:
Backers of fast-track likely need 11 Democratic votes because five of the Senate’s Republicans voted against the trade package last month.
Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) said Monday they are still reviewing their options, while Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) insisted he wants fast-track to remain bundled with Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), an aid program for workers hurt by foreign competition.
Democratic Sens. Chris Coons (Del.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.) and Claire McCaskill (Mo.) declined to say Monday evening how they would vote.
Besides Wyden, Obama has four other former ayes in line to back TPA: Carper (DE), Nelson (FL), Feinstein (CA), and Kaine (VA), most of whose states will benefit from trade. Patty Murray (WA), a key figure in the earlier approval, has remained very quiet this week. If Murray drops her support over TAA, Obama’s down to one vote to swing the issue.
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Sunday that Obama has gone all in on lobbying for cloture, using some remarkable hyperbole to describe the effort:
But I think it will pass and the one thing I can say is the president has spared no effort on this. He has talked to more members than I can count, more senators than I can count. And everyone in the cabinet, including myself, is doing their job to try and get this across the finish line.
Er, there are only 100 Senators at any one time, and in this case only a dozen or so who matter. If that’s more Senators than the Treasury Secretary can count, that hardly builds confidence in our fiscal management, no? Obviously Lew’s using a figure of speech here, but it’s telling that Lew feels the need to hype Obama’s work with Capitol Hill to such an extent. His predecessors considered that kind of engagement par for the course, to use a term with which Obama should be rather familiar.
Obama could have more trouble than just with the Democrats. Republicans have come under considerable pressure from the base to put an end to “Obamatrade,” or at least not give Obama more executive authority to abuse than he already has. In the first cloture vote last month, four Republicans did not support it: Susan Collins (ME), Lee (UT), Paul (KY), Sessions (AL), and Shelby (AL), plus Enzi (WY) did not vote. Obama can’t afford to lose any other Republicans, but presidential hopeful Ted Cruz announced this morning at Breitbart that he’s backing out:
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. …
Enough is enough. I cannot vote for TPA unless McConnell and Boehner both commit publicly to allow the Ex-Im Bank to expire—and stay expired. And, Congress must also pass the Cruz-Sessions amendments to TPA to ensure that no trade agreement can try to back-door changes to our immigration laws. Otherwise, I will have no choice but vote no.
There’s too much corporate welfare, too much cronyism and corrupt dealmaking, by the Washington cartel. For too long, career politicians in both parties have supported government of the lobbyist, by the lobbyist, and for the lobbyist – at the expense of the taxpayers. It’s a time for truth. And a time to honor our commitments to the voters.
If Cruz bolts, that might put more pressure on Marco Rubio to reverse course, although free trade is important enough for Florida and for conservatives in general that he might stick with TPA. Unless Obama can convince one or more of the five Republicans who didn’t back cloture the last time to reverse their position, Obama may be looking at another defeat on trade.
Update: In the end, Obama, McConnell, and Boehner got their way. Cruz flipped to no but Mike Enzi cast an aye vote, and Obama only lost one of the Democrats who voted for TPA the first time around:
The outcome of this key procedural vote had been in doubt as a group of 14 pro-trade Democrats weighed whether to continue their support of the bill out of concern that a related workers’ assistance package might not pass both chambers.
But after repeated assurances by GOP congressional leaders that workers’ assistance measure will be adopted, 13 out of 14 backed the bill.
The vote was 60 to 37, passing by the slimmest margin needed to pass.
A final Senate vote on fast-track could come as soon as later Tuesday, and it will then head to President Barack Obama’s desk for his signature.
McConnell says he intends to honor his pledge to those Democrats by bring the TAA bill to the floor next.
So which Ted Cruz are you supporting 2DV?And the correct answer would be both, that is if you are a constitutional, ethical and principled conservative, that is.
The Ted Cruz who voted for the first version of TPA or the Ted Cruz who voted against the second version of TPA?
So which Ted Cruz are you supporting 2DV?And the correct answer would be both, that is if you are a constitutional, ethical and principled conservative, that is.
The Ted Cruz who voted for the first version of TPA or the Ted Cruz who voted against the second version of TPA?
Sadly I was and am still surprised by this behavior.”
Keep up the good work SoConPubbie. Not all of us believe their misinformation.
You guys can't admit when you are wrong, can you?
The fact of the matter is that Ted Cruz saw that his position on TPA caused a firestorm among his closest followers. His Phones, e-mail, Facebook page have all been inundated with calls from people who begged him to change his mind on TPA, not because of some silly so-called amendments, but because he discovered that he screwed the pooch.
Now you can claim that he was right to support the first TPA and right to not support the second, but the fact is he was wrong on TPA and that TPA is just bad for America, no matter which version they put before the Senate.
If what you say is true, then maybe he isn't the right candidate at all.
If what you say is true, then maybe I won't get back on the Cruz bandwagon.
You said: “Now you can claim that he was right to support the first TPA and right to not support the second, but the fact is he was wrong on TPA and that TPA is just bad for America, no matter which version they put before the Senate.”
So you’re an isolationist/protectionist. Essentially you’re exploiting the situation to prop up anti-free trade propaganda behind the guise of the other issues.
Hostage’s explanation is not rocket science and explains precisely what happened. The TPA that Ted Cruz voted for was radically different from what came back from the House. Cruz supports the principles of TPA and most conservatives who are pro-trade would too. There were alarms which sounded before the first vote that Cruz weighed the pros/cons and did not think Obama was getting any more power and that some of the claims of others were exaggerated and hidden behind the guise of trade protectionalism.
