Obama-backed trade bill fails in the House

[iandhr]

Source: WaPo

BREAKING: House Democrats delivered a stinging defeat to President Obama’s trade agenda when a vast majority voted to derail legislation designed help him advance a sweeping deal with 11 Pacific-rim nations.

President Obama suffered a major defeat to his Pacific Rim free trade initiative on Friday, as House Democrats helped derail a key presidential priority despite his last-minute, personal plea on Capitol Hill.

The House voted to sink a measure to grant financial aid to displaced workers, fracturing hopes at the White House that the package would smooth the path for Congress to approve a separate bill to grant Obama fast-track authority to complete an accord with 11 other Pacific Rim nations.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/president-obama-is-all-in-on-trade-sees-it-as-a-cornerstone-of-his-legacy/2015/06/12/32b6dce8-1073-11e5-a0dc-2b6f404ff5cf_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation

---

[Ed Suspicious]

1. I'm far from the smartest guy in the room, but I really think this

is for the best. Sorry Mr. President.

[roguevalley]

14. I think I can sleep now. I can breathe now too. I think I was holding my breath

since this began. I don't care why they did it either because it was right or a slap at him, its done-zo and I am pleased.

[AllTooEasy]

42. BULLSHIT! Dems just eff'ed US workers

The TAA was voted down. This legislation was designed to relieve the negative effects of TPA on US workers. Now TPA has a chance to pass WITHOUT protection/retraining for TPA-screwed workers. As Rep Kind(D) put it "Our rules, no rules or China's rules"

Our Rules = TPA with TAA
no rules = no TPA
China Rules = TPA without TAA

The Reps and the President will make sure that TPA passes, but thanks to stupid f'cking House Dems, TAA won't be apart of it!!!

All the DU posts showing happiness that House Dems voted down worker protections(TAA) truly displays how knee-jerk stupid America has become.

[Ed Suspicious]

45. I now understand your point. I don't think I'm stupid, but maybe I am a little

quick to react.

[Babel_17]

90. Actually, fast track was tied to this, and thus is now scuttled

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/12/the_democrats_tpp_rebellion_just_drew_blood_everything_you_need_to_know_about_todays_shocking_vote/

[sabrina 1]

109. The poster is wrong, this was an excellent decision by Dems. It is now unlikely

that the TPA will pass. Not to mention the TAA wasn't enforceable, merely an attempt to placate the huge opposition to the TPA, which ironically we are told will not lose American jobs, so why is a law needed to protect lost jobs?

This whole thing is despicable, that any president or representative would try to push this disaster on the American people is simply shocking, not to mention asking Congress to give up their Constitutional right to legislate and the people's right to know what is being done on their behalf. It is, or would have been, a Corporate Takeover of what they haven't already taken over.

Good for the Dems for actually standing up for the American people. The tactic was suggested by Labor Unions airc, stopping this a severe blow to the plan to fast track the TPA.

[bread_and_roses]

111. Excellent summation & spot on

I am fearful, however, that TPP will rise again - and fearful that many Dems, having voted the right way once will then find some reason to reverse and vote for this monstrosity .... it seems to me that's a tactic we've seen before

I have no faith at all in our so-called Representatives.

[Babel_17]

113. It bears a close watch, but having once voted our way ...

It bears a close watch, but having once voted our way, no representative can avoid being branded a sellout if they switch their vote. Minority Leader Pelosi's suggestion of being receptive to inducements doesn't sound to me to amount to much. It maybe signals loyalty to the idea of getting more highway funds, but I can't find it credible that swapping votes for that funding would do us any good come the elections. And I don't see the Republicans as willing to infuriate their base by offering such.

I think we take for granted that Republicans are united behind the TPP deal. For some obvious, imo, reasons the TPP deal rubs some right wing voters, and their advocates, raw.

http://inthesetimes.com/article/16196/rightwing_coalition_opposes_tpp_calling_it_obamatrade

Republican representatives owe it to their donors to help their bottom line, but Republican rank and file voters, mostly non-union, and distrustful of foreign entanglements to start with, will be an easy target to go nutso over pandering to Pelosi, so as to help Obama cut more deals with foreigners. That's how they'll see it. This TPP deal was supposed to fly under the radar and nobody wants to have claim responsibility for the parts that will get a lot of their voters angry.

