Despite Pressure From White House, Leahy And Sanders Will Vote No On Trans-Pacific Trade Deal

[KamaAina]

http://digital.vpr.net/post/despite-pressure-white-house-leahy-and-sanders-will-vote-no-trans-pacific-trade-deal

Despite enormous pressure from the White House, both of Vermont's U.S. senators say they will vote against a plan to give President Obama streamlined authority to negotiate a new trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership....

If the president gets this authority, Congress will not be able to amend the trade deal in any way. Instead, it will simply hold an up or down vote on the proposed plan.

Many of the details of the Trans-Pacific Partnership have not been publicly released and members of Congress must visit a secure room in the basement of the Capitol Building if they want to review an outline of the deal.

Sen. Patrick Leahy says he's disappointed that the process has not been transparent. He says there's no way that he'll give the president full power to negotiate a new trade agreement under these circumstances. "I'm not about to vote for something when I have no idea what's in it,” he says. “Nobody else has any idea of what's in it, so I'm not going to vote for fast track. If they want to bring up an agreement let us have a real debate on it, let us know what's in it whether it is valid or not."

[ananda]

1. Good.

The more no's the better.

[immoderate]

2. The rulers have already approved it.

--imm

[arcane1]

3. Obama and his republican buddies really want this.

[KamaAina]

4. Obama has republican buddies?

Since when?

[arcane1]

6. They're the ones supporting the trade deals and fast track authority.

We have only the Dems in congress sanding between them and us. Not exactly confidence-building

[Bradical79]

37. Trade teammates? I don't know what else you'd call them

They're big fans of his on this issue :-P

[jonestonesusa]

41. Republicans buddies will appear like magic

when it's time to vote for undemocratic trade pacts. The only question is who's going to speak out against the President's stance on this issue. Will you?

[earthshine]

49. Joseph Stiglitz does ...

and I agree with him.

[jonestonesusa]

63. Thanks for the info. Excellent background.

Sobering too when it comes to Obama's support for this.

[scscholar]

13. And the people elected Obama...

so this goes against what the people supported.

[Scootaloo]

17. And the people of Vermont elected Sanders and Leahy

Also I do not recall TPP being a central point of Obama's 2008 or 2012 campaign. In fact the secrecy around hte deal seems to indicate anything other than an informed populace supporting it.

[bvar22]

19. He DID promise to be the most transparent President EVER.

Sure did SOUND good.
Guess he forgot about all that.

[SammyWinstonJack]

24. Guess he was BSing us all.

[Cassiopeia]

31. It was packed in the same box

as his comfortable shoes.

Movers must have lost that one.

[beltanefauve]

45. He said NAFTA should be renegotiated

but I didn't think at the time he meant the TPP.

[pampango]

54. He's no Woodrow Wilson. The Iran deal was negotiated secretly. We didn't know the Cuba talks

were even going on until they were finished. It seems that international negotiations are done in secret.

Neither the Iran nor Cuba agreements were approved by Congress and may well have been rejected if normal ratification was tried.

Trump will tear up the Iran deal and TPP, if ratified, and maybe the Cuba agreement to. Bernie endorses the Iran and Cuba agreements and will renegotiate 'existing' trade agreements. Not sure what Bernie would do with a hypothetical 'ratified' TPP - tear it up since he opposes it or renegotiate it as an 'existing' agreement

[hopemountain]

46. this explains the desperation

to get clinton in the white house - come hell or high water - by any means possible.

the tpp will open doors of political power and gold coffers for the corporates and oligarchy to do whatever they want all over the world ... and make slaves and peones of the rest of us.

[Helen Borg]

50. And wait to see what happens if Illary becomes Prez...

[Rex]

5. 28 pages we cannot see and a trade deal that we cannot know about.

Not good.

[paulthompson]

7. Old news

I'm very much against the TPP, so I think this is great. However, note that this story is from May 11, 2015, not May 11, 2016!

[erlewyne]

10. I am glad someone here pays attention! Way to go paulthompson!!!

How can year old stuff be posted? I wouldn't
have caught it.

[madwivoter]

11. Maybe they got the date wrong when they posted the article?

I see the comments are all from the last few hours (today).

