Help me decipher the rhetoric of Sen Cantwell's response to my questions re. Fast Tracking the TPP.

[rhett o rick]

Excerpts from Sen Cantwell's letter:

According to a recent study by the Washington Council on International Trade, 40 percent of the jobs in Washington state are tied to international trade. Given the importance of trade to our state's economy, I have consistently supported efforts to expand market access for Washington State's workers, businesses and farmers.

>I wonder what “expand market access” is code for.

I firmly believe, however, that any trade agreement must ensure fair competition for domestic industries and support basic labor standards and environmental protections.

>This sounds good but could be just rhetoric. Need some specifics.

Further, an active trade policy must be accompanied by expanded educational and job-training opportunities to better prepare our workforce, including workers displaced by trade, to meet the challenges of the global economy.

>Now this doesn’t sound good at all. This says that since we know that meeting “the challenges of the global economy” we will need to expand our educational and job training to prepare our workers that will be “displaced by trade” (code for “put out of work”) . So I read this to say that although trade agreements are good for Washington businesses they might not be so great for workers, who apparently will need job training. Job training paid for by the taxpayers to enable the "displaced" workers to get in line with the other unemployed.

The constitution provides the President with the power to negotiate international agreements and gives Congress sole authority over the regulation of foreign commerce. Since the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, Congress has delegated authority to the President to negotiate trade agreements. This authorization has been known as Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), which is sometimes referred to as "fast track" authority. TPA allows Congress to provide the President with specific policy objectives, priorities, and conditions for the negotiation of trade agreements. In exchange for the negotiating authority, TPA requires that the President follow certain standards, such as requiring consultation with Congress and achieving stated priorities. TPA provides for expedited consideration to allow a negotiated trade agreement to be voted on by Congress without amendments and within a certain time period. Trade Promotion Authority is important for the purposes of completing trade agreements and the last reauthorization of TPA expired in 2007.

>This is a bunch of rhetoric that sounds good enough but leaves out that “fast-tracking” eliminates debate and amendments and public input. While efficient, it isn’t very democratic or Democratic.

Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) and Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) introduced the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act (S. 1900) on January 9, 2014. This legislation was referred to the Senate Finance Committee, where it is currently awaiting further action. If enacted, this legislation would renew Trade Promotion Authority for four years, with an option for an additional three-year renewal. It also includes enforceable negotiating objectives that would require U.S. trade agreements to ensure strong labor, environmental, and intellectual property standards, among other priorities. Please be assured I will keep your thoughts in mind should I have the opportunity to consider this legislation in the U.S. Senate.

>” Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) and Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)”?? Is legislation introduced by these two truly “bi-partisian”?

> The good Senator says she will keep my thoughts in mind should she have the opportunity to blah, blah, blah. If the good Senator knew my thoughts, she wouldn’t “keep them in her mind”.

At a hearing on this bill in the Senate Finance Committee on January 16, 2014, I highlighted the importance of trade to open up markets for Washington state exports, but also the need for trade agreements to contain strong labor, environmental, and workforce training provisions. During the hearing, I discussed the impact of trade agreements on the Washington state apple industry. The apple industry in Washington state employs more than 59,000 workers and has an estimated $7 billion impact on the state's economy. Since TPA expired in 2007, other countries around the world have signed 83 bilateral trade agreements that have reduced tariffs on numerous products, including apples. The agreements signed by other countries put Washington state apple exports at a disadvantage in those markets since, without a trade agreement, U.S. apples are subject to higher tariff levels compared to apples from other countries with reduced tariffs under a free trade agreement. Renewing TPA will help the United States negotiate new trade agreements and, as a part of free trade negotiations, work to increase market share for U.S. exports, such as apples and airplanes, around the world.

>I read this rhetoric to say that trade agreements will help Washington industries. I don’t hear that it will help Washington workers, unless she is using the “trickle down” card. Meaning that what’s good for the industry is good for the workers and environment.

>I am skipping the remainder of the letter as she just repeats how she is a strong supporter of “the Trade Adjustment Assistance program” which uses taxpayer dollars to train people unemployed by the wonderful trade agreements. Trained but not given work.

>I see the bottom line is that trade agreements (globalization) will help businesses and screw the working class. To help mitigate the damage the lower classes will pitch in tax dollars to “train” those put out of work. I hate to break it to the good Senator, but McDonald’s isn’t hiring.

>Oh yeah, she forgot all about discussing the TPP. I understand, it's a minor thing.

>If I got off track about, please set me straight.

[TheKentuckian]

1. Nope, just a bunch a meandering fluff to say "I'm down like James Brown".

[djean111]

2. Short version - She is voting yes on the TPP. Also - apples!

I understand that only about four chapters of the TPP are actually about trade.

[rhett o rick]

9. Good post. nm

[KoKo]

3. I wish I could...and hopefully others will do better but a K&R

..

Sounds like the kind of stuff most of us get from our Reps in reply...but then...I stopped bothering with them.

It sounds like at least she TRIED to give her "position" and there's enough there to counter...but...I don't believe they listen anymore ....unless you had more than the rest of us could afford to donate.

But...she did put the "Talking Points Out There." More than the rest of us get in our Southern US States when we contact our Reps where we get a three paragraph of TP's geared to telling us to "STFU."

So..

[Samantha]

5. I think it is a form letter composed to walk right down the center of the issue

so it can easily be used to respond to many inquiries.

Sam

[leftyohiolib]

6. great so youre 50+ years old, you get to take out 50k in student loans to "retrain"yourself for

what ?. what job can you get now to replace the one congress let get moved overseas, what job can retrain yourself for that cant get moved overseas. how do you pay back a student loan like that, at 55, working for minimum wage.

[rhett o rick]

8. I wonder who is making the profits from "retraining". nm

[Mass]

7. Cantwell is for trade. Is that news to you?\nt

[rhett o rick]

15. Oh Hell No! nm

[Sparky 1]

10. It means we need to campaign for her Dem opposition in her next primary!

Cantwell voted YES on CAFTA, even though many of us wrote her and begged her not to. She'll vote YES on TPP too, no matter what we say.

My dang (new) rep is also being wishy-washy about this. I campaigned for her and will not again unless she votes NO.

Have you heard from Patty Murray on this?

[rhett o rick]

11. I havent but someone else did.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10822896#post4

[Sparky 1]

16. Thanks! I agree on Warren.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Looks like my noseholding days for Cantwell may be over.

Patty Murray requires minimum damage to my nose but Cantwell has put a lot of strain on it.

[countryjake]

13. Talking with Patty Murray, her thoughts are much the same...

as this "free trade" bullshit seems to be ingrained in our state's success, economically. It's a real shame, as I do like them both (Patty, especially, spoken with her several times about vet's issues) but neither woman appears to be prepared to upset the fruit basket, where the TPP is concerned, and act like it's the party line to enact it.

Write to both of them, try and talk it over, if possible, so they learn that many of us, their constituents, are not pleased with their stance.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. Yep. Politics-as-usual.

I do respond to their votes on issues that concern me. They'll be hearing from me on TPP.