[sabrina 1]

115. It will, these people don't give up and don't take no for an answer. But for now, it is at least

stopped.

[PSPS]

58. No they didn't. Who wants a TAA funded by stealing from medicare?

[daleanime]

62. Well, you can't let the bad....

be the enemy of the horrible.

[nikto]

92. Well said. Kinda' like having a choice between poop and turd

Some things are beyond reform, and must be destroyed.

TPP is one of those things.

[Enthusiast]

61. There were no worker protections and no enforcement mechanism.

If there were worker protections you could show us the documentation. You can't.

Besides, in any case, there is no enforcement mechanism.

About China? Another lie.

[daleanime]

64. +1

[zentrum]

69. I think it's more complicated than

Last edited Fri Jun 12, 2015, 10:33 PM - Edit history (1)

…you're saying.

As I'm reading about it at other sources, "Progressive Democrats who are enraged by Obama's trade agenda, namely the TPP, are attempting to derail TAA, knowing that in doing so fast-track authority will go down with it."

Fact still is that this is a blow to Obama on a political level—he looks inept. On the real-world level, I can't tell what it means for us ordinaries. If fit gets rid of the TPP——that's great. But I expect it to be back.

The only Dems I trust are the progressives. Hope they know what they're doing.

[rbnyc]

99. Thank you.

I crawled through an emotional haze of confusion today when I saw TPA passed and TAA didn't. It spent my whole lunch hour trying to figure out what that meant and why there were headlines of grassroots victory. It is complicated.

The fight is not over, but this was a victory. Unfortunately, it's a victory that takes some explanation.

[zentrum]

103. I know what you mean.

….by emotional haze. Me too.

The thing about the TAA is that it's the bill that was supposed to fix omissions in the TPP by containing "worker's protections". But the AFL-CIO and other unions and all the progressive opposed both the TAA and the TPP. Talk about confusing!

But for instance, the Pelosi contingent also voted against it because the Repugs inserted a poison pill into it—the way to pay for these so-called "worker's protections" was by cutting Medicare benefits. Outrageous.

Don't know how Obama thought he could make it work.

[JDPriestly]

72. The money to fund the worker assistance program was to be taken from Medicare.

No and I repeat no Democrat can vote to take money out of Medicare and expect to be re-elected in the next election. Enough was taken out to help fund Obamacare. No more.

The TPA is not going to pass without worker assistance legislation.

The TPA and all these trade agreements including the WTO are a CORPORATE COUP. They tie the hands of US legislatures when it comes to passing labor and environmental legislation and give multinational corporations a form of international citizenship and standing in special arbitration courts that transcend national authority.

What that means is the end of sovereignty with regard to regulating important aspects of our laws and regulations regarding local and national environmental, economic, labor and even some social (healthcare for example) -- hey, even cultural -- life.

The TPP and our other trade agreements are nightmares. Succinctly stated: CORPORATE COUPS.

They provide corporations with a status that is above us mere human beings in terms of the ability to govern. They permit the multinational corporations to create a now primitive but in the future increasingly power international government run by the multinationals themselves. They bestow on multinationals an international citizenship that we mere human beings cannot claim. Multinationals now operate in different companies bound by the laws of the countries in which they operate. These trade agreements with their courts are the way in which the corporations are moving toward corporate, multinational uniform laws and regulations that encourage and favor THEIR INTERESTS over ours.

I understand that this sounds like something out of Star Wars, a sort of fantastically impossible reality. But, sadly, it is very real. And no accident. Corporations have been very frustrated by the limits on their ability to circumvent the laws that limit their ability to pollute, to maim, to kill and to take natural resources at low prices from nations around the world.

(These multinationals have to be viewed as monsters with huge appetites for markets and resources. The wonderful people who work for them and even manage them become part of the machine of the corporation and lose the ability to control the beast of which they are parts.)

Current American education about government is just pitiful. Most Americans are utterly unable, utterly incapable of understanding that the Constitution that insures us a modicum of sovereignty and democracy (as a republic, if you will) is being chipped away by these trade agreements and the supranational institutions they create.

It is shocking to me that Republican voters get so riled up about the United Nations and just eat up the propaganda about how wonderful these trade agreements are.

