Democrats to Fight Obama on Secret Trade Deal Authorization

[Natural Citizen]

U.S. President Barack Obama (C) meets with the leaders of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) countries in Beijing November 10, 2014.
(Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)

President Barack Obama may be looking for the new Republican-controlled Congress to grant him authority to fast-track negotiations over a pair of international trade deals, but critical Democrats are fighting back against the measure.

Congress knows little about the specifics of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement (TPP) trade deal between 12 Asia-Pacific countries, but President Obama used his State of the Union speech to push Congress to support a fast-track vote on the deal. Obama said the deal is necessary “to sell more American products overseas.”

If the Republican-led Congress votes to give fast-track authority to the president, it means lawmakers can only vote up or down on the trade deal when it is presented, with no chance to add amendments. And only after fast-track authority is approved will congressional members get to see what is in the deal.

For example, the Permanent Normal Trade Relations pact with China was supposed to create hundreds of thousands of US jobs, but instead led to the loss of 3.2 million. Proponents said that the North American Free Trade Agreement would create 200,000 US jobs, but instead it cost 1 million, while the Korea Free Trade agreement, also promoted as a job creator, instead led to the loss of more than 50,000.

Continued - Democrats to Fight Obama on Secret Trade Deal Authorization

[jmdrake]

Here's hoping the congressional democrats will win this one and that Rand will stand with them.

[Natural Citizen]

Here's hoping the congressional democrats will win this one and that Rand will stand with them.

There are only a handful of Democrats opposing the passing of the thing without seeing what is in it. The rest of them pretty much go along with the old pass it so we can see what is in it gag.

Headline is misleading.

[Occam's Banana]

Obama said the deal is necessary “to sell more American products overseas.”

Exactly the same excuse was offered in support of mercantilism - and then imperialism.

And if mercantilism and imperialism were good for trade, why, then, something like the TPP must surely be doubleplusgood for it ...

Congress knows little about the specifics of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement (TPP) [... O]nly after fast-track authority is approved will congressional members get to see what is in the deal.

Yet there are those (even here at RPFs) who will assure us that the TPP is nevertheless indeed a net boon for free trade.

Because, you know - some stuff will end up being traded that might not have been otherwise. In the end, that's all that really matters, amirite?

And just you never mind what is actually in the deal. After all, it says "free trade" right there in the title ...

[CaptUSA]

Yet there are those (even here at RPFs) who will assure us that the TPP is nevertheless indeed a net boon for free trade.

Yeah, I might be one of those... My problem with the deal has nothing to do with the trade proposals. It's the sovereignty issues that concern me. Oh, and the extension of IP privileges. I'd like to see the final details of those before I cast my judgement on it. I don't trust the selective mid-stream leaks.