4 ms·
The fast track, that is taking congress a year to sign, is the process of not then needing congress to sign anything after. If it passes, the whitehouse will be
by lotsofmangos 11y ago
The fast track, that is taking congress a year to sign, is the process of not then needing congress to sign anything after. If it passes, the whitehouse will be able to then sign details of new trade agreements without congress. It is not not the initial process of getting congress to agree to fast track.
- davidu 11y agoThat's not true. Link to the draft section? This is also helpful, and is non-partisan congressional research: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33743.pdf https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33743.pdf What people don't get is that we've had TPA since the 70s: """"" For more than 30 years, Congress has granted the President TPA/fast track authority, agreeing to consider trade agreement implementing legislation expeditiously and to vote on it without amendment, provided the President meets certain statutory negotiating objectives and consultation requirements, and the implementing bill contains the necessary and limited qualifying provisions. TPA strikes a delicate balance by clarifying how Congress chooses to exercise its constitutional authority over a particular aspect of trade policy, while presumably giving the President additional negotiating leverage by effectively assuring U.S. trade partners that a final agreement will be given timely and unamended consideration by Congress. """"
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- anigbrowl 11y agoNo, that is absolutely, totally untrue. Please, educate yourself on the basics before making such foolish claims: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_track_%28trade%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_track_%28trade%29
- lotsofmangos 11y agoI may well be on the wrong side of the Dunning–Kruger effect here, looking a it a bit further.