If you can think logically at all, if you can understand cause and effect and if you know our Constitution and have an idea how these trade courts, whether the WTO or the NAFTA courts work, and you recognize that trade arbitration courts will inevitably be a part of the TPP, you have no choice but to vehemently oppose the TPP and any auxiliary agreement that permits any international body or a trade court to displace provisions in our Constitution.

We fought against taxation without representation in the Revolutionary War. But here we are accepting it (indirectly but very definitely) by signing up to allow corporations to go to arbitration courts (in which THEY pick one-half of the "judges&quot and impose damages, potentially huge damage awards based on speculation about future profits that will in turn impose a tax burden on every American taxpayer.

Those damages awards will not directly confine our ability to govern ourselves. The mechanism is more subtle than that.

But even the recognition of potential awards against the US will influence our law-making and our legislators, and constrict our ability to govern ourselves.

The ability of corporations to go to court -- courts that in no way answer to the people and are not even required to have open and public hearings and trials -- and demand damages gives to those corporations rights that are superior to our own as American citizens.

These trade courts have excessive power. They have no juries of ordinary people. They do not have open trials in which all evidence is made available for public scrutiny,

The systems that are established by these trade agreements are unconscionable. We cannot as a nation agree to these trade pacts and claim to support democratic traditions and goals.

No. No. No. No. No to the TPP.

Let other countries that don't value democracy, countries like China which is still a Communist dictatorship in spite of its wealth and export power, sign up for the dictatorship of the multinationals if they wish. We should not go there.

We have a proud tradition of jury trials in civil disputes. Let the multinationals who have claims or imagined claims against the US or entities including state and local governments with the US bring their grievances into our courts. Let American juries and judges decide whether the companies should receive compensation for alleged losses due to our laws and regulations. Who pays the damages awards when a corporation wins in court? The American tax-payers, that's who. The American taxpayers should not be required to pay awards that are imposed by foreign courts that Americans do not ultimately control. There is no right of appeal from these trade courts. The taxes that they indirectly award have to be paid, and it is the taxpayers who pay them. That is taxation without representation. That is the very wrong that our country was founded to set right.

I hate to be rude, but only fools would vote for or support these trade agreements including the TPP.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

83. Thanks for explaining...

Much appreciated. It's way out of my knowledge base, but it seems that pairing TAA with TPP acknowledges that we can expect lots of lost jobs from TPP.

[green917]

89. Excellent post!

You have hit, virtually, every nail on the head here! This is a very eloquent and succinct description of several of the myriad of reasons that trade deals like this (the tpp in particular though) are disastrous for the American people and economy! As you so eloquently put it, this deal gives more rights than we, as American citizens have, and that is antithetical to everything that this nation is supposed to stand for. You have to have rocks in your head to support this deal (unless you're a CEO or a Republican Congress person)!

[nikto]

94. Exactly right!

Whoomp! There it is.

Well said.


TPP is a Conspiracy-In-Plain-Sight:

http://thesuspicionist.blogspot.com/2015/05/tpp-when-conspiracy-hides-in-plain-sight.html

[LuvNewcastle]

110. Thanks for laying it all out there.

Too bad so many in the media can't see it as clearly as you do. Good job!

[valerief]

77. Training for jobs that'll be offshored anyway? AND crippling Medicare patients? nt

[WoodyM90]

86. If this trade bill has a need to have something to protect workers

who will
lose their jobs because of it, it should never become law. It is an overt admission that there will be a major loss of jobs.

My example:

To all of those who email asking for contributions for political causes.

I am a Democrat. I grew up in the Great Depression. For many of my younger years there was a president who was a Democrat, a true Democrat. His name was Franklin D. Roosevelt. Then after him, there was Harry S. Truman, and then there was Lyndon B. Johnson. All of these were true Democrats.

As many others in the south, I earned a degree in Textile Engineering and went to work in the Textile Industry. Not long after starting to work, I set a goal that for at least five to ten years before I retired I would be a plant manager. I was well on my way, as I had reached the position of Overseer of Weaving, a major position in a textile operation. At most, two steps away from my goal.

