United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Here’s how much corporations paid US senators to fast-track the TPP bill
Source:
The Gauardian
URL Source: http://www.theguardian.com/business ... aid-us-senators-fast-track-tpp
Published: May 27, 2015
Author: Two real reporters; C Robert Gibson and
Post Date: 2015-05-27 17:12:44 by BobCeleste
Keywords: None
Views: 4078
Comments: 40
A decade in the making, the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is reaching its climax and as Congress hotly debates the biggest trade deal in a generation, its backers have turned on the cash spigot in the hopes of getting it passed. “We’re very much in the endgame,” US trade representative Michael Froman told reporters over the weekend at a meeting of the 21-member Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum on the resort island of Boracay. His comments came days after TPP passed another crucial vote in the Senate. That vote, to give Barack Obama the authority to speed the bill through Congress, comes as the president’s own supporters, senior economists and a host of activists have lobbied against a pact they argue will favor big business but harm US jobs, fail to secure better conditions for workers overseas and undermine free speech online. Those critics are unlikely to be silenced by an analysis of the sudden flood of money it took to push the pact over its latest hurdle. Fast-tracking the TPP, meaning its passage through Congress without having its contents available for debate or amendments, was only possible after lots of corporate money exchanged hands with senators. The US Senate passed Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) – the fast-tracking bill – by a 65-33 margin on 14 May. Last Thursday, the Senate voted 62-38 to bring the debate on TPA to a close. Those impressive majorities follow months of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing by the world’s most well-heeled multinational corporations with just a handful of holdouts. Using data from the Federal Election Commission, this chart shows all donations that corporate members of the US Business Coalition for TPP made to US Senate campaigns between January and March 2015, when fast-tracking the TPP was being debated in the Senate: The amounts given rise dramatically when looking at how much each senator running for re-election received. Two days before the fast-track vote, Obama was a few votes shy of having the filibuster-proof majority he needed. Ron Wyden and seven other Senate Democrats announced they were on the fence on 12 May, distinguishing themselves from the Senate’s 54 Republicans and handful of Democrats as the votes to sway. “It’s a rare thing for members of Congress to go against the money these days,” said Mansur Gidfar, spokesman for the anti-corruption group Represent.Us. “They know exactly which special interests they need to keep happy if they want to fund their reelection campaigns or secure a future job as a lobbyist. “How can we expect politicians who routinely receive campaign money, lucrative job offers, and lavish gifts from special interests to make impartial decisions that directly affect those same special interests?” Gidfar said. “As long as this kind of transparently corrupt behavior remains legal, we won’t have a government that truly represents the people.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 19.
#1. To: All (#0)
This can mean only one thing. Republican Whores are more expensive than whores of the party of the democrat.
Nope. No Republican voted against it. Not one. Only 12 Democrats voted for it, and they're identifiable party leaders in safe seats (like Feinstein). 53 Republicans voted for, none against. What it means is that the Republican Party, as a group, supported Fast Track, and the Democrat party opposed it. And it means that well-heeled lobbyists knew that the Republicans were their allies, and so lavished money on them to reward them, but gave Democrats short shrift. Obama wanted fast track, so the loyalists were going to vote with him. It shows corruption, and in particular the corruption of the Republican Party on this issue.
Yep. And that's ALL it means. (By the way, back in 2002 the Republican Party, as a group, supported Fast Track for President Bush and the Democrat party opposed it.) Yawn.
No, Mister White, it means a great deal more. The Republicans support free trade, strongly, to the detriment of American manufacturing. Finance does well, but the factories shut down and American workers are put onto the dole...which the Republicans are keen to cut (to keep the taxes down on the financiers). Meanwhile, the Republicans keep that Border wide open, and squash dissent within their own party to close it. Jobs that can't be exported are to be filled here by cheap, exploitable illegal labor, labor that doesn't have legal recourse because it is illegal. The Republican game is completely transparent. Retired folks who "got theirs" like it. People who have to work and provide for their families don't. And that's what gives the Democrats a persistent electoral advantage over time. The Republicans used to have the Christians, but they've divided that group and now they don't. They used to have the Reagan Democrats. No more. Now they've got financiers, who, naturally, pay the Republicans to enact free trade legislation: good for them, bad for most Americans. They don't care. That's ALL it means. It means that the Republicans are the party of the rich, and acting perfectly in character. But time was that they had large contingent of duped rubes: religious, military, nationalistic and, even workers (who thought they'd protect them against foreign dumping and illegals. But the GOP has given the finger to all those groups. They've dwindled in ranks to the rich and elite, and they're going to start losing election after election on account of it.
