2015 American Politics Thread: The 114th Congress Is in the House!

at the least, i think--given his rhetoric about tpp opponents 'living in the past'--he believes he's acknowledging the realities of globalization and trying to make trade work accordingly. i think he's wrong that those realities are inevitable.

yeah, all this time it should be clear that he's an american consensus true believer

anyway, do we have any kansan ilxors? this shit is like watching wile e coyote realize the tunnel entrance is a painted rock

http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article23744494.html

x-post--I emailed my Virginia Dem rep re my opposition to TPP, and he emailed me back his cliched business Democrat/small business owner reasons for supporting it, as well as mentioning that he had to stand with the President.

^ that's exactly the response I'd get from my rep (Kurt Schraeder D-OR).

(shakes fist)

the other thing about that digny piece is it only is trying to explain why he's unwilling to allow the anti-slavary language to pass (bc it wouldn't let malaysia in). obv that particular provision wouldn't apply to most of the other potential partners

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/obama-trade-vote-meeting-with-democrats-118937.html#ixzz3criYblGc

The Hill trip followed another scrambled appearance Thursday night to the annual Congressional baseball game at Nationals Park. He didn’t mention trade, but the crowd of lawmakers and staffers knew that that’s what his unscheduled visit was about. Republicans, who generally support the legislation, greeted the president with cheers using the bill’s acronym — “TPA, TPA!”

http://i60.tinypic.com/9az7yh.png

rep gregory meeks (D-NY) on floor right now explicitly stating that if we don't pass a comprehensive trade bill, china will

what channel is PRC-SPAN on, anyway

this is showing on CPN1H for me - channel 1217

Ted Cruz: An Error Occurred

reps are really angry about the bill not addressing currency manipulation

took me a few seconds to remember where i recognized paul ryan's babyface from

pelosi sounds like she's a 'no' vote?

FAIL

Pretty sure Obama is pushing hard for this because the sole purpose of government these days is to make corporations richer and lock down their precious intellectual property for as long as humanly possible?

never let me down, Nan:

“I will be voting to slow down fast-track,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on the floor moments before the vote, after keeping her intentions private for months. “Today we have an opportunity to slow down. Whatever the deal is with other countries, we want a better deal for American workers.”

grats hoos

let's all sing!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BYyDusJYJo

thx guys we were watching c-span and when pelosi went up to speak, having been equivocating all week & knowing she was gonna bellwether, we all held our breath; when she started in on "this vote on TPA--or Fast Track, let's call it what it is--is moving too fast for us to get a better deal for American workers"

and my boss yelled WHERE'S THE CHAMPAGNE

would drink w/ u guys

putting a hoos on the case was their shrewdest move

good lookin out hoos

You guys can do better than champagne!

Yay. Good job

Gimlets for everyone! Mixed by Robert Bork!

http://images.politico.com/global/2012/12/19/121219_robert_bork_ap_328.jpg

Also: yet another victory for Speaker Boehner, who joins the ranks of Rayburn and Clay.

now HilRod could come out against this at her rally tomw -- a "bold move"

Whew. Now you can vote for her!

lol

Ready for Nunnery

I thought Nunn retired.

His liberal, labor-supporting, dove-ish ways live on in Morbs.

http://d1.stern.de/bilder/stern_5/politik/2014/KW25/hillary-clinton-interview_n_fitwidth_489.jpg

i don't understand what there is to celebrate. by not giving obama fast track (which, if the TPP was bad for workers doesn't mean he would get to push it through just that they vote on what he already put in or something like that) they also killed this program, which directly gives money to workers who were benefitting from trade. seems like the cost far outweighs the benefits...

sorry, *workers who lost their jobs due to imports

"trade adjustment assistant" sounds like the most heinous euphemism

how much workers training did NAFTA offer?

I think part of the reason they wanted fast track is because the actual legislation is so odious it will never pass once it gets openly debated in congress

the Assistance for Workers bill was specifically tied to TPP in order to try and get it to pass.

I would expect it to be renewed separately before it expires in December.

like, there's no reason it can't be considered separately, attaching it to TPP was just some procedural bullshit to try and lure votes for TPP

the Assistance for Workers bill was specifically tied to TPP in order to try and get it to pass.

OTM. flopson, this was the sweet coating to a poison b(p)ill. If it's so important, it'll pass separately, and Pelosi knows it.

the Assistance for Workers bill was specifically tied to TPP in order to try and get it to pass.

I would expect it to be renewed separately before it expires in December.

― Οὖτις, Friday, June 12, 2015 4:33 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ok, that seems like a sleazy move. but i wouldn't expect it to be renewed, republicans hate it

"trade adjustment assistant" sounds like the most heinous euphemism

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, June 12, 2015 4:30 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

according to this website

$975,320,800 in federal funds allocated to states for benefits and services delivered to assist trade-impacted US workers
227,882 US workers accessed TAA-funded benefits and services

975320800/227882 = 4279.94$ per worker... that seems non-negligible

i don't get how TPP is going to kill labor. WTO members (which there are 120 of) export manufacturing goods to US at an average tariff of 2%. for 11 of the countries in the TPP that's already zero, so it's reducing a tariff by 2% for like, 4 countries? how many jobs is that really going to cost?

oh sorry i misquoted that, TPP will only reduce manufacturing tariffs to zero for 11 countries, they are already zero for 5. still though, from 2% to 0%

The 4279.94$ per worker would mostly consist of the cost of delivery of those "benefits and services", which I am supposing were largely intangible, in the form of career counseling and maybe some community college courses. I'd be interested in a breakdown of what those "benefits and services" consisted of in real terms. Also "trade-impacted" is a wretched euphemism worthy of the Pentagon.

the battle may not be over yet:

The sting of defeat may be temporary. The White House adamantly insisted on Friday that it made important progress by passing part of the trade package and still has a chance to turn around the vote on the other part. If that proves true, Mr. Obama may yet secure the negotiating authority he needs to seal a legacy-building 12-nation Pacific trade agreement and the day’s setback may ultimately be overshadowed.

Ugh to the the phrasing and substance of this NY Times article

the NYT really wants us to know it's not over