But Cruz doesn’t live under a rock and started to see the same stuff we all did, especially after what was coming out of the House will all the back-door deals. This wasn’t the principles he supported and promptly voted it down. I wasn’t surprised he voted “No” today and it only reconfirmed my confidence and trust in him to make good decisions.
By admitting your opposition to ANY TPA, you are putting yourself at odds with the likes of Mark Levin, whom although he is steadfastly against any TPA while Obama is in office, said today he would support a “clean” free-trade (TPA) that was truly a trade bill only and negotiated by a conservative President in the WH. If you don’t even support that idea, then you obviously don’t understand the concepts behind free trade and the benefits of it.
This country needs a President Cruz badly. I can wait to salute him.
Most "trade agreements" meet the definition of a TREATY according to the definition used by the founders. Since they are treaties they should not be fast tracked. They must be negotiated by the president with the advice and 2/3 consent of the Senate.
I am an originalist and a strict constructionist. I don't believe in a "living" constitution.
That being said, can you name a single fast tracked trade agreement that has been a net positive for the United States of America?
Name one.
Just one.
It’s a no win situation. Cruz says there was a lot of crooked dealing that was taking place behind the scenes.
Apparently, he didn’t catch onto it fast enough. That’s not a good thing to be acknowledging.
Name one.
Just one.
Still waiting.
If Cruz didn't know that there was a lot of crooked wheeling and dealing going on behind the scenes on these bills, then he is not ready to be a Senator, much less a president. Obama was in favor of this bill. Shouldn't that make it obvious that there was a lot of crooked politics going on?
He's just looking for some excuse to explain his change of mind without admitting that he changed his mind.
That is the kind of politicking that turns me off no matter who is doing it.
Why can't he just say those three magic words that every wife wants to hear from her husband.... I WAS WRONG.
Again, who is your boy?
I truly was drawn to his belief system. That belief system is still part of him. That is still a positive.
I was drawn to his ability. That has been tarnished.
I was drawn to his willingness to stand for what is right. I will admit that he stood firm on TPA. It's good to know that he'll take his knocks, even when he's wrong.
As I said my assessment of his ability has been lowered. Instead of being a 10 on a scale of 10, he is now a 7 or 8. He admits to being misled by McConnell.
I have only contributed to one candidate in this race... Ted Cruz.
He has sorely disappointed me and his defenders on this thread who are making excuses for his sudden switch are not helping.
He wasn’t deceived unless he is incredibly naive. He voted FOR TPA and then the SHTF from his supporters and now he has backtracked.
I got a ton of e-mails this week from Ted and Heidi begging me to contribute more. I responded to every one saying that unless he votes against TPA when it comes back he will never see another dime from me.
Well he voted against it, but if he can’t admit that he screwed up with the first vote and quit blaming it on others, then I’m still not going to give him another dime.
Right now I don’t have a candidate. With 100 people in the race, why should I choose now? My primary isn’t for another year.
Tell me 2DV, can you name a single fast tracked trade agreement that has been a net positive for We the People of the United States of America?
Just one.
So you won’t admit you support another candidate. Just like most all of the other detractors, huh?
Because I DON'T.
Why can't you accept that fact? Have I ever lied to you before?
If I thought she would run and had a chance to win, I'd be sending all my money to Sarah Palin. She was right on TPA. She didn't have to backtrack because the funds were drying up.
Now, name that fast track trade agreement that has been a net positive for the United States.
2D, I’ve followed Cruz since he broke on the scene in the Senate. I waded through all the nonsense birther threads, did background study, found it was clear that Cruz is eligible to be president.
Initially, I tried to find a way around his H1B visa plan, hoping it was a poison pill offered to the gang of 8 compromise on amnesty.
Then Ted Cruz doubled down on H1B. I had been wrong. He really was supporting that mess.
I opposed on principle giving any power to Obama to do anything. As I read more about TPA, it was clear that there were trusted Senators like Sessions saying “not so fast, this has other stuff in the fine print.”
Cruz and his supporters decided that Sessions was wrong.
Then Cruz decided he was wrong and TPA 1 was bad, that he had been misled. He also came out against TPA 2. He voted against it today.
That is a chronology of events. During this period, Cruz’s numbers have dropped until he’s in 9th place of a 10 person poll that will determine if he’ll even BE in the first debate. While I think that’s a stupid plan, it nonetheless is reality. Cruz has injured himself with all this.
The numbers show it. More importantly, what I’m hearing shows it. He’s not being talked up around me where I live. I’m hearing Walker. I live in Ohio, so I also hear Kasich from people who will then smile. We know that’s not going anyplace. He’s probably campaigning for Vice President.
But make no mistake, I’ve been a Cruz supporter, and verifiably so for anyone will to do the work of checking my past posts. The same with so many others. You do not aid their returning to Cruz support by questioning their integrity when their posting history is there for you to check out.
Tell me 2DV, can you name a single fast tracked trade agreement that has been a net positive for We the People of the United States of America?
Just one.
I’m waiting.
So you think I’m at your beck-and-call? And you’re a lawyer?
Name one fast track trade agreement that has been a net positive for the United States.
You think it’s a good idea to pass TPA, so there must be at least one trade agreement in the last 100 years that was fast tracked that actually benefited the United States.
So far not one fast track supporter has named a single trade agreement that falls into that category.
Can you name just one?
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.