Sessions to House GOP: TPA a Trojan horse for executive action on immigration, climate change; Update: Dem opposition “growing”

posted at 2:01 pm on June 11, 2015 by Ed Morrissey

The White House demand for plenary negotiating authority (Trade Promotion Authority or TPA) on the Pacific Rim trade pact has done what many thought impossible — unite the Left and the Right. In fact, it’s even united them on the same issue, the abuse of executive power …. although not in regard to the same policy areas. Key members in both caucuses and chambers on Capitol Hill want amendments to the TPA plan that will circumscribe executive power on immigration, climate change, and Wall Street regulation, reports William Mauldin at the Wall Street Journal:

Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) is seeking to prevent President Barack Obama from using trade agreements to make changes to U.S. laws on immigration and climate change, a move aimed at reassuring conservatives wary of voting to give Mr. Obama special trade authority.

Some Republicans, led by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), are warning that Mr. Obama could use so-called fast track legislation—which would expedite a sweeping Pacific trade agreement—not only to lift not trade barriers but also to ease the movement of people and workers.  Other Republicans are concerned about the Obama administration’s recent negotiations on climate change and efforts to change environmental rules without the participation of Congress.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) has even warned that a future president could use the six-year fast track legislation, also known as trade promotion authority, to expedite the passage of a trade agreement that could roll back rules on Wall Street.

So far, though, the plan on the Hill seems to be to push the TPA bill forward in the House as is, although Paul Ryan has already provided a twist on that process. Reuters reports that the strategy will open with a vote on trade in Africa with a sweetener in it for Democrats on subsidizing assistance for any lost jobs in the US. That has the unions on board, at least for this phase:

The maneuvering will begin on Thursday with an obscure bill aimed at encouraging trade with African nations. The measure now includes a provision important to Democrats to finance a program helping workers who lose their jobs as a result of trade deals. The program is known as trade adjustment assistance (TAA).

On Friday, the House would then debate and take votes on the TAA bill itself and “TPA,” or Trade Promotion Authority, which is also known as fast-track.

The failure of any one of these bills on Thursday or Friday could bring the entire initiative, a top priority of Obama’s, to a screeching halt, forcing Congress to figure out new ways to get the trade package to Obama’s desk.

Early on Thursday, a Democratic aide familiar with the deliberations, said problems remained, including whether public employees impacted by trade could apply for worker assistance.

“Labor unions are whipping members into a frenzy over the issue and this is very likely to be a major problem in getting significant House Democratic support for TAA,” the aide said.

Ryan’s effort appears to have been more quiet and less direct. He inserted language into a customs bill that would impact the TPA legislation if passed that blocks executive action on immigration and climate change. House leadership wants to give TPA an up-or-down vote on the Senate bill that passed last month, and Ryan’s strategy avoids holding up the TPA with amendments that would then need to pass in the Senate. Democrats and their supporters in the environmental movement weren’t happy about the impact on climate-change policies. Ryan pledged to derail a trade agreement that had language that could impact immigration policy:

Mr. Ryan’s changes may be more symbolic than binding. Even if the changes to the negotiating objectives are signed into law, lawmakers say a president could still choose to insert climate and immigration rules into a trade agreement and enact them through fast track, if Congress signed off at the end. A spokesman said Mr. Ryan is committed to removing a trade agreement from fast track consideration if it contains changes to immigration law.

That would be easier said than done at that point, but the question may be academic anyway. According to The Hill, only 116 Republicans and 19 Democrats in the House are committed or leaning to supporting the bill, while 130 Democrats and 29 Republicans are committed or leaning to opposition. That leaves 139 up in the air, most of them Republicans. To get to 218, Boehner and Pelosi will have to find at least 82 more votes out of the 139, a tall order indeed.

Right now, the public isn’t in the mood for more free trade agreements, either. An NBC News poll shows only 31% preferring free trade over protection for American jobs (66%). If two-thirds of the American public have no appetite for such a deal, then it’s difficult to imagine how Boehner and Pelosi convince two-thirds of the uncommitted to go for fast-track authority on a proposed deal that’s being kept so secret that members of Congress have to go into a locked room to view it. Those who back fast-track for a deal like that will have to face those constituents who will wonder why they put free trade, or even just normal scrutiny, ahead of boosting jobs at home first. Don’t think that scenario isn’t playing out in their minds right now.