Meanwhile, the Republicans keep that Border wide open, and squash dissent within their own party to close it. Jobs that can't be exported are to be filled here by cheap, exploitable illegal labor, labor that doesn't have legal recourse because it is illegal. The Republican game is completely transparent. Retired folks who "got theirs" like it. People who have to work and provide for their families don't. And that's what gives the Democrats a persistent electoral advantage over time. The Republicans used to have the Christians, but they've divided that group and now they don't. They used to have the Reagan Democrats. No more. Now they've got financiers, who, naturally, pay the Republicans to enact free trade legislation: good for them, bad for most Americans. They don't care. That's ALL it means. It means that the Republicans are the party of the rich, and acting perfectly in character. But time was that they had large contingent of duped rubes: religious, military, nationalistic and, even workers (who thought they'd protect them against foreign dumping and illegals. But the GOP has given the finger to all those groups. They've dwindled in ranks to the rich and elite, and they're going to start losing election after election on account of it. All of that is in the Fast Track Authority given to Obama? Wow! OK. I give up. What's in Obama's trade agreement that you don't like? What's that? You say the agreement hasn't even been written yet? Well then, WTF are you rambling about?
Well then, WTF are you rambling about? That's right, it's all there. Crony capitalists lard money into Republican pockets to give expedited and secret (and easier) political passage to secret treaties that will ultimately put Americans out of work, just like all of the other treaties of this sort have in our lifetimes. We all know this. But Republicans like you try to play games and pretend that we don't know. Oh, but we DO know, and we're on to your games. All we need to do is look to see how much money was larded on Republicans to vote for tricky trade legislation, and how they moved as a bloc. We know from experience with Republicans since the administration of Ulysses S Grant to this very day that Republicans are corrupt crony capitalists. It's who they are. It's what they do. So we know, without reading the secret treaty, that it's in their interest, and not in ours, because it NEVER is.
Ooooooh. A secret treaty. Really? Congress is going to vote on a treaty that's a secret?
Yes. When you boil it all down to its essence, that's exactly what they're going to do.
Once negotiations are finished, the trade agreement will be written up as a bill which must be introduced to Congress as soon as they're in session. They have 60 days to vote on it as is -- up or down. During this time, the bill will be in the public domain, and you can let your representatives know how you feel. Now, what in hell are you talking about -- Congress voting on some secret trade deal. What's wrong with you?
During this time, the bill will be in the public domain, and you can let your representatives know how you feel. The Senate is a body that requires supermajorities to pass things. There are plenty of provisions of this trade deal already cooked, but this is all kept secret from the public for now. Instead, Congress goes ahead and removes supermajority voting from it, and grants blanket authority to the President, all so a trade deal that would be blocked in the Senate will pass. It's a shell game played by crony capitalists. We've seen this game before. It's what Republicans do.
Yes. According to current Senate rules. It hasn't always been that way, and nothing requires it to be that way. "There are plenty of provisions of this trade deal already cooked" On a bill that can't be amended, wouldn't it be smart for the President and Congress to agree to as many things ahead of time as possible? "all so a trade deal that would be blocked in the Senate will pass." Are you a Democrat or are you feeling sorry for Democrats? They're the ones who don't want this.
Yes. According to current Senate rules. It hasn't always been that way, and nothing requires it to be that way. except for the U.S. Constitution.
Only at certain times. The rest of the times the Senate makes their own rules.
There are no replies to Comment # 19. End Trace Mode for Comment # 19.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: BobCeleste (#1)
#3. To: Vicomte13 (#2)
"What it means is that the Republican Party, as a group, supported Fast Track, and the Democrat party opposed it."
#4. To: misterwhite (#3)
#10. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
No, Mister White, it means a great deal more. The Republicans support free trade, strongly, to the detriment of American manufacturing. Finance does well, but the factories shut down and American workers are put onto the dole...which the Republicans are keen to cut (to keep the taxes down on the financiers).
#11. To: misterwhite (#10)
All of that is in the Fast Track Authority given to Obama?
#12. To: Vicomte13 (#11)
"secret treaties"
#13. To: misterwhite (#12)
Ooooooh. A secret treaty. Really? Congress is going to vote on a treaty that's a secret?
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#13)
"When you boil it all down to its essence, that's exactly what they're going to do."
#15. To: misterwhite (#14)
Once negotiations are finished, the trade agreement will be written up as a bill which must be introduced to Congress as soon as they're in session. They have 60 days to vote on it as is -- up or down.
#16. To: Vicomte13 (#15)
The Senate is a body that requires supermajorities to pass things.
#18. To: misterwhite (#16)
The Senate is a body that requires supermajorities to pass things.
#19. To: We The People (#18)
"except for the U.S. Constitution."
Replies to Comment # 19.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]