Paul Ryan ok with Obama regulating commerce with foreign nations

[johnwk]

SEE: Lawmakers reach deal on 'fast track' trade authority (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/04/16/lawmakers-reach-deal-fast-track/25885569/)

April 16, 2015

”WASHINGTON — Top lawmakers reached a deal Thursday on legislation to grant President Obama "fast track" trade authority to advance one of the largest trade pacts in history, a step that could set off one of the sharpest legislative battles of the year and put Democratic unity to the test.
The bill is a top priority for the administration and congressional Republicans, but the fast track bill and the underlying Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade deal between the U.S. and 11 Asia-Pacific nations, is roundly opposed by major labor unions and most congressional Democrats.”

The power which Paul Ryan wants Obama to usurp and exercise is Fast-track trade power. I say usurp because Congress cannot delegate a power which is exclusively placed in the Legislatures’ hands. This proposed power would remove the people’s representatives from Congress’ assigned duty to debate, create, amend, and adopt legislation regulating commerce with foreign nations.

Fast-track trade power would allow the President to negotiate trade deals with foreign nations in secret and effectively eliminate the American People’s Representatives from their assigned duty to create legislation regulating commerce with foreign nations. Congress would no longer create the legislation and the process of adding corrective amendments to Obama’s deals to insure they promote America’s best interests would be totally circumvented. The only part Congress would have in the President’s fast-track trade power would be an up or down vote within 90 days upon receiving the presidents' deal which leaves little time to even allow the people’s representatives to read and study the deal and then debate it before a vote.

This Fast-tract trade authority is a Chamber of Commerce’s idea to remove the people’s Representatives from amending bad trade deals struck by Obama in secret which are not in the best interests of America, but rather, are deals beneficial to international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or promoting the general welfare of the United States.

Every member of the House and Senate who supports this attempt to usurp Congress’ power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and allow Obama to exercise this power which is exclusively placed in Congress’ hands ought to be viewed as a dangerous domestic enemy of the United States and subversive of our Constitutionally limited system of government.

GOP ringleaders behind Obama-Trade authority are Senator Mitch McConnell from Kentucky, Senator Orrin Hatch, Utah, and our little weasel from Wisconsin, Paul Ryan.

Just remember exactly what these snakes are attempting to do, which is to circumvent the process of having the people’s Representatives creating legislation, debating it, amending it and then adopting it. Their intention is to effectively exclude the people’s elected Representatives from the legislative process as it was intended to operate by our founding fathers.

JWK



To support Jeb Bush is to support our Global Governance crowd and their WTO, NAFTA, GATT, and CAFTA, all used to circumvent America First trade policies, while fattening the fortunes of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation.

[johnwk]

Well, has anybody figured out why Paul Ryan wants to reverse the roles of the President and Congress when formulating regulations of commerce with foreign nations? I surely don’t know. But I do know our Founding Fathers intentionally decided that Congress would have exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations with the exception that the President would have veto power. Ryan seems to want to reverse the roles of Congress and the President with reference to the regulation of commerce.


But the regulation of commerce has always been, and for good cause, an exclusive power of Congress! As evidence, let us recall our Nation’s first revenue raising Act (http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llac&fileName=001/llac001.db&recNum=55) in which Congress exercised its exclusive power over commerce with foreign nations to adopt an America First Policy!

In addition to imposing a specific amount of tax on specifically chosen articles imported, our Congress imposed an across-the-board tax on imports which was higher for imports arriving in foreign owned foreign built vessels, and discounted the tax for imports arriving in American owned American built ships:

"...a discount of ten percent on all duties imposed by this Act shall be allowed on such goods, wares, and merchandise as shall be imported in vessels built in the United States, and wholly the property of a citizen or citizens thereof." SEE: An Act imposing duties on Tonnage July 20, 1789 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=150)

This patriotic use of taxing at our water’s edge not only filled our national treasury, but gave American ship builders a hometown advantage and predictably resulted in America's ship building industry to flourish and America’s merchant marine to become the most powerful on the face of the planet.

The fact is, Congress, and not our president, is vested with power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and this power was intended to be exercised by Congress so each State’s interests would be represented when formulating regulations of commerce which would affect their economic interests. Fast-track trade authority is intentionally designed to remove the people’s representatives from the process when regulations of commerce are being formulated. And this would benefit international corporations who have no allegiance to America or any nation, and certainly do not give two twits about the economic interests of the of the United States.

Perhaps Paul Ryan shares the views of international corporate giants and believes the interests of the various states being debated and considered when formulating regulations of commerce with foreign nations is an obstruction to the interests of international corporations?

JWK



He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation___ Declaration of Independence

[amartin315]

the kind of protectionism you are talking about is a bad thing. not pro market at all. it benefits a few shipbuilders at the expense of the overall welfare of the many.

however, on the point of separation of powers, you are correct

[ZENemy]

Color me shocked, a control freak is OK with another control freak controlling something.

[johnwk]

the kind of protectionism you are talking about is a bad thing. not pro market at all. it benefits a few shipbuilders at the expense of the overall welfare of the many.

however, on the point of separation of powers, you are correct

I’m not sure what you mean by “protectionism”.