Still, George Will believes that opposition to TPA on the Right may be misguided:

Some Republicans resist granting fast-track authority, a traditional presidential prerogative, to a president who has so arrogantly disregarded limits on executive discretion. It is, however, unnecessary to defeat fast-track authority (thereby defeating freer trade) in order to restrain this rogue president. The 22nd Amendment guarantees his departure in 19 months. His lawlessness has prompted congressional resistance on multiplying fronts. The judiciary, too, has repeatedly rebuked him for illegal executive overreaches. So, it is neither necessary nor statesmanlike to injure the nation’s future in order to protest Obama’s past.

Rep. Paul Ryan campaigned hard to prevent a second Obama term, but he strongly favors TPA. He notes that if Obama’s negotiations about Iran’s nuclear program were being conducted under guarantees of congressional involvement similar to those contained in TPA, Congress would enjoy statutorily required briefings on the negotiations and access to the negotiating documents. Furthermore, any agreement with Iran would have to be made public for examination at least 60 days before Obama signed it, after which the agreement could not take effect unless Congress approves it.

Obama has all the friends in Congress he has earned and deserves, so even among Democrats this cohort is vanishingly small. By passing TPA, House Republicans can achieve a fine trifecta, demonstrating their ability to rise above their justifiable resentments, underscoring his dependence on them and on Congress, and illustrating his party’s dependence on factions inimical to economic vitality.

TPA doesn’t mean ratification; it just means that the ratification vote has to be up-or-down on the treaty as presented, rather than having the Senate renegotiate the treaty unilaterally. That’s why Congress has often given presidents this authority. However, past presidents have rarely if ever shown such contempt for Congressional authority and a determination to usurp legislative functions as Obama has. And some conservatives rightly wonder whether Republicans would sustain a majority to torpedo the TPP deal if it turns out to be as bad as some fear. That, combined by the strange secrecy surrounding the deal, is enough to support the skeptical view and demand a more open process, even if that does make the job tougher for Obama.

Update: Looks like TPA is in serious trouble, but so is the TAA thanks to unions not being mollified after all:

President Barack Obama’s push for a large-scale trade deal with the Pacific Rim is in serious jeopardy, as House Democratic opposition to his top legislative agenda is growing on Capitol Hill. …

Most pressing are concerns over TAA. The initiative is unpopular with Republicans, and aides in both parties estimate that only 50 to 100 GOP lawmakers will vote for it. And with unions actively lobbying against the bill, a senior House Democratic aide said it will be “a major problem” to wrangle “significant House Democratic support” for the measure.

The so-called rule vote is also critical, and is in danger, according to sources. That measure would allow the House to proceed to the larger trade package. A vote of that nature is usually carried by the majority party, but in a sign of how close it is, Wisconsin Rep. Ron Kind — a pro-trade Democrat — is urging his party to vote with the GOP.

Both the jobs assistance bill and the rule needs 218 votes to pass.

The uncertainty surrounding the TAA and fast track votes are becoming a serious problem for Obama. If TAA fails, the House will not take up Trade Promotion Authority, the key legislation that would give Obama fast-track authority to negotiate the sweeping Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. Under that scenario both sides would have to regroup and figure out a way forward — or else the 12-nation trade deal could fall apart.

If they needed 82 votes and Democrats are bailing on it, then all of those votes would have to come from the GOP’s 100 uncommitted members — assuming the leaners don’t abandon ship. If the GOP had an 82% whip rate overall for Obama, that would be surprising, but among the uncommitted? That seems all but impossible. And note that Democrats will not go along at all on TPA without TAA, which looks almost certain to go down to defeat now. It’s getting ugly.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Ryan has seriously damaged himself by pushing this crap.

petefrt on June 11, 2015 at 5:38 PM

Ryan has long been a big government guy. He has supported TARP, the auto bailout, No Child Left Behind and every debt ceiling increase. He was rolled by Joe Biden and Patty Murray. His debt reduction plans call tor a balanced budget by 2040. The only people who think highly of Ryan are women who admire his abs.

bw222 on June 11, 2015 at 6:19 PM

What do you make of this reasoning?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/419650/yes-trade-promotion-authority-which-does-not-mean-yes-trans-pacific-partnership-andrew

onlineanalyst on June 11, 2015 at 5:56 PM

Normally it is very difficult to pass a treaty, requiring a 2/3rds vote of Congress, but if TPA is passed, (which changes the Constitution without an amendment and is thus unconstitutional), instead of requiring 2/3rds vote to pass, it requires a 2/3rds vote to defeat TPP and other acts of treason.

