Rand Paul to Obama: "Prioritize" Passage of Trans-Pacific Partnership

[Brett85]

But he and the rest of the stinking conservatives ARE 'isolationists'...they/?you want to 'isolate' Americans from trading etc. with Iranians, Cubans, North Koreans, etc..

That's a legitimate point. I disagree with Rand when it comes to placing sanctions on those countries.

 

[H. E. Panqui]

Traditional Conservative, it sounds like you need to change your screen name...someone might confuse you with one of those GD fool traditional conservatives...

 

[Brett85]

Traditional Conservative, it sounds like you need to change your screen name.

I don't think they let you do that here.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Why is that? The language in the Constitution says that Congress has the power to regulate trade with foreign nations. It doesn't say exactly how they have to do it, that they can't involve other countries or organizations in the regulating of trade. Congress still authorizes the regulation of the trade when they vote to authorize the trade agreements.

That's the weasel and the wiggle and the dodge.

Here's how it works:

"We" sign on to a UN treaty or multilateral "trade agreement".

The treaty or agreement states that we must bring our codes and regulations into compliance with what has been decided at the agreement's administrative board meetings.

So, ICE or OSHA or USCG or FAA or NHTSA or EPA or any one of hundreds of alphabbet soup agencies writes the new code mandated by the international agreement.

This "code" now has the force of federal law, and will put you in prison for non compliance.

But not once has this been voted on or debated by any legislative body accountable to the people of the United States.

And if "fast track" status is given to the executive, even the treaty itself will not be debated.

So, tell me, who did you "vote" for on the TPP board of directors?

Regulation without Representation.

It's how you are going to lose your gun rights, property rights, economic rights and civil rights in the 21st century.

It's how Agenda 21 is going to rule you.

And all you'll be "voting hard" for are the puppets in DC orchestrating this.

 

[Brett85]

Rand actually voted against the fast track authority for trade agreements, if that means anything. It seems like he at least wants to debate it in Congress, unless he's changed his position on that.

 

[kahless]

I had no doubt in my mind I would be supporting Rand this cycle. This is mind blowing. I am totally disgusted.

At this point if Buchanan or someone like him on these trade deals was going to run I would support Buchanan over Rand in the primaries over this very issue. Before this I had no doubt in my mind I would be supporting Rand. This is a deal breaker.

 

[Brett85]

I had no doubt in my mind I would be supporting Rand this cycle. This is mind blowing. I am totally disgusted.

At this point if Buchanan or someone like him on these trade deals was going to run I would support Buchanan over Rand in the primaries over this very issue. Before this I had no doubt in my mind I would be supporting Rand. This is a deal breaker.

He previously voted for the trade deals with Korea, Panama, and Columbia. I don't see why people are surprised about this now. It just seems like people haven't really been paying attention to how Rand voted previously on this.

 

[Suzu]

Lets hope Rand is just being a demagogue. If he comes out with serious sustained support of the TPP in its present form, I will not support his Presidential run nor his Senate career and neither should anyone who supports liberty.

We see Rand saying a lot of things that we wish he would not say -- things he needs to say so he has the best chance of winning the nomination. What if these are also the views on which he will change positions once elected POTUS?

 

[Carlybee]

We see Rand saying a lot of things that we wish he would not say -- things he needs to say so he has the best chance of winning the nomination. What if these are also the views on which he will change positions once elected POTUS?

Are you saying that if he promises support for certain things, he can back out of them if elected? I'm not so sure it works that way.

 

[presence]

He previously voted for the trade deals with Korea, Panama, and Columbia. I don't see why people are surprised about this now. It just seems like people haven't really been paying attention to how Rand voted previously on this.

KORUS FTA

is arbitrated by ICSID which funded by the World Bank.
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41779.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Centre_for_Settlement_of_Investment_Disputes

KORUS FTA arbitration is BINDING supranational authority over US trade with Korea and is Unconstitutional


Panama TPA

Unless the Parties otherwise agree,
the roster shall include up to seven individuals
who are nationals of each Party and up to six individuals who are not nationals of either Party.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/agreements/fta/panama/asset_upload_file460_10398.pdf

It allows investors alleging a breach in investment obligations to seek binding arbitration against the state through the dispute settlement mechanism defined in the

BINDING arbitration against the state

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32540.pdf

Panama TPA arbitration is BINDING supranational authority over US trade with Panama and is Unconstitutional


Columbia TPA

Chapter Ten provides a mechanism for an investor of a Party to submit to BINDING international arbitration claim for damages against the other Party.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112srpt222/html/CRPT-112srpt222.htm


ALL of these "free trade agreements" and "trade promotion agreements" subvert national soveriegnty.


Congress should never be bound by a supranational authority to subvert is constitutional duty to regulate trade.

 

[Peace Piper]

The White House Blog: The Road Ahead- President Obama Travels to the Asia Pacific
November 07, 2014

America’s security and prosperity are increasingly and inextricably linked to the Asia Pacific. Tomorrow, President Obama will head to Asia for the second time this year and his sixth time as President.

Monday, November 10:
President Obama travels to Beijing, China.
In Beijing, the President participates in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders Meeting and the APEC CEO Summit, and delivers remarks.
President Obama then holds bilateral meetings with Prime Minister Abbott of Australia, and President Widodo of Indonesia.
Later, the President participates in a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Leaders Meeting in Beijing.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/11/07/road-ahead-president-obama-travels-asia-pacific

****************************

Obama Heads to Asia Amid Growing Opposition to Fast Track for the TPP
Friday, 07 November 2014

Washington, DC — As President Obama prepares to leave for Asia in another attempt to finalize the stalled Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations, a broad coalition of labor, environmental and consumer groups delivered over half a million petition signatures and letters to key Congressional leaders today opposing Fast Track authority for the pact.

