I’ve been preoccupied with non-political matters over the last week or so, and that’s left me at a disadvantage in trying to write about the president’s trade bill and how it is proceeding in Congress. Burgess Everett has an adequate explanation in Politico if you’re looking for just a basic primer. You’ll probably want to look at the roll call that took place in the U.S. Senate at 10 o’clock this morning. This was a basic cloture vote that pretty much stops the amendment process and sets a time to end debate on the portion of this package that gives the president trade promotion authority. The simplest way of understanding the vote is that it means that the Senate will probably be able to set it up so the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement can get an up or down vote without anyone in the Senate being able to amend the treaty.
Whether you support the TPP or not, it’s essential that these types of agreements are not amended by the various national legislatures that have to approve them. Without the assurance that such agreements won’t be modified, negotiations and compromises could not occur. So, what this vote really was was an opportunity for opponents of this free trade agreement to kill it by insisting on the right to make amendments. If they had been successful on this point, they would have vanquished the TPP.
That didn’t happen.
But that doesn’t mean that the TPP will be approved. It still has many hurdles to clear before it can get to the president’s desk.
The vote was still revealing, however. You might notice that some senators defied popular preconceptions about their ideology. Supposedly Wall Street-friendly Democrats like Chuck Schumer, Cory Booker, and Bob Menendez voted against giving the president fast track authority, while liberals like Ron Wyden and Patty Murray voted with the president. Senators from New Hampshire voted yes while Maine senators voted no. Conservative-minded red state Democrats split, as Joe Manchin of West Virginia was against it and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota was for it. Finding explanations for these votes requires some investigation into details that cannot be reduced to simple ideological predispositions. South Carolina and Washington state senators are pro-trade because Boeing is pro-trade. Delaware senators are corporate-friendly by default. Some senators were horse-trading for a vote on the Export-Import Bank, which was also a top priority for Boeing.
One reason that I’ve barely written about the TPP is that I never for a moment thought that it had a prayer of passing. I’m still pretty skeptical about its chances, but it didn’t die today and it could have.
Up until recently, I thought that the administration didn’t even want it to pass but felt compelled to go through the motions. I can see that they’ve finally begun working with some degree of energy to get this thing done, but I still sense a ton of ambivalence. If it doesn’t happen and they can tell corporate America that it was the Republicans’ fault, I think they know this will be the best thing for the party going forward. Of course, the administration is as divided on this as the left is, and knowing where the president really stands is not possible.
The official line is that this is good policy and a big priority. But it’s also a big priority to keep corporate America happy with the Democrats and upset with the Republicans. It’s a priority to keep the unions energized and the right divided. It’s a priority to present America internationally as committed to free trade and these kinds of agreements, even if we no longer fully believe in them ourselves.
So, we’ll see. I don’t think there are enough people who really want this thing to pass to make it happen. I have never thought so.
I could be wrong.
Well, that was very stupid then, wasn’t it? Since when do the President and 90% of Republicans agree on anything? If 90% of Republicans agreed with Obama more often, he could rule the world.
Screw the Democratic Party for defying their president and valuing parochial ignorance over the nation’s exporters. Japan, our preexisting NAFTA partners, Chile, Australia and New Zealand, Singapore, etc. These aren’t countries who should scare us.
First we get them onboard. Then the TTIP in Europe. Then the Pacific partnership gets expanded over time to bring in South Korea (who already signed KORUS a couple of years ago) and trickier low-wage nations like Indonesia, Cambodia, Thailand and maybe even Taiwan (can they negotiate FTAs apart from the mainland?) Then the tough task of bilateral ties with India. And then before you know it, 2/3 of the damn planet is all hooked in to one consistent global trade architecture. And then we play hardball with China and repair the imbalances of the WTO, because where else are they gonna go?
It’s a worthy plan, and if you refuse to see it because American farmers and manufacturers are going to see profit spikes because of it and you resent that, you’re an out-of-touch dummy. Like the Obama Labor Department has been biding its time all these years in a conspiracy to screw American workers, I mean really.
Yes indeed. It’s not like a nice nation like Canada would use trade deal provisions to weaken Dodd-Frank.
Oh wait.
/snark
One doesn’t have to believe this to also believe that the TPP is not a good idea.
I dunno, since it’s provisions were generally made even worse by the president’s team I think he favors passage full stop.
Most international compromises screw over the citizens of both countries so I don’t mind if there’s less of that.
○ Obama Nominates Former SOPA Lobbyist to Help Lead TPP Negotiations | March 2014 |
○ Empowering Foreign Corporations to Bypass our Courts, Challenge Basic Protections
○ Hundreds of Tech Companies to Congress: TPP and Fast Track Harms Digital Innovation and Users’ Rights
Pope Francis condemns the excesses of unbridled capitalism with words such as “dictatorship” and “a new tyranny.”
○ Pope Francis ‘Evangelii Gaudium’ Calls For Renewal Of Roman Catholic Church, Attacks ‘Idolatry Of Money’
Thanks, that was very clarifying. A lot of the argument on both sides has been very propagandistic; I’m especially disappointed with Warren, who is saying things about the ISDS aspect that are really at odds with reality. The way they’ve been denouncing TPA as if it were the end of democracy is shameful, and I’m glad you point out that it’s the only way the treaty can get written–and voted down if necessary–at all.
