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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Anti-TPP Amendment Fails at Heated Dem Platform Meeting [View all]portlander23
(2,078 posts)7. Lame duck is to our disadvantage
The TPP Lame Duck Push Insults Democracy
Dave Johnson
Common Dreams
Here is why the push is on. The so-called lame duck session of Congress is particularly unaccountable. Those who might have been tossed in the November elections are still able to vote. Newly elected and reelected legislators are not yet sworn in, so they cant vote. And reelected legislators have the opportunity to pay back the big donors who funded their campaigns, knowing voters have two long years to forget what they did.
For example, Rep. Randy Forbes, a Republican representing Virginias 4th congressional district who is a proponent of TPP, lost his primary to Scott Taylor, a TPP opponent who called the deal Obamatrade in the Republican primary. The TPP, and Forbes earlier vote for fast track trade authority to grease the skids for TPP, was a major issue in the primary.
But even though Forbes was tossed out by his constituents because of his support for fast track and TPP, he will still be able to vote if TPP comes up in the lame duck session of Congress. Forbes will be looking for a job probably from the very corporations that support TPP.
See if you can guess which way he will vote on TPP, after being tossed out for supporting free trade.
Dave Johnson
Common Dreams
Here is why the push is on. The so-called lame duck session of Congress is particularly unaccountable. Those who might have been tossed in the November elections are still able to vote. Newly elected and reelected legislators are not yet sworn in, so they cant vote. And reelected legislators have the opportunity to pay back the big donors who funded their campaigns, knowing voters have two long years to forget what they did.
For example, Rep. Randy Forbes, a Republican representing Virginias 4th congressional district who is a proponent of TPP, lost his primary to Scott Taylor, a TPP opponent who called the deal Obamatrade in the Republican primary. The TPP, and Forbes earlier vote for fast track trade authority to grease the skids for TPP, was a major issue in the primary.
But even though Forbes was tossed out by his constituents because of his support for fast track and TPP, he will still be able to vote if TPP comes up in the lame duck session of Congress. Forbes will be looking for a job probably from the very corporations that support TPP.
See if you can guess which way he will vote on TPP, after being tossed out for supporting free trade.
The lame duck session gives incentives to vote for unpopular legislation. This also hurts Mrs. Clinton because she does not support TPP but her brand is to build on top of Obama's foundation. This short circuits her sales pitch.
On the other hand, Trump's brand has been running against the GOP establishment, so having the backing of a party that disagrees with him plays into his narrative.
This really is the nexus of bad policy and bad politics for Democrats.
That said, progressives and working people will carry on the fight.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
73 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Definitely a bad choice by Dems. But don't forget there won't be any anti-TPP language in the GOP's
villager
Jul 2016
#1
Well, if he talks it up more than Clinton. But neither party will be "officially" against it.
villager
Jul 2016
#3
Good point. If this administration craps out TPP all over us during the Lame Duck, that will severly
villager
Jul 2016
#10
Her "campaign trail" would be over, at that point. It would knee cap her administration. (nt)
w4rma
Jul 2016
#52
Her eventual support will be due to some "new protections" or some such b.s .
CentralMass
Jul 2016
#29
The loss was about President Obama's ego. And the opposition to the TPP won't stop.
w4rma
Jul 2016
#11
If he is fine with it 'quietly' dying, then he shouldn't oppose statements against it, anywhere.(nt)
w4rma
Jul 2016
#15
It's ok to screw working people as long as we don't embarrass a sitting president
portlander23
Jul 2016
#12
The Sanders side needs to stop being so concerned about who is going to be able to claim credit.
annavictorious
Jul 2016
#16
It's not about "claiming credit". It's about stopping the TPP from ever becoming law. (nt)
w4rma
Jul 2016
#17
Stating that Democrats are against the TPP allows no wiggle room to rewrite history and be for it.
w4rma
Jul 2016
#25
Hillary will surely be uncomfortable, since she supposedly hates the TPP and all.
arcane1
Jul 2016
#26
So "uncomfortable" that she's given the word to most all of her surrogates to not oppose the TPP
w4rma
Jul 2016
#28
Remember the last time the Clintons 'played chess' with a 'free' trade agreement?
w4rma
Jul 2016
#35
The unions, environmental, indigenous, human rights groups and many top Democrats are opposed
think
Jul 2016
#62
NAFTA cost the Democrats control of Congress for the first time since the New Deal. (nt)
w4rma
Jul 2016
#34
The Republicans *say* they oppose these 'free' trade agreements, then quietly vote for them.
w4rma
Jul 2016
#37
You don't 'hate' to say that. It's not even true. These 'free' trade agreements underlie Trump's
w4rma
Jul 2016
#41
Paul Krugman: The Very Serious People who nearly destroyed the American economy have learned nothing
w4rma
Jul 2016
#43
You fully support the TPP and don't believe for a second that Clinton/Obama won't try to pass it. nt
w4rma
Jul 2016
#51
You're getting your way. She supports the TPP, otherwise she wouldn't be telling her surrogates
w4rma
Jul 2016
#54
Please provide the link to audio or video of Hillary telling her "surrogates"
MohRokTah
Jul 2016
#55
Most every surrogate that she picks just happens to oppose writing any anti-TPP statements. (nt)
w4rma
Jul 2016
#60
The important thing is what the TPP actually DOES rather than the considerations of the possible
think
Jul 2016
#72