"CWA activists are focusing all our efforts on stopping Fast Track authority for the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Millions of labor, environmental, community and human rights activists are fighting back and demanding that the White House and Congress put U.S. citizens ahead of the corporate and financial interests that already define and dominate the global economy," said Communications Workers of America president Larry Cohen.

"Fast Track is as dead in the water post-election as it was before it," said Arthur Stamoulis, executive director of Citizens Trade Campaign. "After all the secrecy and back-room dealmaking surrounding the TPP negotiations, there's no way the public, civil society or responsible policymakers will allow the pact to be rushed through Congress."

President Obama is heading to Asia this weekend for a week of summits and meetings aimed, in part, at bringing the TPP to conclusion. The TPP is a twelve-nation pact that would set rules affecting approximately 40% of the global economy, covering not only tariffs and quotas, but everything from financial regulations and public procurement to medicine patents and environmental policy. While various leaked texts from the TPP negotiations have been published by Citizens Trade Campaign and WikiLeaks, none of the U.S. proposals or composite texts has every been officially released for review by the public.

The White House and various corporate lobby groups are calling for to TPP be approved under "Fast Track" trade promotion authority, an expired, Nixon-era policy-making process that would allow the pact to circumvent ordinary Congressional review, amendment and debate procedures.

A total of 663,674 letters, email actions and petition signatures opposing Fast Track were delivered to House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden today, from 350.org, AFL-CIO, Citizens Trade Campaign, Communications Workers of America, Corporate Accountability International, CREDO, Democracy for America, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Fight for the Future, Firedoglake, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, MoveOn.org, Organic Consumers Association, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, SumOfUs.org and others...SNIP
MORE: http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/i...-growing-opposition-to-fast-track-for-the-tpp

***********************

The O Dude isn't wasting any time...

 

[Brett85]

KORUS FTA

is arbitrated by ICSID which funded by the World Bank.
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41779.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Centre_for_Settlement_of_Investment_Disputes

KORUS FTA arbitration is BINDING supranational authority over US trade with Korea and is Unconstitutional


Panama TPA


http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/agreements/fta/panama/asset_upload_file460_10398.pdf


http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32540.pdf

Panama TPA arbitration is BINDING supranational authority over US trade with Panama and is Unconstitutional


Columbia TPA



http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112srpt222/html/CRPT-112srpt222.htm


ALL of these "free trade agreements" and "trade promotion agreements" subvert national soveriegnty.


Congress should never be bound by a supranational authority to subvert is constitutional duty to regulate trade.

So where are all of the comments about how Justin Amash is a sellout and can no longer be supported? He has the same position as Rand on this.

https://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/208102755927263

"Here's the roll call for H R 3078, United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act. The bill approves the text of the trade agreement and makes corresponding changes to U.S. customs law. Like the other trade agreements in this vote series, the Colombia agreement reduces government interference in trade. The agreement does not move as quickly as I'd prefer, but it's a good first step. It will ensure that our producers have a level playing field when selling in Colombia while also giving Americans access to a greater variety of products and services. I voted yes. It passed 262-167."

 

[Suzu]

Are you saying that if he promises support for certain things, he can back out of them if elected? I'm not so sure it works that way.

It has for just about every politician lately. Maybe in this case flip-flopping could be a good thing.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Lets hope Rand is just being a demagogue. If he comes out with serious sustained support of the TPP in its present form, I will not support his Presidential run nor his Senate career and neither should anyone who supports liberty.

Anyone that supports him now isn't supporting liberty. This being yet another example.

 

[Brett85]

Anyone that supports him now isn't supporting liberty. This being yet another example.

Then why aren't you consistent and say the same about Amash? They have the exact same positions, including on this issue.

 

[jjdoyle]

So where are all of the comments about how Justin Amash is a sellout and can no longer be supported? He has the same position as Rand on this.

https://www.facebook.com/repjustinamash/posts/208102755927263

"Here's the roll call for H R 3078, United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act. The bill approves the text of the trade agreement and makes corresponding changes to U.S. customs law. Like the other trade agreements in this vote series, the Colombia agreement reduces government interference in trade. The agreement does not move as quickly as I'd prefer, but it's a good first step. It will ensure that our producers have a level playing field when selling in Colombia while also giving Americans access to a greater variety of products and services. I voted yes. It passed 262-167."

Still trying to move goal posts I see, after your points/propaganda get repeatedly destroyed.

You were one of the few (most others apparently duplicate accounts) RPF members that voted Jesse Benton should, "manage the campaign" for Rand in 2016. Are you Jesse Benton? Or, just always trying to excuse horridness around Rand Paul for some other reason?

Two wrongs don't make a right. Walter Jones voted no. Maybe he is one of the few that finally realizes that when the government says a bill is going to do something, usually the opposite thing occurs?

 

[cajuncocoa]

Are you saying that if he promises support for certain things, he can back out of them if elected? I'm not so sure it works that way.

And even if it did work that way....how is that a good thing?

 

[pcosmar]

Ya'll need to vote harder.

 

[Brett85]

You were one of the few (most others apparently duplicate accounts) RPF members that voted Jesse Benton should, "manage the campaign" for Rand in 2016.

Interesting. I don't remember anything about that. If I did that, I was probably just joking around.

 

[presence]

Then why aren't you consistent and say the same about Amash? They have the exact same positions, including on this issue.

Generally I like Amash, Massie, Rand, and Trad-Con. That doesn't mean I always agree with them, nor does it mean I won't vehemently damn their lack of commitment to US soverienty.

I do not support any endeavors into "trade agreements" that appoint

third party supranational arbitration panels with binding influence on US trade policy.


supranational? binding?

NO