Out here where we have no inside knowledge at all, the president’s language seems really committed at this point, and we have to ask why. In addition to the points you make about corporate happiness with the Democrats and paying tribute to internationalism (the worst thing about the Warren opposition is its NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY exceptionalist tone), I think he must have compelling reasons for believing he will get really good labor and especially environmental agreements. (And language in the ISDS part guaranteeing government right to regulate for legitimate national interests, as seems to have been done in the EU-Canada treaty.)
Unfortunately the hostility on the part of some of our friends is so intense at this point that it could be a great treaty and they’d refuse to see it. It’s really important that progressives and liberals who are willing to wait to see what the final draft looks like should be speaking up right now.
My view has been pretty much the opposite: I expect both TPA and TPP to pass. I can’t say that for certain, and I could very well be wrong, but there’s strong enough support for the TPP among Senate Republicans, there’s enough Republican support in the House that Boehner could probably round up enough House Democrats (and he may not even need to do that in the end), and the White House has really been pushing this deal.
I really have no opinion on the TPP until it’s finished being negotiated and released to be read.
I was very disappointed by Warren & Sanders grand standing and fear mongering on the TPA.
We should also keep in mind that Canada & Mexico are included in this agreement which could be fixing the problems we all have with NAFTA, which was one of the things the President ran on in 2008.
When it’s released to be read, it becomes a done deal politically. That means that all the elites required to assent to its passage have come to consensus on the text if not agreement. Eight hundred corporate observers with the highest stakes financially can watch the negotiations.
Given the difficulty of educating the public on short notice to a very complicated agreement shrouded in secrecy, Warren and Sanders have at least done what they could.
We cannot assume that the agreement does anything useful for ordinary people because the corporate observers are transnational corporations, not corporations with an sole interest in the future of the United States or a few states.
you know as well as I do that nothing is a done deal politically in this country anymore
There will be at least 60 days to educate whomever you want, probably more than that and if you can’t convince people in that time then you never will anyway.
Corporations are lobbying like anyone else can, instead on lying about the TPA we probably should be doing that instead.
It’ll be too late then, Jim.
how can you be against something you don’t know what it is, seems silly to me
If it’s bad we can defeat it in the Senate, it’s not too late
This has cost us already – U.S.–Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS)
Now Obama wants fast track on TPP takes me back to the debt limit hostage taking when we were not sure if he was willing to give up social security and medicare to the wolves.
The vote split the shippers from the non-shippers. With those with illusions of exports adding to the Yes vote.
West Coast port states tended to be For.
East Coast port states measured in terms of their Asia trade.
Shipping is two-way. Whether the goods are coming in or going out, these states benefit regardless of the effects of the trade deal.
High intellectual property states – California, Washington, New York tend toward supporting it. States burned by previous trade agreements not so much.
And McConnell was whipping for passage.
There are more than enough people against this treaty whose content, by the way, is literally inaccessible to any common person who might be interested than only Sanders and Warren. For instance, 250 tech companies/executives, etc. write a letter warning Congress:
https://www.eff.org/document/tech-company-and-user-groups-letter-congress-urging-their-opposition-tp
p-fast-track
It’s pretty pathetic how posters here feel moved to come out and proclaim their loyalty to the ruling power and drool over Obama. Pretty soon full-length statues wil be erected to Caesar on public squares: a cult. Just the fact the whole negotiating procedure happens in secret is enough to set off alarms. ‘What is Obama hiding?’, any Joe Blow in the street might ask herself.
Praise be to Wikileaks and may it prosper and grow.
Who are the stakeholders at the TTP negotiations table … imbalance programmed in the end result.
In Europe, the principles of naked capitalism has replaced the notion of society based on solidatiteit with the weakest family who have bad luck with health issues or are just not a life’s chance to rise above the poverty level. In the UK, Tony Blair and Labor’s introduction of the ‘Third Way’ during the Clinton years has managed to weaken the position of organized labor and individual worker’s rights. In The Netherlands, legislation to ‘increase jobs’ has instead led to flexible worker’s contracts in duration and ease in termination to the advantage of corporate business. In the last decade, young people are just not given the opportunity for definite labor contracts. As a result of job insecurity, an explosive increase in burn-out by young people between 25-35 years of age. Many permanently damaged mentally they will not reach the occupation level their education would expect. What a bs situation with our “leadership” who let this happen from right across the spectrum to left-wing and progressive political parties. Statistics do not lie … the rich get richer and the ‘American dream’ is just fantasy.
I’ve never thought for a minute that the tpp would fail. Too many politicians on both sides depend on corporate money to keep their jobs.
Krugman says today in his column that trade isn’t really the thrust of the tpp. Mainly it strengthens Intellectually property rights (e.g. big pharma)and sets the terms for corporations and countries to settle disputes. He points out Canada’s objection to Dodd Frank, which could be challenged under the treaty. He also says that Warren was right about challenging US sovreignty. It’s a bad deal for individuals in the area of pharmaceuticals alone and I doubt anyone knows for sure how it will affect our lives down the road.
It sets up corporate sovereignty over democratically passed laws. That’s the end of democracy. And not even for a mess of potage. It’s about a mess of potage for the 0.1%.