President Obama Presses Democrats to Support Trade Deals

[nationalize the fed]

William Mauldin Wall Street Journal Dec 3, 2014

U.S. President Barack Obama answers questions while at the quarterly meeting of the Business Roundtable in Washington. —Reuters

Republicans and Japanese officials finally got what they wanted.

President Barack Obama publicly pressed Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday to get out of the way of a trade agreement with Japan and other Pacific Rim countries.

Efforts in Congress to move legislation that would smooth passage of an agreement—a measure known as fast track or trade promotion authority—foundered in January after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) eschewed a bill hammered out by committee leaders in the House and Senate and supported by Mr. Obama.

...Through the midterm election, Mr. Obama mentioned trade policy only in brief as part of his broader economic strategy, leaving the public heavy lifting to U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman...

...After Republican gains in the November elections, Mr. Obama and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), the likely Senate majority leader next year, identified trade as an area where cooperation is possible. “I’m going to be talking to McConnell, and Boehner, Reid and Pelosi, and making a strong case on the merits as to why this has to get done,” Mr. Obama said.
MORE: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/12/03/president-obama-presses-democrats-to-support-trade-deals/

Obama talks about NAFTA during the 2008 campaign

Hillary Rodham Clinton on the TPP

Both Democratic and Republican party platforms endorsed "free trade" agreements in 2012.
http://www.kslaw.com/library/newsletters/TradeManufacturingAlert/2012/October/article1.html

[Robbins]

1. The democratic party has sold out

on all corporate issues including free trade

Free trade is enemy of working americans

there may be some indivuals in house and senate who haven't sold out but on whole the party has.

[on point]

2. After it is openly published and withstands months of review, I might consider supporting it if it

enforces environmental standards, health and safety laws, labor standards with heavy tariffs against those who don't
If it penalizes companies with severe fines that risk putting them out of business when they violate these standards, or seek to rip off citizens
If it does not over ride laws of the land and companies cannot use their own external kangaroo courts
If it makes an agreement to equalize all corporate taxes at say 30% worldwide to stop this tax shopping race to the bottom game.

Anyone else have some preconditions we need before considering such a monstrosity??

[nationalize the fed]

3. Alan Grayson has seen it

Rep. Alan Grayson: I've Seen The Details And There Is No Reason To Keep TPP Secret

Rep. Alan Grayson has apparently been allowed to see a copy of the latest text of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement, and he's mystified about why it's being negotiated in secret. As we've noted in the past, the USTR likes to claim how "transparent" they are because (1) they "listen" to whoever wants to talk and (2) they'll show things to Congress. Neither of those things are "transparency." Listening to people is great, but transparency is about information flowing in the other direction, from the government to the public. As for showing things to Congress, we've explained how that's not really accurate. Elected officials in Congress can see the text, but they have to go to the USTR, where they can look at the document, but they're not allowed to take notes, make copies or bring any staffers (such as experts on trade or any of the issues in the document) with them.

Grayson apparently took the USTR up on that offer, and he says there's no reason that the text should be secret.
Because of this pressure, the USTR finally let a member of Congress – little ole me, Alan Grayson – actually see the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP is a large, secret trade agreement that is being negotiated with many countries in East Asia and South America.

The TPP is nicknamed “NAFTA on steroids.” Now that I’ve read it, I can see why. I can’t tell you what’s in the agreement, because the U.S. Trade Representative calls it classified. But I can tell you two things about it.

1) There is no national security purpose in keeping this text secret.

2) This agreement hands the sovereignty of our country over to corporate interests.

3) What they can’t afford to tell the American public is that (the rest of this sentence is classified)...
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130622/01545623580/rep-alan-grayson-ive-seen-details-there-is-no-reason-to-keep-tpp-secret.shtml

[djean111]

4. You do know that Obama is requesting Fast Track, right?

Congress will have 30 days to look at it (are they even there in Washington for 30 days in a row?) - and no changes, deletions, or additions are allowed. Just a straight up or down vote for what was put together, secretly, by our corporate masters.

There is no "we", as you are using it.
Just Obama, the corporations, and politicians. "We" don't count any more. Well, just for votes every few years, and to pay our taxes and buy shit. Other than that, we are supposed to STFU.

[djean111]

5. Does Obama even need the Dems for this now?

[polichick]

6. Shame on Pres. Obama and all "Dems" who have sold the party and the country.

[SamKnause]

7. No politician with morals, scruples, or integrity

would support this trade deal.

There is something very wrong when the politicians of countries push policies that have devastating effects on the country they were elected to represent.

[msongs]

8. after 6 years of Obama's blatant lies about transparency & open government the truth is revealed

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/

[Brigid]

9. Sorry, Mr. President . . .

But the answer from me is still NO.