Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)FT is NOT about "trusting President Obama". FT is NOT just about the TPP. [View all]
Recently we have been hearing questions along the line of "Why can't we trust President Obama" to negotiate a good deal with regard to the TPP? After all, we trust him to negotiate nuclear treaties"
Let's look at that question.
The Hatch Fast Track, Trade Promotion Authority, bill is neither about "Trusting President Obama", nor is it just about the TPP:
The Fast Track bill would allow WHOEVER is president for next 6 years to eliminate amendments on EVERY proposed "trade" agreement they choose to propose, and to do so through a process which markedly reduces the leverage Congress has by:
1. Eliminating Congress's ability to amend,
2. Eliminating Congress's ability to threaten filibuster if a satisfactory consensus cannot be reached,
3. While (1) and (2) weaken the ability of a Congressional minority to bargain, the ability of a future majority is also weakened by the requirement that a future proposed "trade" agreement cannot be removed from the Fast Track process without a SUPERMAJORITY.
4. And, by eliminating the possibility of amendment it facilitates the passage of bad or questionable chapters, by subjecting our representatives to the duress of not being able to vote down a bad or questionable provision except by defeating the entire agreement. (which is, after all, the entire point, to make it more politically difficult for Congress to impact the process.)
Weakening the power of Congress is particularly inappropriate given the evolving ability of "trade" agreements to be a vehicle for bypassing all manner of regulations by every level of government (including, but not limited to environmental, labor, intellectual property, health and safety, labeling and other federal, state, and local governmental entities) by means of the establishment of extra-judicial Investor-State-Dispute-Resolution tribunals which are essentially sovereign as their decisions cannot be appealed to any court, even the Supreme Court.
This is NOT just about the TPP (or the TTIP, or any other proposal currently under negotiation).
This is NOT just about trusting President Obama.
It is NOT even about "trade".
What it is about is dis-empowering Congress.
It is about establishing a method to bypass democratic regulation of corporate power.
Weakening the power of elected representatives to impact agreements that can overturn established federal, state, and local law in environmental, labor, intellectual property, health and safety, and overturn judicial appeal, all in one fell swoop, is not good policy in a democracy even with the best executive.
For Congress to surrender such power to, not only our current executive, but to whoever may happen to be president in the future, would not bode well for the future of democratic governance.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
125 replies, 9007 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (147)
ReplyReply to this post
125 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
FT is NOT about "trusting President Obama". FT is NOT just about the TPP. [View all]
Faryn Balyncd
Apr 2015
OP
Of course he loves Obama. The Obama Administration decided not to indict his brother
totodeinhere
Apr 2015
#108
Some members of Congress did sue over Libya but the court dismissed the lawsuit
merrily
Apr 2015
#84
Then trust him right off the cliff just like workers did with Clinton and all his trade disasters.
Elwood P Dowd
Apr 2015
#6
Millions of lost jobs, declining wages, & 8 trillion dollars in trade deficits the past 30 years
Elwood P Dowd
Apr 2015
#14
"Trusting Obama" means also trusting the next President, who may not be a Dem. n/t
winter is coming
Apr 2015
#7
Our best chance to defeat this is a coalition of Tea Party Republicans and
totodeinhere
Apr 2015
#116
What he hell do we gain from the TPP, currencies can still be manipulated
QuestionAlways
Apr 2015
#46
Great, and once Congress hands over its power to negotiate Trade Agreements to Obama,
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#67
I'm sure it's just a coincidence that when we sign 'free trade' deals
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Apr 2015
#33
I watched it. One thing that stood out for me was this "dig into it and find out for yourself." How
jwirr
Apr 2015
#42
That 75,000 is questionable math. It assumes a Korean car bought is a portion of an American job l
Hoyt
Apr 2015
#81
What if it is an engineering construction company that takes US employees and goes overseas to build
Hoyt
Apr 2015
#102
Shows your thought process. I'm for creating additional disincentives, and the TPP does that.
Hoyt
Apr 2015
#104
It is one aspect. The agreement covers a lot of ground. Are you really that obtuse?
Hoyt
Apr 2015
#107
Not to mention that the average TV viewer is not accustomed to reading treaties and desn't
merrily
Apr 2015
#65
Chris Matthews was the moderator. Enough said. He did not ask much. Just made fun of the
jwirr
Apr 2015
#94
Was Obama still making Matthews' leg tingle? Also, Matthews wife is running as a Dem.
merrily
Apr 2015
#121
They may trust Obama, we all may do that, but he is not going to be President for life.
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#50
You fail to consider that the TPP only deals with trade issues in 5 of the 29 chapters.
stillwaiting
Apr 2015
#48
Then you are okay with Congress playing no role in legislation that affects the people of this
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#97
I'll take the word of credible organizations and most of our best Democrats, who refused to give
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#110
Pretty simple, if it is bad deal with bad provisions, Congress should reject it.
tritsofme
Apr 2015
#113
From a general process standpoint, I agree with you. However the ruling from the parlementarian is
tritsofme
Apr 2015
#125
Would SCOTUS even allow it? After all they did strike the Line Item Veto Act back in 1998
cstanleytech
Apr 2015
#21
So it was the law of the land that the president didnt have to get approval from congress
cstanleytech
Apr 2015
#25
I apologize if I misread it then as I thought it was an attempt to take some of the power
cstanleytech
Apr 2015
#31
A Republican Congress and a Republican SCOTUS are going to fight the rich and powerful?
merrily
Apr 2015
#60
I hate the TPA, and the TPP, but I love Hillary, they are not one and the same
QuestionAlways
Apr 2015
#61
K&R. I agree. I don't want any of the Fast Trade. Corporations already have too much power.
Overseas
Apr 2015
#35
Obama's history shows he cannot be trusted to do the right thing without being severely pushed by us
blkmusclmachine
Apr 2015
#40
Obama's taking care of us, everything he's done has been for the middle class.
raindaddy
Apr 2015
#68
Normally I refute "third" way BS with links and footnotes, but after the Chris Matthews interview
myrna minx
Apr 2015
#70
MSNBC is establishment. That's what MSNBC told Cenk when the Obama WH complained
merrily
Apr 2015
#63
Politics is not supposed to be about faith in a charismatic leader. That would be religion.
merrily
Apr 2015
#83
.....! Recommend for exposure and for most of the infomative, intelligent comments.
KoKo
Apr 2015
#92
reminds me of how in CA a lot of county measures fail because they only got 66.2% of the vote
MisterP
Apr 2015
#96