Posted on 06/13/2015 6:16:20 AM PDT by GIdget2004
The United States is making headway on two historic trade agreements, one with 11 countries on the Pacific Rim and another with America’s friends in Europe. These two agreements alone would mean greater access to a billion customers for American manufacturers, farmers and ranchers. 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. There is a lot at stake. One in five American jobs depends on trade, and that share is only going to grow. Ninety-six percent of the world’s customers are outside the U.S. To create more jobs here, America needs to sell more goods and services over there. When that happens, the American worker benefits. Manufacturing jobs tied to trade pay 16% more on average, according to a study released by the independent U.S. International Trade Commission.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
In theory PTA offers US trade advantages, in practice it never happens.
Has Obama done anything that is good for America and Americans? If not, why would he start now? I’m in favor of smaller trade agreements and letting the public in on them while they’re being negotiated. I see no need for secrecy, especially from “the most transparent administration ever.”
We have negotiated away our sovereignty and control over our own shores with the GATT and other agreements. We get taken to a foreign court and we seem to always lose. Then per the agreement our trading partners get to punish us until we comply.
I read where Bonehead personally recruited Cruz, to help Lyin Ryan write this *Op-Ed*.
TPA reduces Congress’ power over trade.
So, this is a lie from the headline.
Yes, Paul Ryan and Ted Cruz conspired to LIE to you.
Cruz told us that TPA contained dangerous immigration powers and that he could not vote for it.
Cruz offered an amendment to “fix” the dangerous immigration powers.
Cruz’s amendment failed to win support.
So, Cruz voted for TPA anyway.
Cruz supporters can try to spin and obfuscate. They can try to shift the focus to other candidates.
But the fact remains that Ted Cruz sold us out and went back on his own word.
That does not mean I would not support Cruz for POTUS. But it certainly means he will not get my support for the nomination.
As far as our embracing Cruz for his immigration stance goes: It seems what he's against is ILLEGAL immigration. His goal is to make it legal, not necessarily to protect US worker's jobs and decent wages. Anyone on the side of US workers should begin talking about fixing or revoking the bad trade deals we already have, not passing new ones. And supporting even more H1B workers? That's insane. How about talking about matching all of those STEM graduates with jobs?
I'm where you are. I'd vote for Cruz if he's the Republican nominee. But he won't get my help in that endeavor. I might even give Rubio a second look. He voted the wrong way on this, but he never got "in our face" defending it like Cruz just did.
The entire GOP slate is off my list. Nobody officially declared or about to for whom I would vote. Even Cruz is controlled by the money men who pay for the campaigns, in his case a faggot billionaire. The country is going to get what it deserves after eight years of a Marxist homo...eight years of a Stalinist lesbian.
Donald Trump is announcing (something) in just three days.
I believe he will run, and he seems to be the only candidate who is ready to bring back US jobs.
He’ll also shut down illegal immigration.
Just saying. Donald Trump. Three days...
Paul and Ted, thank you for taking time out of your busy privileged day to make the case for the TPP / TPA trade agreement to we little people.
Funny how you and your fellow elites refused to do that before the vote on your secret trade scheme that would cede national sovereign control over immigration and pharmaceutical regulation to foreign governments and multinational corporations.
You should know you are duty bound to disclose all details of legislation / trade agreements that you vote for, (except those rare ones critical to national security).
After this last disgraceful move you made to pass-the-bill-in-order-to-find-whats-in-it, you republicans that voted for TPP / TPA, have breached our trust.
You no longer serve our interests, and no longer deserve to be in office.
FU RINOS
“In theory PTA offers US trade advantages, in practice it never happens.”
That is always the case when theory collides with reality.
bfl
“I’m in favor of smaller trade agreements and letting the public in on them while they’re being negotiated. I see no need for secrecy, especially from “the most transparent administration ever.””
Negotiations are inherently ‘secret’ since none of the parties are willing to disclose their bargaining strategies.
Opening up the negotiations to the public is also opening them to Congress. You wind up negotiating with the individual members of Congress. This CongressCritter wants this for his vote. That CC wants that. You wind up with an “Omnibus” trade bill. Can you imagine all the special provisions that Congress would insert? Up to and including additional bike paths for Cleveland.
Transparency sounds good but it is impractical in trade negotiations.
This article was written it April.
It is now being posted by one of the Republican Presidential candidates, who is trying to harm the Cruz campaign.
Freepers, please use discernment when you see hit-job posts like this.
“Transparency sounds good but it is impractical in trade negotiations.”
I’m willing to forgo any trade negotiations that permanently bind us to a course of action until we have a president I trust. (That may never happen.) In which case my governor has done just fine bringing jobs and trade to Florida.
Cruz seems to be doubling down.
Two rhymey things we became aware of in the news of the week.: 1.Lindsey Graham is a Bro without a Ho.
2.Ted Cruz performs as a Ruse.
A little over a month ago is certainly a fair article to post to show Cruz's position unless he disavows it, but instead he is more adamant than ever on his view.
This is EXACTLY why the Founders wanted trade deals to be difficult to ratify....because large interests can manipulate events to their advantage.
Now, we get lousy deals with up/down simple majority votes.
Anyone who honors the constitution knows this is wrong.
TPA is to trade deals what the nuclear option is to executive nominees.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.