Totally unconstitutional, illegal, and by definition Obamatrade is literally treason. It sells out America to foreign powers for money/power. AKA Treason.

FloatingRock on June 11, 2015 at 6:20 PM

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 5:33 PM

You’ll note that I’ve already discussed the salient parts of the agreement that vary from traditional trade agreements, particularly in regard to immigration policy changes, rather than posting portions that are standard to any trade agreement.

If you were ever in pursuit of a point it has eluded you.

thatsafactjack on June 11, 2015 at 6:30 PM

There will be another round of milking extortion when TPP comes up for ratification in 2016 and when the European trade bill comes up sometime in the Cruz or Sanders administration.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 5:10 PM

lol!

thatsafactjack on June 11, 2015 at 6:31 PM

I am just shocked that Ted Cruz read and voted for this bill. How do we explain this?

Jack_Burton on June 11, 2015 at 2:26 PM

Ted is literally married to Wall Street. Wife Heidi, on leave as a top executive for Goldman Sachs, formerly worked for JP Morgan Chase. Ted is not gonna bite the hand that’s been feeding him lobster, caviar and champagne for the past 10 years.

Why do you think he wants to double legal immigration and increase H-1B visas by 500%?

Ted is just another big business Republican with constitutional conservative speeches.

bw222 on June 11, 2015 at 6:42 PM

Ryan is not to be trusted. Period.

Carnac on June 11, 2015 at 6:44 PM

Astounding, simply astounding.

At least Ed recognizes the differences between TPA, TAA, and TPP, although it is difficult to get information through the thick skulls of some. The dangerous provisions sparking the fear and rage may be in TPP, the final version has not yet been negotiated. If they are there when it is submitted for ratification, we should oppose the agreement.

►►

But TPP negotiations began in the Bush Administration. It is very important to reinforce our influence in Asia; the downsizing of the Navy along with the generally weak foreign policy of Obama has hurt us in the region. Failure to adopt a trade agreement after a dozen partners have worked with us on it will drive them closer to China, and increase Chinese clout while reducing ours.

Personally, I would be leery of taking the same position as Warren and Sanders on anything. YMMV.

Adjoran on June 11, 2015 at 6:48 PM

Levin just gave a good rant about how the former congress critters like Trent Lott and Daschle etc are all on the lobbyist payroll, and are working behind the scenes lobbying the current congress to enrich the big corps they work for, and they are pushing this Obamatrade hard, showing that it is all about these scumbags all enriching themselves at the expense of the American worker and taxpayer.

Senator Philip Bluster on June 11, 2015 at 6:52 PM

While liberal organizations and members of Congress deride the TPP as the biggest boondoggle since NAFTA and President Obama defends it as “the most progressive trade treaty ever,” the influence peddlers who populate K Street see opportunity.

NAFTA has cost US workers an estimated 700,000 – 1,000,000 jobs. Appliances that were once made in Louisville (GE) and Evansville (Whirlpool) are now manufactured in Mexico. Cars that would have been built in Michigan (Big Three) or the southeast (foreign nameplates) are now made in Mexico.

The year before NAFTA the US had a small trade surplus with Mexico. Last year it had a $54 billion deficit.

bw222 on June 11, 2015 at 6:58 PM

You’ll note that I’ve already discussed the salient parts of the agreement that vary from traditional trade agreements, particularly in regard to immigration policy changes, rather than posting portions that are standard to any trade agreement.

Why don’t YOU provide a link to the text in the wikileaks doc, then… so I don’t have to guess what the heck you are talking about?

I’ve read the whole thing. I don’t see anything that sends me scurrying to find my tinfoil hat….

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 7:00 PM

“Several staffers are in the bag with lobbyists who hang around and chum with them all the time,” one House GOP aide in one of the very many House GOP offices still publicly undecided said in an email. “Pretty shady. ‘Tis the season for damn near every lobbyist in the forsaken town to cash in with their ‘buddies’ and call in their favor. Problem is, staff are having a hard time moving their bosses.”