Then Bill Clinton, a so-called democrat, sided with the republicans and began passing “free trade” legislation and the textile industry began to migrate overseas. As a result, I lost three positions in the textile industry due to closing of the plant and with each new position I managed to acquire was a down step. The last one did not last long enough for me to reach an age old enough to draw Social Security.

Social Security, the very bedrock of Democrat policy, has been placed on the bargaining table by a so-called democrat president, Barrack Obama. Minority Leader of the house Nancy Pelosi, a so-called democrat, is willing to accept a chained CPI for future cost of living for Social Security.

How do you think I must feel when I get a request for a donation to help cover the President’s back when he is willing to put my SS income on the table? Moreover, when the House Minority leader will accept a lowering of cost of living increases by a CPI rate?

I am a Democrat and will vote for Democrats, as I fear this nation is headed for an Oligarchy. Moreover, I cannot, in any way be helpful to those who want this to become reality.

I see very few Democrats in the party now. However, there is one in Elizabeth Warren and we need many more like her. In addition, there is one who is not a democrat, but caucuses with the Democrats. Bernie Sanders is more of a true democrat than many who claim that designation.

If you have read this far, I express my thanks and appreciation to you.

Old Artillery Man

[Ed Suspicious]

95. Thank you.

Your opening statement puts it in perspective for me. We don't need to sell out our country's workers for the sake of trade. This is a resource rich country who would end up just fine if we needed to endure a little protectionism if we needed to so as not to join the race to the bottom for workers only to help multinational CEO s win the race to riches

[roguevalley]

102. alltoeasy, way to influence. oh wait ...

It has to go to the senate but they won't pass it. Neither house will. We aren't stupid and we work, some of us 50+ years. Just saying ... Politely. Try it.

[rpannier]

104. You do know the two are linked together

They voted for the TPP in the House, but it was symbolic as you can't have one without the other

[sabrina 1]

108. Wrong, first of all, we are told there will be NO job loss due to TPA, yet, they tried to placate

opposition by adding the TAA. THIS was excellent strategy, suggested I believe by Labor Unions. Now no Dem can change their minds BECAUSE this 'protection' isn't there.

And if the President goes ahead now to push the TPA, he is essentially saying 'I don't care about American workers'.

THIS is how chess is played, Dems did a great job today.

[Vincardog]

114. TAA = Medicare CUTS. No TAA = NO fasttrack = no TPP GOOD.

[JDPriestly]

56. Sorry. But this is not over.

Democrats in the House cannot yet be trusted. If you read the whole argument, Pelosi is saying that the Democrats voted against it not because they see the light and understand how bad the trade bill is for America and American workers but because of the worker assistance part of the bill. I think the problem is that the worker assistance part of the bill is to be paid for out of Medicare funds. Democrats cannot both vote for the trade bill and for a cut in Medicare and stay in office. Any Democrat who would vote for that combination will assuredly lose the next election.

And I would add that in my view any Democrat who votes for the trade bill is likely to be challenged in the next election.

[Divernan]

73. You'll know it's over when HRC decides it's safe to take a public position on it.

She pushed it aggressively for years while she was Secretary of State, and even though out of office now, would have been very helpful to Obama if she'd backed him up on this issue. Of course, she didn't.

While Hillary Was Secretary of State, Foreign Corporations in Favor of TPP Paid Bill over a Million Dollars
Could Clinton's silence on the matter be due to a serious conflict of interest?
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/while-hillary-was-secretary-state-foreign-corporations-favor-tpp-paid-bill-over

As Secretary of State, she was part of the negotiating team for the deal, calling it the “gold standard” of trade agreements. In a statement she gave in the summer of 2012, she said the agreement would “benefit” the United States. These actions stood in sharp contrast to Clinton's rhetoric during her 2008 bid for the presidency, where she sharply criticized free trade agreements. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/09/nation/na-penn9

There are likely a number of factors for why Clinton went from a critic of these corporate-written trade agreements to a supporter while in the Obama administration to more or less neutral today. But one very important factor for voters to know about is the role her own personal wealth might have played in the matter.

Because spousal income is shared, cabinet officials are required to report not only their own personal financial data but also incoming income their spouse receives. While Clinton was Secretary of State, her husband continued his lucrative corporate speaking tour, receiving millions of dollars from both foreign and domestic corporations.

