Friday Open Thread

14 thoughts on “Friday Open Thread”

1. For a "political" blog, CPOLS sure couldn't care less about the Obama/Republican Congress (there's a political alignment we haven't seen since Bush left office) push for fast-tracking a worker-hostile, corporate-friendly hot mess of a trade bill. 

   Even while the officials were speaking to the caucus, two lawmakers who had been undecided — Reps. Denny Heck and Adam Smith, both of Washington — released statements of opposition to fast-track, vowing to vote no on giving Obama the authority.

   Additionally, an aide to Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.), the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, confirmed that the congressman subscribed to the strategy of voting against TAA in order to bring down fast-track.

   Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), an early supporter of Obama when he first ran for office, railed on Thursday against both the pending TPP deal and fast-track authority.

   “I’m not so sure many votes were changed. I have great affection, incredible respect and support for the president,” she said, but quickly added that Obama’s decision to bring his trade agenda to Congress “was a mistake.”

   We have to wonder why a Republican congress, hell bent on denying almost every Obama initiative these last 7 years, is so complacent on TPA, TPP, "Fast Track", and have had so few complaints about the secretive process. Remember when they complained so bitterly about the 2000+ page Obamacare law?

   And we have to wonder why President Obama is so determined to go against labor, against environmentalists, against so many activists in his own party, and for such a mish-mash of Corporate and Bankster priorities as one of his last big acts?

   Finally! At last! Bipartisan collaboration in Washington — and what a beaut! President Obama, the Republican Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, K Street lobbyists and giant multinational companies are all singing "Kumbaya" and working together to shove through Congress the fast-track legislation that will grease the wheels for the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement.

   That's the deal that favors CEOs over workers, profits over the environment and corporate power over the rule of law. Small wonder that it was drafted in secret or that Obama, McConnell and Boehner are determined there will be no amendments permitted once it is made public.

   And just look at the strong-arm tactics this bizarre coalition is employing to pass fast-track: As the clock ticked past midnight into Wednesday, the House Republican leadership posted the legislation online, hoping for a vote this Friday — "to spare supportive legislators," POLITICO reports, "the possibility of another weekend of attacks by trade foes back in their districts." Heaven forbid they should have to go home and hear a discouraging word from their constituents — the actual voters, as opposed to their big donors.

   Maybe if more Democrats, and more progressive blogs like Colorado Pols, had the guts to speak up, we wouldn't be contemplating NAFTA on Steroids: another giant giveaway to Banks, Corporations, the Wealthy the world over in the name of TPP and TPA.

   Log in to Reply

   1. President Obama asked us not to talk about this just to piss you off.

      Log in to Reply

      1. 

         Log in to Reply

         1. credit where credit due for Friday funny!

            Log in to Reply

      2. Just to be clear – MADCO has not become part of the Borg CoPols collective.

         But this is the kind of witticsim that MADCO endorses.

         Jimmy likes.

          

         Log in to Reply

         1. No need for that clarification, MADCO. The left leaning majority here doesn't have a Borg and if we did, you wouldn't be one of the drones. We disagree with each other and with various Dem pols all the time.  On the smaller other side, CHB is no GOTP Borg member and even Elliot occasionally diverges from the received Tea Party wisdom, though rarely from his self appointed role of apologist. There's only one Borg member here…. Immoderatus.  And resistance is anything but futile. Laughably easy, in fact. 

            Log in to Reply

   2. As the Guvs would often say: WRITE A DIARY!

      Log in to Reply

   3. We got our wish – the House just voted No on the Trade Adjustment Assistance . Now I have little understanding of what that is, but I get that it will make it harder to pass the TPP. It appears to be a complex issue with lots of moving parts. 

      And yeah, the vote was bipartisan. 

      Log in to Reply

      1. Zap loves him some bipartisanship. 😉

         Log in to Reply

      2. It was assistance for displaced workers which some Dems thought was inadequate but mostly (I don't understand all the moving parts either) voting it down is supposed to torpedo TPP.

         It also seems like a pretty blatant admission that TPP is indeed bad for American workers if they need retraining as a result. And BTW, how much good has retraining done working Americans? None judging by the fact that the middle class has remained stagnant through every retraining program over recent decades while the  top .01% has received an ever increasing share of the pie. When they say good for the economy they mean good for themselves, the few who get something out of it. Plenty of banana republics saw their GDP skyrocket back in the day while 99.9% of they're people remained poor as ever, maybe more so. That's the model that appeals to the corporate class. 

         Log in to Reply

      3. Fast-track is on life support – but not entirely defeated.  There is still one more chance to revive it – next Tuesday.  This has to do with some arcane procedural rules in the House.

         Fast-track was brought before the House for a vote pursuant to a special rule – i.e. a resolution that defined the procedure for debate and voting.  One of the times this is done is when two or more bills need to be passed at the same time in order to ensure a majority vote for all of the bills.

         In this case, Democrats did not like the Trade Adjustment Assistance – TAA – provisions passed by the Senate because it was funded by cuts in Medicare. (Many also thought it was too small.)  But, they didn't trust Republicans to ever bring up any amendments to the Senate bill.  So, Boehner agreed to bundle fast track with amendments to TAA requiring TAA to be voted on and passed first.  If it failed, then the subsequent votes on fast track would be non-binding and have no legal effect.  Since TAA failed the special rule means that nothing the House did after that has any real meaning – well, almost.

         There is a loophole. (Isn't there always a loophole?) TAA can be brought back before the House again next Tuesday.  If the leadership does call it up and the House passes it, the "advisory votes" on fast track that were taken today will become retroactively effective.

         Confused yet? Good.  That means you are a rational, thinking human being.

         Log in to Reply

         1. Thanks for an explanation of the moving parts. Still, makes my head hurt and I had forgotten the Medicare cuts aspect. In any case, whatever it takes to kill fast track is fine by me.

            Log in to Reply

   4. You should cite your sources lest anyone reading here would think these are your words and your writing and your ideas.

      TPP? Whowhat?

      I thought it redefined the immigration rules?  I thought this was the Texas Protection Policy and it's all about taking over Texas. Where's the problem- we did that before, I'm sure we could do it again.

      The plural wondering journalist motif was done to death. In 7th grade.  I get it saves you from actually having to be breathless- but I have to wonder if a more direct and articulate phrasing would be more compelling and possibly therefore more persuasive. Oh, but no, I don't actually wonder that.  See – it's therefore snarky and superior.

      And that's only ok when I do it.

      Log in to Reply

      1. Then there are those of us who doth cite too much.

         MADCO, I get that "inside baseball" acronyms are annoying, especially for new or occasional visitors to this site, Citing is a courtesy to the reader and gives one's claims greater credibility.

         But we'd been writing about the TPP for days now. Not to mention it's topic du jour in most leftie blogs and news sites. Even most rightie ones. Bipartisanship, amirite, Zap?

         Zappatero does about the right amount of citing, IMHO. What he needs to do more is attribute. Sometimes it's tough to see where his writing, or the source's writing begin and end.

         Log in to Reply