Moreover, even members who are coming out in support of Obamatrade are having a difficult time defending their decision since none of them wants to be the next major headline in conservative media—Breitbart News or the massively influential Drudge Report–which has been closely following every Obamatrade development.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/11/republican-opposition-to-obamatrade-grows-in-face-of-ryan-mistakes/

lynncgb on June 11, 2015 at 7:01 PM

NAFTA has cost US workers an estimated 700,000 – 1,000,000 jobs. Appliances that were once made in Louisville (GE) and Evansville (Whirlpool) are now manufactured in Mexico. Cars that would have been built in Michigan (Big Three) or the southeast (foreign nameplates) are now made in Mexico.

And, BMWs that were once made in Germany are now made in South Carolina. And Mercedes in Alabama. And Toyotas in Texas. And Hondas in Ohio. An Nissans in Mississippi.

Somehow I’m guessing that the UAW did not include those NEW jobs in the union PR number above.

Or for that matter, the numbers of new jobs at Google or Amazon that weren’t even imagined when NAFTA was passed.

Countries like the US, Japan, and Germany, can not and never will be able to, with labor intensive last-century manufacturing jobs. That’s the nature of the beast. We’ve lost ours to Mexico. Japan has lost there’s to Vietnam. And so forth. The advanced economies get new types of jobs in new types of industries.

I know there’s a longing for the days of buggy whips, but things don’t stay the same forever.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 7:07 PM

What do you make of this reasoning?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/419650/yes-trade-promotion-authority-which-does-not-mean-yes-trans-pacific-partnership-andrew

onlineanalyst on June 11, 2015 at 5:56 PM

Not much.

A fast-tracked trade deal has never in it’s history been blocked. And as Mr. Morrisey rightly states, “some conservatives rightly wonder whether Republicans would sustain a majority to torpedo the TPP deal if it turns out to be as bad as some fear”.

lynncgb on June 11, 2015 at 7:08 PM

Is this trade deal a new translation of “Das Kapital”.

CodaUPB on June 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM

At least Ed recognizes the differences between TPA, TAA, and TPP, although it is difficult to get information through the thick skulls of some.

Adjoran on June 11, 2015 at 6:48 PM

TPA/TPP/TTIP/TISA is all Obamatrade. If they pass TPA the rest is virtually impossible to stop. That’s why the differences between them are irrelevant because it’s the first one, TPA, that decides the rest. Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) is like the one ring to rule them all. The traitors that vote for it need to be lined up a shot for treason immediately after they receive a fair trial.

One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them.

FloatingRock on June 11, 2015 at 7:20 PM

And, BMWs that were once made in Germany are now made in South Carolina. And Mercedes in Alabama. And Toyotas in Texas. And Hondas in Ohio. An Nissans in Mississippi.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 7:07 PM

Toyotas, BMWs and Nissans built in the US are for sale in the United States. Mexico is now the leading importer of vehicles into the United States (for sale in the United States).

Your screen name describes you perfectly.

bw222 on June 11, 2015 at 7:23 PM

The agreement allows the immigration of workers from all member nations, much like the Schengen Agreement/Area of the EU. These workers would then be free to exploit our other immigration laws to bring their families over through ‘family reunification’ visas.

Please prove a link to ANY paragraph of ANY leaked wikileaks draft that discusses ANY immigration other than temporary guest worker visas for workers in working for and/or with service contracts for a company in a host country.

Just one link.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 7:27 PM

I know there’s a longing for the days of buggy whips, but things don’t stay the same forever.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 7:07 PM

Do you know someone named joana? Also posts comments here from time to time?

Just wondering because there are comments you make that have the same condescending tone she uses.

lineholder on June 11, 2015 at 7:30 PM

Quoting from another blogger:
mastice -Jun. 11, 2015 at 5:26pm

Finally, a story here on TheBlaze about this but still not about the bigger issue at hand here. (a little disappointed in you Blaze staff) This legislation is being strong armed through congress, by in large by Republicans, without fully reading or understanding the whole text of the bill. This is not only reckless and irresponsible but extremely dangerous. ANY politician, regardless of political party, that votes ‘yay’ on any piece of legislation without fully reading and understanding it should be removed from office immediately. This is NOT what our founders had in mind and they would be rolling over in their graves right now.