[JDPriestly]

80. Thank you.

[pangaia]

85. And thank you for your clear explanation of this enbtire cesspool.

[BumRushDaShow]

2. Just saw the Wapo Breaking

It should be slowed. There needs to be worker input.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. There needs to be publication, discussion, and negotiation.

The secrecy for this was disgusting. Unamerican. And Obama should be ashamed for his "Take it, or else" approach.

[BumRushDaShow]

18. I expect it has to do with the sausage-making that happens in negotiations

but there needs to be a line drawn on how much stuff is being jammed in for expediency, where piecemeal would be a better option so you don't have a ton of detrimental loopholes stuck in it (which was obviously happening).

[drray23]

3. yes!

Thats the power of public opinion. If people are willing to call their representatives, demonstrate, flood social media with their voice it has an effect.

For the same reason Bernie stands to win if he can harness the public opinion.

[newfie11]

4. YES!!!!!!!!!

[gopiscrap]

5. This is the TPP we're talking about, yes?

If so excellent. Thank you House dems!

[harun]

10. No, something related to it though.

[gopiscrap]

15. ok thanks, I was wondering because of the wording!

[zentrum]

71. It's a confusing mess.

The TAA was voted down, but as I understand it, that helps defeat the TPP because the TPP can now not be voted on. So by default, it may be a defeat for the TPP.

However—the enormous risk as I see it is that since the TAA didn't pass, then the fast track TPP may go forward without it. Which would hurt us even more because then worker's protections are stripped out. But the TAA contained a poison pill ——hurting Medicare.

It's really an ugly, effed up deal where they really figured out how to hurt us no matter which way it goes.

Obama looks terrible though.
And it ain't over.

[frylock]

6. Have a nice weekend, Mr. President

[rurallib]

8. I am not religious but halle-freaking-luliah

praise be to some higher power - like citizen action.

[Plucketeer]

33. Yeah! Someone lend me their God for a moment

I need one to THANK!

[840high]

38. Thank God!!!!!!

[Plucketeer]

44. Thanks!

[TheNutcracker]

9. I for one, am not sorry Obama lost this.

It's like the CIA had a gun to his head or something.....who knows...maybe they did and he didn't want this either! Stranger than fiction his support was for this dirt bag piece of shit legislation.

[hopemountain]

81. i share some of those same thoughts.

it was not making sense. - but, power to the people! and, perhaps, the president is relieved because all he has to say to the corporations when they attempt to hold him accountable: "the american people would have none of it".

[awoke_in_2003]

88. Not the CIA, but big business...

can't get as many of those high paying speaking gigs unless this gets passed.

[shawn703]

11. However I am hearing that TPA passed

Meaning either it goes back to the Senate without TAA attached (where it will probably fail) or Boehner can have a motion to reconsider TAA. I wish it was over but there's more ways this could go bad.

[rpannier]

105. It doesn't go back

The two are linked
Must have both
The Hill reported the vote as symbolic

[n2doc]

12. A little more information

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/us/politics/obamas-trade-bills-face-tough-battle-against-house-democrats.html?_r=0

In a remarkable rejection of a president they have resolutely backed, House Democrats voted to kill assistance to workers displaced by global trade, a program their party created and has stood by for four decades. By doing so, they brought down legislation granting the president trade promotion authority — the power to negotiate trade deals that cannot be amended or filibustered by Congress — before it could even come to a final vote.

“We want a better deal for America’s workers,” said Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House minority leader who has guided the president’s agenda for two terms and was personally lobbied by Mr. Obama until the last minute.


Republican leaders tried to muster support from their own party for trade adjustment assistance, a program they have long derided as an ineffective waste of money and sop to organized labor. But not enough Republicans were willing to save the program.

Republican leaders then passed a stand-alone trade promotion bill, but that would force the Senate to take up a trade bill all over again. And without trade adjustment assistance alongside it, passing trade promotion authority in the Senate would be highly doubtful.

[bemildred]

23. +1. nt

[EndElectoral]

13. Doesn't tell whole story. Obama got the fast track authority in second bill.

First bill was to help displaced workers which Republicans gladly voted down.

This really stinks as the enforcement bill also is going through.

Boehner asked for reconsideration on first bill and will probably get it.

Probably going to be a Republican victory for the President .