[a2liberal]

14. doubt it

Maybe it's making social media rounds again or something... Just from the excerpt I'm pretty sure it's talking about TPA, which passed quite a while ago

[LiberalArkie]

20. Date is correct :President Obama’s ambitious trade push is back on track, after several

By JONATHAN WEISMAN JUNE 23, 2015

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s ambitious trade push is back on track, after several near-death moments, in large measure because top Republicans stood by him.

The Senate on Tuesday narrowly voted to end debate on legislation granting Mr. Obama enhanced negotiating powers to complete a major Pacific trade accord, virtually assuring final passage Wednesday of Mr. Obama’s top legislative priority in his final years in office.

The procedural vote of 60 to 37 just reached the minimum needed, but final Senate passage will require only 51 votes. The House approved trade promotion authority last week.

With congressional support for “fast track” authority, the president can press for final agreement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a legacy-defining accord linking 40 percent of the world’s economy — from Canada and Chile to Japan and Australia — in a web of rules governing Pacific commerce. His administration can also bear down on a second agreement with Europe — known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership — knowing that lawmakers will be able to vote for or against those agreements but will not be able to amend or filibuster them.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/24/us/politics/senate-vote-on-trade-bill.html

[TheProgressive]

8. This is the kind of President we can also expect from a Clinton presidency...

Under a Clinton presidency, TPP passage is a given.

It's not about the 99% people - it's all about the establishment oligarchy.

[chwaliszewski]

34. You are abso-freaking-lutely correct!

I see a Clinton presidency as an Obama presidency on steroids & adderall.

[A Simple Game]

59. I don't think it's even about the establishment oligarchy either.

This and other things, I think of the 28 pages being classified that protect the Saudi's but there are other examples, are meant to protect and benefit a class that transcends all national boundaries.

[Ferd Berfel]

9. With TPP everything is subservient to Corporate - everything

The United States will cease to exist. We will have something else entirely. Voting won't matter much after that.

And Clinton thinks it's 'the gold standard' . I guess for the Global elite it will be.

[kadaholo]

12. ONCE AGAIN...

Sanders proves that he is willing to speak truth to power in order to protect the American people!

[FairWinds]

15. Yes, this is old news . .

the Senate has already passed fast track authority on the TPP.

http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/2015/06/so-who-voted-for-tpp-fast-track-in-the-senate-list/

The next vote will be to ratify it.

Doing so will be a great way to elect the Trumphster.

His campaign is substantially about how rotten these deals have been.

On that, he is correct.

Please check your basic facts prior to posting.

[RiverNoord]

22. I was quite confused by the OP...

fast track opposition, unfortunately, failed last year.

The constitutionality of such a step is questionable, and the first cases reaching appellate level under the TPP regime will raise the issue.

Right now, the likelihood of the TPP passing is very high...

[Bradical79]

38. Ditto

Glad I wasn't missing something

[FighttheFuture]

16. This is from over a year ago!!! The fix is in and the lame duck session is the most

likely time to push it through. Loosing Senators will be rotating out, and for chump change they will vote to sign away our future. surviving Senators may take a gamble that the rubes will forget in 6 years and also take some payola to fuck us all. It is already signed by Obama (tm) and cannot be filibustered and just needs a simple majority to make it law.

I will be very surprised if Bammie cannot push it through. Only the R's hate of him might stop it. Here's hoping for hate.

[Angry Dragon]

18. Throw this trade deal out

[AllyCat]

21. We need more than two. But I'm glad these two have principles

[silvershadow]

23. K&R

[greiner3]

25. And if Hillary were still the Senator from NY

She would have voted aye aye aye, all the way to the banks

[villager]

26. I'm glad they are standing up to our Republican incumbent. Or were.

Since perusal establishes this as a former line in the sand, rather than a current one.

[KamaAina]

27. Republican incumbent?

[villager]

28. When it comes to policies like this, yes. A Rockefeller Republican, for all intents & purposes

They could be liberal-ish on social issues, too.

[abelenkpe]

29. Old and Yay!

Congress cannot amend the deal in any way. Yes or No don't discuss details.

[tomm2thumbs]

30. I guess it did come to pass - 'boiled all the hope out of him...'

He said it would happen, and thus

Viewing the document in a secure room in the basement? really????

[ucrdem]

32. This is from last May 11 ...

not sure you realized that . . .