Bambi on June 11, 2015 at 7:40 PM

Countries like the US, Japan, and Germany, can not and never will be able to, with labor intensive last-century manufacturing jobs.

Germany still has tons of high-paid manufacturing.

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 7:50 PM

Bambi on June 11, 2015 at 7:40 PM

No doubt Glenn Beck and The Blaze have some wealthy benefactor(s) that support Obamatrade. I’d guess that Huntsman is one of the weasels, but perhaps not the only one.

FloatingRock on June 11, 2015 at 7:53 PM

Failure to adopt a trade agreement after a dozen partners have worked with us on it will drive them closer to China, and increase Chinese clout while reducing ours.

We have already sold out to China, they are running things over there no matter what stupid trade deal we pass.

Personally, I would be leery of taking the same position as Warren and Sanders on anything. YMMV.

Adjoran on June 11, 2015 at 6:48 PM

I honestly would rather listen to them on this issue than Ryan or other GOP sellouts; they have more credibility.

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 7:54 PM

The kabuki dance here is that the Republicans have 20 extra votes for TPA that they don’t want to use because they want to make as many Dems walk the plank and get primaried by the unions as possible. So the final vote will be a 4 or 5 vote win (so nobody was the deciding vote), with the Republicans using as few of the votes in their back pocket as necessary and Pelosi trying to keep as many of her votes from having to walk the plank as possible

Very possible, however I think that you and the GOP don’t realize how loathed this Obamatrade thing is.

GOP voters are masochists, yes, and honestly stupid to continue supporting a party that continually spits in their faces, but TPP support will be yet another disaster for the GOP and certainly won’t help them in 16.

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 7:59 PM

At least Ed recognizes the differences between TPA, TAA, and TPP, although it is difficult to get information through the thick skulls of some.

Adjoran on June 11, 2015 at 6:48 PM

Everybody understands the difference, they don’t want a straight up and down vote that only needs a simple majority.

They want congress to be able to make amendments.

If our “partners” don’t like it, who cares? We are more important and it is up to us whether the deal passes or not.

Judging from past experience there is a 99% chance that we would be the ones getting the short end of the stick anyway.

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 8:02 PM

Very possible, however I think that you and the GOP don’t realize how loathed this Obamatrade thing is.

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 7:59 PM

I have a feeling s/he does know how loathed Obamatrade is but has a vested interest in it.

FloatingRock on June 11, 2015 at 8:23 PM

I have a feeling s/he does know how loathed Obamatrade is but has a vested interest in it.

FloatingRock on June 11, 2015 at 8:23 PM

Knowing the vote counts would suggest some sort of inside info.

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 8:30 PM

It doesn’t take inside information when you read that a group of 18-23 Republican no votes are horsetrading:

Conservative Republicans are pressing House GOP leaders for a package of concessions on a fast-track trade bill they say would deliver roughly two dozen key votes — but that critics argue is designed to sink the bill.

Top members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus have been negotiating with the GOP leadership team for two weeks over changes to a bill that would give President Barack Obama authority to expedite free-trade deals. They have three demands: that the charter for the federal Export-Import Bank, which is set to expire at the end of the month, not be given a reauthorization vote; that rank-and-file lawmakers be given more power to reject future trade deals; and that aid for workers displaced by free trade be separated from the trade legislation.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/house-freedom-caucus-trade-bill-gop-leaders-118594.html#ixzz3cnuxLJM3

The horsetrading is fine. The three demands are easy enough. They’ve alredy separated out the TPA jobs training union pork so Repubs can vote against it. But, why would Boehner want to use these votes if he doesn’t need them? He certainly isn’t going to use them to let 20 Dems off the hook. After all, it’s Obama’s bill.

Boehner has 20. Pelosi has 20. They’ll play chicken up ’til the final roll call, ending up passing the TPA by some small margin (just big enough so that nobody has to cast the deciding vote). They both might have to use a few. Nothing that a transfer from a leadership PAC to a campaign fund can’t nail down if needed.