[Ed Suspicious]

28. Wait. So you're saying that the part of the trade deal that might serve to

protect displaced workers was voted down, but the shitty part, that part that authorizes fast tracking, is a go or at least still in play?

[Red Oak]

35. Correct

This is not a done deal yet. It could easily go the other way, and soon.

[Ed Suspicious]

36. Is it too cynical to think that these are separate bills in order to kill the one

that is of benefit to displaced workers while passing the one that creates displaced workers?

[jeff47]

47. Well, the one that "helps workers" is funded by stealing from Medicare

So it isn't exactly a great thing itself.

The way that was supposed to be "fixed" was yet another bill restoring the money to Medicare. But the ads write themselves: "Representative _____ voted to take money from poor, dying seniors and give it to lazy moochers."

[Xipe Totec]

16. About time they started acting like Democrats. nt

[DebbieCDC]

17. Dems actually behaving like Dems should

Maybe this is the start of a trend

[Duval]

19. Calling our members in Congress has

been a huge help in letting our Dem. Reps know we oppose this deal. Shame on those who voted for it.

[totodeinhere]

20. Does anyone know where to find the vote breakdown? I want to know which Democrats voted for it.

Thanks.

[Red Oak]

75. Here you go and make sure to call the DINOs that voted Aye

Here you go:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll361.xml

Here are the DINOs that voted Aye - call them, primary them!

Ashford, Bass, Bera, Beyer, Blumenauer, Bonamici, Carney, Clyburn, Connolly, Cooper, Costa, Cuellar, Davis, Delaney, DelBene, Eshoo, Farr, Foster, Heck (WA), Himes, Hoyer (really? Wow!), Israel, Johnson (E.B.), Kilmer, Kind, Larsen (WA), Larson (CT), Meeks, O'Rourke, Perlmutter, Peters, Pilis, Price (NC), Quigley, Rice (NY), Richmond, Schrader, Sewell (AL), Smith (WA), Wasserman Schultz (she really needs to go).

Sorry for any typos, I don't have time to check their names twice. Refer to link for all vote both Aye and Nay.

[totodeinhere]

78. Thanks a lot. That's just what I wanted to know.

n/t

[ImaPolitico]

97. Yes Here it is.

Daily Kos website notates the Dems who voted yes today.

[Hoppy]

21. YES !!!

[lark]

24. At first I was ecstatic, then I paid attention.

It's not Fast Track that went down as I read with rose colored glasses the first time around. It's the TAA that died. Repugs could still approve Fast Track and no TAA. I bet Obama will support TPP even without the think candy coating of TAA. Now we just get doubly screwed. Damn!!

[n2doc]

25. Only if the Senate goes along

Will they get enough turncoat dems to vote for this unvarnished turkey?

[lark]

27. We will soon know.

I'm praying hard that some Dems in the Senate break off and don't approve of Fast Track without the TAA. I guess I'm just not very optimistic. Hope I'm wrong.

[totodeinhere]

26. But a stand alone bill probably will not get through the Senate. You are correct though.

This is a far cry from over. The forces in favor of this are very powerful and they will keep trying.

[lark]

30. We aren't safe yet!!

Fingers firmly crossed that the Senate will do the right thing, but not holding my breath.

[BeanMusical]

39. Fingers crossed too!

[DFW]

49. Paying attention is always a good idea

Letting your opinion be formed by CNN, Fox, or plain old-fashioned conformity is usually a bad idea.

[lark]

51. true

Sometimes I get excited and read what I want, but when I always go back, the truth is there to see and I have to remove my rose colored glasses.

[BeanMusical]

29. Kick and R

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

31. Is the voting closed?

Or is the speaker going to keep it open until enough arms have been twisted?

Hopefully it's done.

[840high]

32. I'm crying - I am so happy!!!!!!

[markpkessinger]

79. You may want to hold your tears for a bit . . .

What has been defeated is the aid to displaced workers. The TPP could theoretically still pass (although this will likely make passage more difficult), and if the TPP passes without the TAA, workers will be screwed big time.

[BlueStreak]

34. Next step : Force Hillary and the others to take a stand on this.

[BlueStreak]

116. And I will give Hillary some credit for her position today

It was a bit too cautious, but considering it came from a Clinton, her position on the TPP fast track was more courageous than I expected. Good for her. Let's hope she remembers it.

