Democrats Warn Obama They Don't Have His Back On Trade Plans

[RiverLover]

Democrats Warn Obama They Don't Have His Back On Trade Plans
1/21/15

WASHINGTON -- With President Barack Obama declaring on Tuesday his intentions to push for legislation giving him authority to move forward unilaterally with trade deals, Democrats made one thing clear: They don't have his back.

"Twenty-first century businesses, including small businesses, need to sell more American products overseas," Obama said in his State of the Union address. "That’s why I’m asking both parties to give me trade promotion authority to protect American workers, with strong new trade deals from Asia to Europe that aren’t just free, but are also fair."

He added, "It’s the right thing to do." But it's not the right thing to do according to those in his party opposed to granting that special authority, known as trade promotion authority or fast track authority, which prevents lawmakers from shaping the details of trade deals.

"We will do what we can in the Senate to defeat this unfortunate proposal," said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who caucuses with Democrats.

"The president cannot go around the Democrats," said Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.). "If he wants trade promotion authority, which of course is what we call fast track, he has to tell us what it’s going to be."

In a Congress run by Republicans and with the largest majority of House Republicans in 85 years, it's a steep climb for Democrats hoping to block Obama's action on trade deals.

...Some Democrats are fine with Obama using that authority for a massive trade deal currently on the table, the Trans Pacific Partnership. That proposal involves 11 countries in the Asia-Pacific region and would cover nearly 40 percent of the world's economy.

"Why would we deny our president the same authority every president has had since the 1970s?" asked Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.). "We still reserve the right to vote against the ultimate agreement. But giving him the flexibility to negotiate with broad [fast track authority] is something every president’s had the last 40-plus years. I think it would be a terrible blow for Democrats to be the instrument of denying this president that authority.”

"It’s going to create some very interesting fault lines here in the Congress," he said.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Democrats ready to buck Obama will do so because it's about more than just trade policy. It's about wooing the voters that he has long counted as the most important.

"I’m going to see things through the prism I’m trying to get our entire caucus to look through, and I think just about everyone agrees: Does it help the middle class?"...

...Critics of fast track authority continued to hammer the issue Wednesday. A group of seven House Democrats, along with Sanders, described the damage caused by past trade deals crafted in secret. Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), for one, said that Kodak, the photography company based in her district, had to slash its employees from 62,000 to 4,000 because of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement.

"We need to rename it. It should be the well-worn dead-end track, and not fast track," said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.).

..."We are going to win this issue," she said, noting that the House blocked it in 1997. "We believe that we will win this vote to deny fast track."...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/21/obama-trade-agreements-democrats_n_6518212.html

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. I am glad to hear that these Democrats are united to stop the president on this matter.

The TPP is a mistake, and we need to stop it.

[daleanime]

2. If they are fair....

why are they secret?

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Democrats Warn Obama They Have The 99%'s Back On Trade Plans

Good.

We'll see if it's real.

Thanks Senators Warren and Sanders, for calling Bull@#$%!!! when it needed to be called!

[RiverLover]

6. Koch Bros & ALEC are working hard with the propaganda machine too, "F" the 99%

The TPP, for the 99 percent, this is a losing proposition.

Millions more American Jobs Offshored.
Backdoor deregulation deals for financial firms.
Floods of unsafe foods and produce.
Higher Medicine Prices
It would Ban Buy American Policies
Foreign corporations empowered to attack our environmental and health policies in foreign tribunals.

There is just a tremendous amount at stake here. So, who are the bad guys here. There are several but the short list is the infamous Koch Bros. Are you surprised? You might be since they are paying for a little known proxy called ALEC to do most its bidding for them and other elites around the world. So, what is ALEC?

Alec Explained!

The Koch Brothers have for sometime been trying to destroy social security. The have funded and backed several conservative think tanks and focus groups like the Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation, Reason Foundation and the Father God of all right-wing think tanks the John Birch Society. They know it’s a very successful program and they want to get their hands on the money by privatizing Social Security. So, they pay these organizations to spread misinformation and out-and-out lies about Social Security. Koch has funded over 300 position papers to dismantle social security. They do this by distorting the truth.

--Need To Raise the Retirement Age to 70 years old. They do this biding through campaign contributions to politicians and right-wing media outlets. Which creates an echo chamber.
--Social Security is going Bankrupt. The Koch brothers have funded study after the study that suggest Social Security is going bankrupt. When in fact it is not going bankrupt in the least.
--We Should Privatize Social Security. They would like to see everyone risk their Social Security in the stock market for example. Once again its all about creating an echo chamber.

How do they achieve this echo chamber? By position papers, pundits, media and politicians.

It has been the Koch brothers plan to dismember government in general. So, by influencing trade agreements and funding misinformation about Social Security and other Progressive initiatives they go about achieving these means by creating an echo chambers of lies and distortions.

http://www.liberalamerica.org/2013/11/19/trans-pacific-partnership-fast-track/

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. Holding his feet to the fire has spread to congress.

About time.

[SammyWinstonJack]

8. HA!

[Faryn Balyncd]

7. The TPP, if passed, would be toxic for 2016. Secrecy does not last forever.

Stopping TPP is vital for the American people.

And if the Democratic Party does not stand with the American people and stop the corporate coup TPP, the Democratic Party, and America, will pay a horrible price.

[Fearless]

9. About damn time.

[StopTheTPP]

10. Rec. Called my rep and senators today to tell them no.

The White House is launching a blitz on democrats in the house and senate behind closed doors. The people are going to have to provide counter-pressure if this is to be stopped.

[cstanleytech]

11. Guys trade isnt the issue though, trade in of itself is fine the problem is the wages people are

being paid here in the US by corporations.
We should imo be more focused on fixing the wage issue for everyone by using a carrot and stick approach and telling the companies with 50 or more workers that if they want any tax breaks from now on that the they cannot have more than say 5% of their workforce earning less than 500% over the poverty level and the more they have who work for them (and that includes temps) that earn below that the higher their taxes will be.
Edit: And so that franchises like McDonalds cant wiggle out of it and claim they are a small business and thus not subject to it, the law should count franchises as part of the parent company for tax purposes.

[Scuba]

12. This is more of an issue of national sovereignity than it is of trade.

[pampango]

13. The far-right in Europe wants to dismantle the EU to restore national sovereignty.

Maintaining/restoring national sovereignty should not be an end goal for liberals. National sovereignty for a corporate-controlled government is not preferable to an international agreement - like the European Union - IF that agreement accomplishes liberal goals.

International agreements weaken national sovereignty since they limit a government's ability to do whatever it wants. If agreements do not change governments' behavior there is not much point in negotiating them. If international agreements accomplish liberal goals, they may be worth a weakening of national sovereignty.

If the TPP does not serve liberal goals like enforceable labor/human rights and environmental protection then it deserves to die. If it - or some future international agreement - does do that, an absolute commitment to national sovereignty should not stand in the way. We are part of the world - a small part (around 5%) but a part. Sooner or later we will have to negotiate agreements with other countries that show we understand this.

[Scuba]

14. You've confused agreements between nations with a corporate coup d'etat.

[pampango]

15. Or a liberal sovereignty-limiting agreement between European nations versus a more limited agreement

between Pacific nations.