Once you understand it’s an extortion racket, you can see these milker bills for what they are. Making it look like the bill won’t pass is the Congressional equivalent of going to special interests (on both sides) and saying, “hey, that’s a lovely business you’ve got there. It would be a shame if something happened to it…” Business is paying protection money to the Repubs. Unions are paying protection money to the Dems. Obama is probably collecting on both sides of the racket — from the unions and from business.

It’s all theater. The underlying belief that free trade agreements are a net benefit to US business was decided 40 or 50 years ago.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 8:55 PM

And, the horsetrading on the Dem side has been sweetening the TAA “jobs retraining” union pork. Business gets the trade bill. Unions get a money for nothing fund.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 8:57 PM

Or maybe they went to check out threads that we already active at other sites.

lineholder on June 11, 2015 at 4:58 PM

Maybe.

Tlaloc on June 11, 2015 at 9:04 PM

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 7:50 PM

I don’t know if it’s still in place, but Germany kept tight import limits in their economy for a while. This allowed them to keep some elements of the manufacturing industry withing Germany strong enough to support the economy and provide exports.

lineholder on June 11, 2015 at 9:09 PM

I basically agree with your view of DC, even though I vehemently disagree that the TPP, or even prior trade deals, will be/have been good for the nation as a whole. That 50 year period largely coincides with a decline in the nation as a whole, starting with the Ted Kennedy immigration bill that prioritized third-worlders.

This GOP led congress has careened from one treasonous disaster to another, and I don’t think the kabuki will cut it this time.

This bill has too many giveaways and gives away too much sovereignty. Not scare tactics, simply what has been released so far.

People are voting for something that is tremendously important which they have not even bothered to read.

It is a complete and utter disgrace.

Redstone on June 11, 2015 at 9:13 PM

It’s a bizarre world we’re living in when we’re saved by the dems.

Norky on June 11, 2015 at 9:15 PM

I basically agree with your view of DC, even though I vehemently disagree that the TPP, or even prior trade deals, will be/have been good for the nation as a whole. That 50 year period largely coincides with a decline in the nation as a whole, starting with the Ted Kennedy immigration bill that prioritized third-worlders.

Oh, don’t get me wrong. I have absolutely no idea whether this or any free trade deals are, in reality, a net plus for the US economy. The only thing I’m absolutely sure of is that none of braying, chest thumping, and fear mongering in the blogosphere and media this week (from both sides) will help me really understand in any way whatsoever. None of it is actually intended to shed light.

I try to follow a couple of in-depth issues oriented podcasts, one from the left and one from the right, to get an overview of complex political issues. The media and the partisan blogs are useless.

In this case, my favorite NPR (lefty podcasts) and my favorite Coffee and Markets (righty podcast) have done multiple shows on these trade bills over the last couple months, with expert guests from both sides. The proponents have tended to be a bit more balanced, enumerating winners and losers from trade deals in the US economy.

I don’t really care one way or the other. I generally favor fewer government barriers and protections and impediments to free trade. On the other hand, I like seeing Obama slapped down whenever possible.

The cherry on the sundae in this one would be opening up the Japanese market. However, it is apparently far from clear how far Japan will go. They have even stronger protectionist factions than we do, especially in the agriculture sector.

village idiot on June 11, 2015 at 9:45 PM

Scott Walker Pushes Obamatrade On Eve Of Vote

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/11/scott-walker-pushes-obamatrade-on-eve-of-vote/

Once a crony, always a crony.

FloatingRock on June 11, 2015 at 10:30 PM

Norky: “It’s a bizarre world we’re living in when we’re saved by the dems.”

But we won’t be saved by the Dems. They’ll all work it out so not all R’s will vote yes, & leave room for the D’s. Its a game, but a dangerous one of playing with our sovereignty & weakening our Constitutional rights. But what do these plutocrats care, as long as they get all the goods, & those voting yes get bonus packages.

Didn’t know if it was already posted that Obamacare relaxes visas for Pakistan. There’ll be many of these items that come out after passage.

It is disgraceful that this bill will be passed with a majority of legislators who haven’t bothered to read it, & with 100% (minus the Wikileaks) of the bill being shielded from public view.

Yes, I fear the worst, that it’ll pass. Obama & Boehner will see to it. Doomsday Friday.

Thanks, Hotair, for posting this thread. Us constitutionalists were getting worried.