[frazzled]

37. That was a weird way of doing it

They sunk the TAA (financial aid to displaced workers), which Democrats are for and Republicans oppose, while the TPA (fast track) passed.

While it may make passage in the Senate much more difficult, there seem to me (but what do I know) at least two dangers:

That the bill will pass without TAA, which would make things really bad for American workers.
That Democrats will be blamed for scorning workers.

I'm not 100% sure how smart this was.

[magical thyme]

43. The TAA was going to be funded by raiding Medicare

So it was 1. admit TPA will harm workers and help them by stealing from the elderly

or

2. vote down TAA and and make the senate pass TPA without TAA.

ideally both TPA and TAA would have failed in the house, which would have been a clean victory.

But funding TAA by stealing from Medicare is simply not acceptable.

[frazzled]

76. It was more complex than that

First, it was a cut (albeit relatively small) to providers, not to benefits. Still, that's a cut and a third rail for we Dems. So the Republicans proposed a separate bill that would pay for the TAA instead with stricter tax enforcement provisions, and no Medicare funds. But labor leaders convinced the Dems not to go for this change, in order to scuttle the whole deal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-republicans-work-together-in-final-push-on-trade-bill/2015/06/10/12118a7c-0f94-11e5-a0dc-2b6f404ff5cf_story.html?hpid=z4

I'm not sure what happens next. It sure will be interesting to watch in the Senate.

[whathehell]

54. I firmly believe the bill will NOT pass without TAA

The Dems voted against it so as to keep it from passing.

[salib]

57. "Smart" may not be the best adjective. However, it is perhaps the best that could be done

to derail TPA and ultimately then TPP.

I do not see how any Dem could vote for the TAA (assistance) when it was going to come out of Medicare! That was definitely a poison pill type of thing in the Senate.

Instead, now the fight returns to the Senate.

Does anyone know if it requires cloture again (i.e., requires 60 votes to consider the TPP only as passed in the House)? That is now our best chance to stop this.

[bigwillq]

40. Big props to the DEMS who fought against the trade bil.

[SoapBox]

41. Sorry Mr. President...

You've done some good but these double-triple-secret pacts are bad, bad, bad.

We can breath a sigh of relief BUT...I suppose these evil things will probably return shortly.

The American people will be wait to say NO again.

[ImaPolitico]

98. Am I the only one?

I would rather hold my answers here until it is all settled down by next week.

Perhaps Nancy Pelosi is going to come through on this next week if some part of the bill is tweaked,from what I read.

[Dont call me Shirley]

46. Thanks to all who called the whitehouse and Congress, you're talking democracy!

United States Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121 Call to say thanks for not passing that corporate global constitution!

Whitehouse Comments: 202-456-1111 and here to express dismay they would put on their walking shoes for that corporate coup

[Baclava]

48. The TAA failed, but the TPA passed, another vote next week

[Jack Rabbit]

52. Not good

Get ready, my fellow American patriots, to revolt.
[center]

[/center][font size="1"]From Wikipedia Commons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eugène_Delacroix_-_La_liberté_guidant_le_peuple.jpg)
(Public Domain)
[/font]

[abelenkpe]

60. Probably Never happen

Read another DU thread this morning where displaced white collar workers were encouraged to do as blue collar workers already have: suck it up, accept work in a different field at lower pay and stop being whiney babies. This from democrats on a democratic board. I give up. Wake me if anything changes though...

[NorthCarolina]

63. Pelosi is now saying

that she thinks Dems can pass it if it includes a highway bill.

[abelenkpe]

66. Wait, what?

A highway bill instead of a program to retrain expected displaced workers that robs from medicare is an OK compromise? So does this mean the TPA will pass?

[NorthCarolina]

68. I think she was

alluding to the addition of a transportation highway bill to the package, then enough Dems will vote for it on the second go around on Tuesday...or whenever the revote is held.

[Baclava]

65. Lady Liberty!

Nice bayoneted musket

[Jack Rabbit]

50. !!

