Though the Trans-Pacific Partnership is supposed to be the trade deal that needs fast track to get approved by Congress, the real worry is the Trade In Services Agreement being negotiated in secret. Until now, the details of TiSA have been hidden carefully, but a draft treaty and notes about the negotiations now in progress
All but 54 courageous Republicans sided with President Obama to approve giving this president fast-track authority to OK trade deals. As a result, trade pacts will require only a majority vote in each house rather than the two-thirds specified for treaties in the Constitution. And no amendments will be allowed. Debate will be limited and
In 2011, Bill Clinton had a problem. He had already figured out how to parlay his reputation into income by giving speeches. But, now, with his wife serving as secretary of state and a Democrat in the White House, he wanted to take things to the next level and actually solicit relationships with major companies
The Trans-Pacific Partnership has nothing to do with trade. While it officially embraces 12 countries plus the U.S., 76 percent of our trade with the 12 is with Mexico and Canada, already covered by NAFTA. Any growth exports is likely to have been already covered by NAFTA, making the TPP irrelevant to our trade relations.
From admittedly underestimating the power and scope of ISIS to its insistence on calling terror attacks like the Fort Hood massacre and the beheading of an Oklahoma woman acts of “workplace violence,” Obama is adopting a strategy of defeating terrorism by denying that it is happening. This ostrich-head-in-the-sand strategy is part willful blindness and part
Eric Holder’s resignation, just 40 days before the midterm elections, shows how jittery Obama is about losing control of the Senate this November. While Holder likely is getting out of Dodge before federal judges weigh in and order the release of documents showing he covered up the Fast and Furious and IRS email scandals, the
Hillary Clinton is increasingly facing the same kind of problem as bedeviled former Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey in his failed 1968 race for the presidency. Both she and Humphrey wrestled with how to put distance between themselves and an unpopular president, particularly as he sank deeper and deeper into an increasingly difficult foreign war.
Why did President Obama release five of the most dangerous prisoners he had in Guantanamo in exchange for a man who is, at best, a deserter and, at worst, a traitor? Why did he take the risk of bypassing Congress? Didn’t he realize the fallout that would hit him? I believe the answer is that
Why, some Republicans are asking, should we focus on winning the Senate? What will it achieve as long as Barack Obama is still president? We won’t get 67 votes to override his vetoes or even 60 votes to overcome filibusters. Why bother? Here’s why winning the Senate, while not a complete answer, is still worth
“A statesman’s duty is to bridge the gap between his vision and his nation’s experience. If his vision gets too far out ahead of its experience, he will lose his mandate. But if it hues too close to the conventional, he will lose control over events.” — Henry Kissinger in “Years of Upheaval” President Barack