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2015/06/obamatrade-relaxes-visa-process-for-pakistan

Belle on June 11, 2015 at 10:39 PM

Oh, no, another GOP contender bites the dust. We’ll knew Walker was big on amnesty, but now he’s officially a globalist. If this keeps up, who’ll be left to vote for next November?

Belle on June 11, 2015 at 10:40 PM

Scott Walker Pushes Obamatrade On Eve Of Vote

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/11/scott-walker-pushes-obamatrade-on-eve-of-vote/

Once a crony, always a crony.

FloatingRock on June 11, 2015 at 10:30 PM

Scott Walker just blew it.

When he briefly parroted Jeff Sessions on immigration, I was willing to give Walker a second look, as I believe a nationalist conservative agenda is the only one that will take the GOP to the White House in 2016. I specified that Walker, in order to convince skeptics, who had every right to be skeptical, given his past immigration positions, should continue down that path, and publicly, and vehemently, oppose TPA/TPP.

Since then he’s been as quiet as a dormouse, except to offer his support to a Constitutional marriage amendment, in a grotesque, pointless, and obvious pander to social conservatives.

Now we know where he stands. Bye-bye Mid West, bye-bye White House.

Joseph K on June 11, 2015 at 10:45 PM

Norky: “It’s a bizarre world we’re living in when we’re saved by the dems.”

But we won’t be saved by the Dems.

Belle on June 11, 2015 at 10:39 PM

Damn right we won’t be saved by the Dems; this is Kabuki theater all right, but not in the way Village Idiot thinks.

The Democratic Party loves TPA/TPP. It will facilitate the continued de-industrialization of American, exporting decent manufacturing jobs while importing more low wage workers. The result will be a vast, metastasizing dependent class that will vote Democrat into infinity.

The problem is that the Democrats cannot appear to be pro-TPA/TPP. They are still, vaguely, the party of the working class, and need those voters in 2016. The Obama coalition is imploding, and will disappear with him. Hillary, or whoever is the candidate, needs those despised white working class voters to win.

Obama is a lame duck and can afford to take heat from the likes of Elizabeth Warren. The corrupt union leadership knows the score, but can be bought off with trash like TAA (more Dependent Class fertilizer), which they will sell to their short-sighted membership. GOP Inc., crony capitalist to the core, will do the heavy lifting and get the thing passed. The Democrats will turn around and use the issue against the Republicans in 2016. The Republicans will lose.

GOP Inc. is now pretty much signaling that it does not care about winning. It’s happy with payoffs from the Chamber and fundraising off outrage. An occasional Congressional majority seems to be the extent of its ambition now, and I think they are losing the belly for that.

Joseph K on June 11, 2015 at 11:02 PM

Well said, Joseph K!
Alas, sadly well said.
Its a doomsday scenario, & us freedom loving people have no where to go.
It almost feels that hotair threw us a bone by posting a thread on this before the eve of disaster.
Ha, for some dark humor I remember Pelosi saying she was going to drain the swamp.
That swamp has turned into an ocean, & it’ll not be curtailed.

Belle on June 11, 2015 at 11:24 PM

The Democrats will turn around and use the issue against the Republicans in 2016. The Republicans will lose.

Joseph K on June 11, 2015 at 11:02 PM

GOP fast track to the minority

http://netrightdaily.com/2015/05/gop-fast-track-to-the-minority/

lynncgb on June 11, 2015 at 11:34 PM

FLOOD THE PHONES STARTING AT 9AM EASTERN TIME ON FRIDAY!!!

Call your local office of your Senator and Representative……DEMOCRAT or member of the SURRENDERLICAN Party!!!

Tell these Chamber of Commerce Whores NO NO NO on ObamaTrade!!

PappyD61 on June 11, 2015 at 11:42 PM

Wow, lynncgb, thanks for posting such an excellent article!

Pappy, I’ll be doing just that. @ times like these, ya’ll just got to do something.

Belle on June 11, 2015 at 11:51 PM

WE (Mammy and I) have stopped donating to Ted Cruz over this piece of crap legislation.

If Cruz thinks this is a good idea to hand this despot ANY more power then he to is a freaking fool.

NO OBAMATRADE, SAVE OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY…..if it’s not too late already.

Good Lord these people in DC are just plain despicable and traitorous to our nation!!!