Taxing at our water's edge to give America's ship building industry a hometown advantage was indeed patriotic, and such taxes were paid by foreign importers at custom houses prior to such products entering our market place. Why do you have such a problem with foreigners paying for the privilege of doing business on American soil? Shouldn’t foreigners pay for the privilege to do business on American soil, just like a fee is required by you to sell your goods and wares at a flea market?

Additionally, encouraging America's ship building industry was beneficial to America’s national defense! When at war or a threat was present our Merchant marine vessels were outfitted with arms to protect America's interests.

I think you will find the following article interesting and informative with regard to America’s merchant marine. See: Looking at the merchant marine role in 1812 (http://www.msc.navy.mil/sealift/2012/August/role.htm)

Aside from that I am glad we agree on the separation of powers. That is really the important issue with regard to Paul Ryan's desire to remove the State's Representatives and Senators from representing their State's economic interests when formulating regulations of commerce.

Has Paul Ryan sold out to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce? I know they are big fans of Paul Ryan.


JWK


“…a national revenue must be obtained; but the system must be such a one, that, while it secures the object of revenue it shall not be oppressive to our constituents.”___ ___Madison, during the creation of our Nation’s first revenue raising Act (http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llac&fileName=001/llac001.db&recNum=55)

[johnwk]

.
See Tea party, Dems join forces to put Obama’s Asia trade deal in jeopardy (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/9/obama-asia-trade-deal-trans-pacific-partnership-in/?page=all)


”Details of the TPP framework remain cloaked in secrecy. Some lawmakers have been allowed to view parts of the draft agreement, but they can’t be accompanied by staff, take notes or make copies of the documents.”

Now tell me Paul Ryan is not actively engaged in an attempt to subvert our constitutionally limited system of government just as Nancy Pelosi did during the passage of Obamacare.

Do Paul Ryan’s actions ring a familiar bell? “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it – away from the fog of the controversy.” ___ Nancy Pelosi


JWK



“He has erected a multitude of new offices (http://www.firstgov.gov/Agencies/Federal/All_Agencies/index.shtml) , and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance” ___Declaration of Independence

[johnwk]

See: Putting Congress in Charge on Trade (http://www.wsj.com/articles/putting-congress-in-charge-on-trade-1429659409)

By Paul Ryan and Ted Cruz

April 21, 2015 7:36 p.m. ET

” But before the U.S. can complete the agreements, Congress needs to strengthen the country’s bargaining position by establishing trade-promotion authority, also known as TPA, which is an arrangement between Congress and the president for negotiating and considering trade agreements. In short, TPA is what U.S. negotiators need to win a fair deal for the American worker.”


If Senator Cruz believes Obama should have Trade Promotion Authority and was obedient to our Constitution, he would then promote a constitutional amendment to alter Congress’ exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations in such a manner as proposed in the Trade Promotion Authority now being sought. Instead, Senator Cruz is attempting to have Congress’ exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations usurped and placed in Obama’s hands.


What Senator Cruz is advocating is to reverse Congress' and the Presidents' constitutionally assigned duties. Senator Cruz wants to prevent the various State's Representatives and Senators from formulating regulations dealing with foreign commerce which take into account their particular State interests, as well as the interests of the United States and then mold legislation with an American First object in mind.


In fact, Senator Cruz wants to circumvent the separation of powers written into our Constitution and have President Obama exercise the functions of the legislative branch of government, while the legislature may only veto legislation cooked up by Obama.


I thought Senator Cruz was a friend of our constitutionally limited system of government, but it now appears his friendship is more in line with our global governance crowd which has no allegiance to America or any nation, and whose primary loyalty is to international corporate giants.



JWK


To support Jeb Bush is to support our Global Governance crowd and their WTO, NAFTA, GATT, and CAFTA, all used to circumvent America First trade policies, while fattening the fortunes of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation.

[johnwk]

It's absolutely amazing that the American People did not learn their lesson with the NAFTA. At the time it was being pushed through Congress I did my best to explain it was never about "free trade" as it was being touted by Gingrich and Clinton. In fact, the NAFTA, from the very beginning was about creating a managed trade, managed not by our elected Representatives and Senators exercising their exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, but managed by our global governance crowd’s representatives who are un-elected by the American people, and a majority of whom are foreigners! See: Establishment of Binational Panels (http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/nafta/chap-192.asp#An1901.2)


And now our Global Governance Crowd is going for the big enchilada! The Trans-Pacific Partnership deal is between the United States, Japan, Vietnam, Canada, Mexico and seven other Pacific-rim nations! And if you do not believe there is a global governance crowd check out the Council on Foreign Relations Global Governance Page: International Institutions and Global Governance: World Order in the 21st Century (http://www.cfr.org/project/1369/international_institutions_and_global_governance.h tml)


JWK



At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on September 18, 1787, a Mrs. Powel anxiously awaited the results and as Benjamin Franklin emerged from the long task now finished asked him directly, `Well, Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?' `A republic, if you can keep it,' responded Franklin.