Thursday, June 11, 2015

Demand a No Vote on TPA

On Friday, the House is set to act on behalf of President Barack Obama to give him fast track trade authority to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Fast track means that Congress would cede its right to amend the trade deal. Instead, it would be granted an up or down vote — even if it needed to be fixed.

At a time when the President has for all intents and purposes declared war on the constitutional separation of powers, it makes zero sense for Congress to voluntarily weaken its treaty ratification prerogatives. Why not make Obama go through the process under regular order, with amendments allowed?

Making matters worse, the U.S. Trade Representative website on the trade deal explicitly states, “Through the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the United States is negotiating for robust environment standards and commitments from member countries.”

Meaning this is really just a stealth climate treaty — the outcome of which will be to allow Obama to unilaterally regulate the global economy. This cannot stand.

Obama should have to explain and where necessary defend every word in any treaty he agrees to, with it being held to the highest level of scrutiny.  That is Congress’ job.  It is also their job to amend or defeat any treaty that falls short of being in America’s interests.


Not giving the President trade promotion authority is not anti- trade.  In fact, the United States already exports $861 billion to the trans-Pacific trade partners, accounting for almost 40 percent of the $2.2 trillion of U.S. exports worldwide in 2012. As a result of this continued trade, our economic bonds with these nations are tight. 

Now it is time for Congress to step up and fight for the constitutional separation of powers and Congress' role in making treaties — not give more executive powers to Obama to negotiate a bad deal for the U.S. economy. Tell Congress Trans-Pacific trade deal will regulate climate. Don't cede treaty powers to Obama! No stealth climate treaties. Let’s keep fighting! For Liberty,

Robert Romano, Senior Editor, Americans for Limited Government

 

No comments: