Obama & others: Congress won’t risk a vote on TPP before elections
By The Truth Hound–Mark Anderson
As the many free-traders in Congress and in the executive branch contemplate when to try and pass the treacherous Trans Pacific Partnership, President Obama visited Germany and said on April 24 that he believes Congress will give final approval to the TPP trade treaty once the heated climate of this year’s elections cools.
According to Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D), no member of Congress who supports the TPP would dare vote for it prior to being assured of re-election.
A slight difference, however, is that Stabenow said that Congress would likely wait until after the November general elections to hold a TPP vote. But Obama suggested that once just the primary election hurdle is cleared, a vote could happen. Thus, a TPP vote prior to November cannot be ruled out.
“I think after the primary season is over the politics settle down a little bit in Congress, and we’ll be in a position to start moving forward,” Obama explained during a press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel April 24, as quoted by Breitbart News, which added: “Obama reminded reporters that a majority of Congress already passed the authorities for his administration to negotiate the complex deal with 11 [other] countries, and it was only a matter of political nervousness.”
Such “authorities” are a reference to Congress foolishly giving Obama the keys to the kingdom, in economic terms, by last year approving Trade Promotion Authority—a grant of power under which the White House was enabled to solely supervise the final TPP negotiations, in tandem with the other 11 TPP nations. That authority also means that Congress, when it finally casts what will be a highly contentious TPP vote, can only vote up or down with absolutely no amendments allowed.
That’s why Congress must be repeatedly urged in the strongest and clearest terms possible that the only acceptable TPP is no TPP—and that it’s not a matter of “improving” the pact in any manner.
A little good news is that some political candidates have backed off from supporting the TPP, although the sincerity of such statements can never be fully confirmed, since many a presidential and congressional candidate—too often eager to support something many in the public do not support—will tell the weary public what they want to hear.
Reports that Hillary Clinton, who helped prepare the TPP groundwork as Obama’s secretary of state, has “unexpectedly” turned “against the TPP” as a Democratic presidential candidate, are the work of simpleton reporters. Hillary’s internationalist pedigree as a fake friend of the working class, which carries with it unbreakable support for the TPP and other trade pacts, simply cannot be refuted.
“Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) voted against giving President Obama authority to negotiate the deal, after voicing support for the legislation,” Breitbart News also noted, even while Obama, in his press conference with Merkel, acknowledged that people across the world view trade deals suspiciously.
Obama, although he admitted that people see factories close and jobs depart under such trade deals and declare the deals defective, claimed that the people overlook other trade benefits. On that basis, he argued that it was important for the U.S. to open markets in foreign lands so that America’s businesses could be more competitive.
“Ninety-five percent of the world’s markets are outside of our borders, and if we’re not there . . . we’re going to have problems,” he said—clearly ignorant of the fact that under a system where money is born as debt, consumers and businesses in each nation, who’ve already been harmed by the trade pacts currently in force, get most of their money by taking out new loans to pay off previous loans in an endless, merciless cycle, with “interest drain” depleting the money supply faster than it enters the economy.
Therefore, each nation’s consumer buying power can only lag behind the totality of goods for sale. So, it follows that each nation must exploit foreign markets to make up for what their domestic economies lack in purchasing power. The core solution is monetary reform, not free trade. For great options read about the broad, ongoing program of the fine chaps at www.ukcolumn.org to “bring back the Bradbury Pound” and see economic-democracy particulars explained at www.socred.org.
One other bit of good news that is that TPP has come under fire in the TPP nations of New Zealand, Malaysia, Japan, Australia, Mexico and Canada, where several protests have been held. Plus, apparent GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump, like Democratic contender Bernie Sanders, has called the TPP a bad deal.
The Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA), a public advocacy group, added, “To add more fuel to the fire, key Congresspersons . . . stood up against the ‘status quo’ long before it was ‘cool’ to be against the TPP. Rep. Tom Reed (R-N.Y.), who sits on a Ways and Means subcommittee, declared his position against the TPP.” Moreover, Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who’s a former U.S. Trade Representative, opposes TPP. Ditto for Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-Maine) and others.
And notably, Vice President Joe Biden will be visiting all Democratic congressional offices to push for a yes vote on TPP. While many Democrats are reluctant to face Biden and tell him “no,” maybe they could consult the voters. What a novelty.
“A recent poll showed that out of 10,000 registered voters, 34 percent of Republican voters oppose the TPP compared to 24 percent who support it. 75 percent of Democratic voters are against it. And 30 percent of independents oppose it in comparison to 22 percent who support it,” CPA added.
Yet, amid all the TPP uproar, Obama’s European visit also included remarks in favor of the U.S.-EU equivalent of the TPP—the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). During Obama’s stay, though, protests erupted against the TTIP, the passage of which is a major goal of the secretive world planners in the Bilderberg Group and its corporate kin, the Trilateral Commission.
Now’d be a good time to contact Congress and raise your voice against these trade and banker-protection schemes—coming as they do from motley mountebanks who scream about the pitfalls of protectionism if some commoner dares to utter the word “tariff,” but they’re just fine with protecting every iota of their economic realm against even the faintest whiff of populism.