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

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
5. "Trade agreements should proceed through open Congressional Regular Order."
Tue May 12, 2015, 09:26 PM
May 2015

What could go wrong?

This was supposed to be the easiest part. Just today on a cloture vote (supermajority rule) to consider debating and amending the TPA, we had a "procedural dispute." The Republican majority had allowed TPA and TAA (a bill providing further displaced worker benefits for job losses) to advance together as a concession to the Democrats.

Now, TAA alone would be a hard pill to swallow for House Republicans, but the Senate felt they could get the 2 bills approved.

Then, the Senate Democrats decided they really wanted 2 other separate bills added to the package. One about trade in Africa. The other about "currency manipulation." This second extra bill is basically the famous "poison pill."
Obama has explained adding more "currency manipulation" rules, even if agreed to by 11 other countries, would leave us open to charges by other nations of "currency manipulation" regarding Federal Reserve policies - a guaranteed veto by Obama.

The Republicans did not add the extra 2 bills -- the Democrats rejected just the 2 bills included. Done.

Who knows what's next? If anything.

Imagine 535 Congresspersons doing this to every chapter and verse of trade negotiations, and you now understand why Regular Order doesn't work and will not work.

Unless you want what we have had for years -- nothing.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

"True rank-and-file Democrats would never support this." yallerdawg May 2015 #1
Interestingly, ... 1StrongBlackMan May 2015 #2
It's true. Like the President said, "we've got folks still fighting the last battle". Tarheel_Dem Jun 2015 #27
I remember all the horrid threads about ACA Iliyah May 2015 #3
I agree. Andy823 May 2015 #4
+1 treestar Jun 2015 #23
And Social Security, and DADT, and DOMA, and Iraq and on and on ... JoePhilly Jun 2015 #26
"Trade agreements should proceed through open Congressional Regular Order." yallerdawg May 2015 #5
Major goal post shifting, and for what? ucrdem May 2015 #7
149 amendments have been proposed revising TPA so far. yallerdawg May 2015 #14
One day later... yallerdawg May 2015 #15
for the record... steve2470 May 2015 #6
Wow ucrdem May 2015 #8
I think the problem is that trade is a Dem wedge issue. ucrdem May 2015 #9
No elected Democrat can go wrong opposing trade deals. yallerdawg May 2015 #11
Yep. That's why there are a lot of maybes in the California delegation at least. ucrdem May 2015 #12
Chicken or egg? yallerdawg May 2015 #10
"'Fast track' greases the skids." yallerdawg May 2015 #13
Belated kick Hekate May 2015 #16
conversation with my activist brother about TPP went like this steve2470 Jun 2015 #17
yes -I'm also very pro-labor (especially these days, when labor is getting shafted all around) MBS Jun 2015 #20
This is how I see President Obama and the TPP steve2470 Jun 2015 #24
ditto, ditto, ditto n/t MBS Jun 2015 #25
Kick! Cha Jun 2015 #18
Pew Research, May 27: "Free Trade Agreements Seen as Good for U.S." ucrdem Jun 2015 #19
A calm, rational description of trade promotion authority (TPA). yallerdawg Jun 2015 #21
Good explanation. ucrdem Jun 2015 #22
Who advises on TPP? Just corporations? yallerdawg Jun 2015 #28
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Barack Obama»BARACK OBAMA GROUP: Excel...»Reply #5