If you can’t defend our nationhood what are you worth?

PappyD61 on June 11, 2015 at 11:52 PM

Here are DC phone numbers and contact info…

http://www.contactingthecongress.org

PappyD61 on June 11, 2015 at 11:56 PM

lynncgb on June 11, 2015 at 11:34 PM

Excellent link, thank you! I had not given much thought to the 2016 Senate races; I’ve been focusing almost solely on the Presidential race. I was looking at the tally for the House vote earlier and was shocked at all the House Reps from Rust Belt states voting “yes”. Talk about a death wish.

Joseph K on June 12, 2015 at 12:09 AM

Ya know, looking back, I knew what sell-outs they were. But, darn it, I wanted a little glimmer of hope.
All those showmanship repeals for Obamacare by the House were just that, show.
These progressive rino’s wanted Obamacare all along! They didn’t need to vote for it because the Dems took care of that, but they sure funded it, & will continue to support it.

They happily funded DHS & fully funded O’s executive amnesty.
Oh, not a word of border security amongst these turncoats.
Not an argument on raising the debt ceiling.
They gleefully supported Lynch, a clone of Holder.
& on & On.
Traitors. Each & every one of them.
Even Joni Ernst was a disappointment, She lied…we’ll make them squeal…right, & she supported fast-track.

Is there any politician that hasn’t let us down? Jeff Sessions, a lone ranger in a pool of rinos.

Belle on June 12, 2015 at 12:11 AM

Thanks, Pappy, I bookmarked it. The little people will speak to a brick wall, but still, its something.

Belle on June 12, 2015 at 12:13 AM

Oh, no, another GOP contender bites the dust. We’ll knew Walker was big on amnesty, but now he’s officially a globalist. If this keeps up, who’ll be left to vote for next November?

If TPP is the issue you take your stand on, you have three choices:

Donald Trump
Bernie Sanders
Martin O’Malley

Personally, I’m just not that worked up over a trade pact to vote for any of those three.

Cruz’ support of TPP is simple. Three million jobs in the state he represents in the Senate rely on US exports. Texas, with energy, agriculture, tech sectors, and corporate headquarters for Toyota and many others is a huge free trade winner.

village idiot on June 12, 2015 at 12:34 AM

Rand Paul’s against it.

Belle on June 12, 2015 at 12:48 AM

Rubbing it in our faces.

“Popping up out of the Democrats’ dug-out at Nationals Park with 24 White House beers on offer for the winning team, Obama was greeted with Republicans chanting “TPA, TPA!”

Ah, what’s with the drama, anyway, you know what’s going to happen.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/house-democrats-vote-trade-bill-unfair-fast-track-barack-obama-118892.html

Belle on June 12, 2015 at 1:07 AM

ConstantineXI on June 11, 2015 at 2:58 PM

I have seen the reports of Disney blacklisting their employees, of course no explanation from Disney.

What I want to know is why no one there has been arrested for this. The law forbids EXACTLY what they did.

Jeff kuhner will have Ted Cruz on his radio program on WRKO this morning at 0930 to explain his position on TPP and the aristocrat wetdream TPP.

dogsoldier on June 12, 2015 at 7:41 AM

Well, Ted Cruz and Scott Walker have come out in support of it.

Paul Ryan has gone full Pelosi

So, if its not that bad…. why the rush to pass it before anyone can read it? Why the secrecy from the public? Doesn’t matter which letter’s by your name, if you can’t be transparent about what’s in a bill, you know it’s bad.

Never in the history of mankind, has there been a person, or group of people, more capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, than the Republican party of today.

Razgriez on June 12, 2015 at 9:07 AM

Kuhner’s article, cited by dog soldier, is mandatory reading. Today is D Day for America. Ted Cruz and Paul Ryan are fools.- ( and that’s giving them he benefit of the doubt).

Basilsbest on June 12, 2015 at 9:21 AM

Cruz will be on Kuhner’s show in seven minutes.

dogsoldier on June 12, 2015 at 9:24 AM

Rand Paul’s against it.

Nope. Check again. He has said that is favors free trade agreements and will likely support TPP when it comes up for a vote. He voted against TPA in the Senate purely because he didn’t want to give Obama additional authority.

village idiot on June 12, 2015 at 9:26 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3