[raindaddy]

33. I don't see how any Democrat could vote for that POS trade bill.

[Dont call me Shirley]

35. Pat and Bernie...

[Hotler]

36. This and letting Wall St. go free says a lot about the true....

colors of this president. Yes he has done some things positive, but they have been mostly crumbs thrown our way. The man is bought and paid for by the 1%. He had no fight for single payer. I could go on.

[TBF]

39. Good. At least 2 of them have morals. nt

[appalachiablue]

40. These Are the 28 Democrats Who Voted for 'Fast Track', Twice including Senate Members. Oct. '15.

*Repost, Oct. 28, 2015, by OS, http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027296534
----
These are the 28 Democrats who voted for 'fast-track'—twice & Senate members too
The list of D's that won't be getting $ when they email OR call.
Senate list posted by Shred before below.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/18/1394407/-These-are-the-28-Democrats-who-voted-for-fast-track-twice

On Thursday, House Republicans once again held a vote on the so-called "Trade Promotion Authority" legislation—abbreviated as TPA and better known as "fast-track"—that would prevent Congress from adding amendments to any trade deals negotiated by President Obama. And once again, the same 28 Democrats voted in favor of it:
Terri Sewell (AL-07)
Susan Davis (CA-53)
Sam Farr (CA-20)
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Ami Bera (CA-07)
Scott Peters (CA-52)
Jared Polis (CO-02)
James Himes (CT-04)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL-23)
Mike Quigley (IL-05)
John Delaney (MD-06)
Brad Ashford (NE-02)
Gregory Meeks (NY-05)
Kathleen Rice (NY-04)
Earl Blumenauer (OR-03)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)
Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01)
Jim Cooper (TN-05)
Rubén Hinojosa (TX-15)
Eddie Johnson (TX-30)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
Beto O'Rourke (TX-16)
Gerald Connolly (VA-11)
Donald Beyer (VA-08)
Rick Larsen (WA-02)
Suzan DelBene (WA-01)
Derek Kilmer (WA-06)
Ron Kind (WI-03)
Last week, when fast-track first came up for a vote, its fate was tied to another piece of legislation called Trade Adjustment Assistance, which helps displaced workers. Since TAA failed, so did TPA, even though the latter received a majority vote. This time, unencumbered by TAA, TPA passed by a 218 to 208 margin, thanks to the support of those 28 Democrats listed above.
Now TPA will head to the Senate for a possible vote next week whose outcome is uncertain. Republicans have promised Democrats that TAA will come up for a separate vote as part of a non-controversial trade bill regarding Africa, but will Democrats in the Senate take that risk and support TPA on its own?

We know that 28 House Democrats were willing to do so, and we aren't going to forget their names.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027296534

[mountain grammy]

60. My Democratic rep and senator

Once again ignoring working people, and these are the "good" guys. Good for corporations.

[jwirr]

42. Good. When are they voting? I am sure that there will be

more.

[grahamhgreen]

43. Will Clinton Denounce it? It would help solidify us Dems!

[Hiraeth]

56. I like that dream. Bet she comes riding down a rainbow on a unicorn with cotton candy farts.

[zentrum]

44. That's our Bernie!

[nikto]

47. It is heartbreaking and disturbing to see Obama so vigorously support this toxic, hideous pact

[AZ Progressive]

48. Talk about a thread to humiliate DUers...

So many recs and replies to a story that is a year old and was likely put mistakenly here...

[pampango]

55. I know. Posting a story from May 2015 like it is recent news to fire up

the 'Obama is a republican' (whom all republicans seem to hate) crowd.

[Skwmom]

51. This is crazy. Anyone who thinks that this is okay needs to be voted out of office.

[Enthusiast]

52. Huge +1!

[Enthusiast]

53. I hate this fucking TPP. Why does Obama always go against our wishes?

And why does he act against out best interests?

[pampango]

57. Today's news: republicans kill FDR's International Trade Organization as an affront to

"our national sovereignty". FDR proposed it; Truman negotiated it; 48 countries signed it; republicans killed it.

I know this happened 70 years ago but this seems to be an "old news" is still news thread.

[madokie]

58. Oh

They'll wind up giving the senate 5 minutes to debate this and all will be well.
I don't have much confidence in this congress anymore. President either as it stands on this issue

[sinkingfeeling]

61. Wish more Democrats would vote no.

[Trajan]

62. How did Wyden vote?