[center]

[/center][font size="1"]From Wikipedia Commons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Eugène_Delacroix_-_La_liberté_guidant_le_peuple.jpg)
(Public Domain)
[/font]

[JDPriestly]

53. Republicans wanted to take the money for worker assistance of of Medicare.

No deal

If the trade deal is going to be so great for our economy, the money for the worker assistance should be taken from the wealthy people who get the profits from trade deals, not from Americans who worked in the past, paid their taxes for Medicare for THEIR parents and now rely on Medicare paid for from the taxes of the generation that is now working.

[chev52]

55. The displaced worker fund

What more do you need to know Americans will lose their jobs because off this trade deal. A fund to help workers displaced if the bill passes.

[marble falls]

59. One of the few times I wanted one of the President's issues to not bear fruit. I'm glad but I'm....

not gloating.

[zeemike]

67. Rest assured it is not over yet, not by a long shot.

Money does not give up easily when they want something.

[DonCoquixote]

70. as someone who proudly wore the brand "obama cheerleader'

and as someone who got tired of Obama being blamed for the fact that all the ponies did not appear on cue because Blue Dog Congress critters made sure to kill anythign that would force them to earn their paychecks, I say this.

Good

TPP had to die.

And now, if SHE wants it in, the author and midwife of the TPP will have to campaign on it, and even Bill "minister of splaining stuff" Clinton will not be able to pour sauce on that turd.

[Divernan]

74. Eloquently stated, sir!

[antigop]

82. I just got home and wondered what had happened with the vote. Thanks for the updates. nt

[Kablooie]

84. I just heard that Obama may have wanted this to appease China.

This may just be an idle rumor but there is something going on in the South China Sea right now that's not covered by the US News at all.

There is a heated dispute over China controlling the sea trade routes around the Philippines.
China has been building artificial islands that they claim extends borders of China owned waters and they are building military based on them.

I hear the waters there are now crowded with warships from China, the US, Russia, Australia, India and more may enter the fray soon.
The people in the area are becoming very nervous and there are local articles scaring people with predictions of a hot war starting.

If China was part of Obama's reason to fast track the trade bill, could this conflict be part of the puzzle?

I don't know.
This is pure speculation and I'm probably just blowing bubbles out of my navel -- or naval as case may be.

[dpatbrown]

87. momentum

More momentum for Sanders. Great news. Do you think that people are starting to hear him?

For everyone who is thrilled with the outcome, you should sent a note of appreciation to Nancy Pelosi. It took a tremendous amount of courage on her part to oppose Obama.

[Babel_17]

91. An article at Salon shows why this was important

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/12/the_democrats_tpp_rebellion_just_drew_blood_everything_you_need_to_know_about_todays_shocking_vote/

TAA and fast track have passed together ever since the Trade Act of 1974. This is a Washington game where Democrats get to vote for TAA so Republicans don’t have to. Republicans don’t favor TAA because they see it as welfare.

That set up liberal Democrats as the deciding factor on whether Obama would get his fast-track trade authority. The President went to Capitol Hill to tell Democrats to “play it straight” on the vote. But voting for TAA as a sweetener for a policy most Democrats don’t support is the opposite of playing it straight. It’s a stupid game, and progressives finally decided not to play.

When Nancy Pelosi made her rambling speech on the House floor, finally saying that she would not vote for TAA, she was getting out in front of a caucus that already told her they weren’t going along. Pelosi said specifically she was voting to “slow down” fast track, meaning that she could be persuaded down the road to bring this home. But today, TAA fell 126-302, with only 39 Democrats supporting.

In a show vote just after, the House passed fast track, the vote that gives the President the ability to negotiate trade deals and bring them back for a guaranteed up-or-down vote without the possibility of filibuster or amendment. But without both fast track and TAA passing, the bill cannot go to the President for his signature.

[rbnyc]

100. Excellent article.

Thanks.

This is not simple.

[CullenBohannon]

93. finallly

This mess of a bill didn't pass the smell test.

[L0oniX]

96. Hillary's corporate backers must be very pissed off.

[raouldukelives]

112. IDK, I try to stay away from Wall St investors.

I prefer to surround myself with people who genuinely care about others.

[neverforget]

101. I love the Nelson Munce Ha! Ha!

Cracks me up every time.

Excellent.

[Phlem]

106. Fuck Yes!!!

Let's keep it up folks. You know this isn't the end.

[grahamhgreen]

107. Good riddance