Well, that didn't take too long. The wonks in White House, the Republican Leadership. And the “free trade” Democrats, have hatched another devious process for passing the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) bill. It has the following steps
– Step one: the House passes a TPA bill without passing Trade Adjustments Assistance (TAA); then
– Step two: the Republicans in the Senate give assurances to Senate Democrats that TAA will be passed by the Senate and later the House; Read more about TPP: Fast –Track Is Back: Shall It Pass?
The roll call 126-302 vote (Roll call 361) defeating the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) bill was a result worth a little celebrating on Friday, since it was a very decisive victory on that particular vote, and also stopped the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) fast track bill from being sent to the President's desk for signature. If the vote on TAA hadn't failed, it would have been far more difficult (I don't say impossible as many do) to defeat all manner of “free trade” agreements (aka multinational sovereignty agreements), including the currently scheduled Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), and the Trade in Services (TiSA) agreements over the next year or so.
Everything we know about these agreements is that they would have been a disaster for all but an extremely small segment of the people of the United States. So, we ought to be overjoyed that, for now, fast-track is stalled in the House, and may get pigeon-holed there for quite some time to come, if the re-vote on TAA fails. Still as Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers, and Bill Black say in their recent posts, this stall may be short-lived if we don't keep up the pressure and make sure that the Republicans and Democrats in Congress, along with the President are, unsuccessful in reversing Friday's vote on the TAA. Read more about TPP: Fast –Track, the Next Rounds In Congress
The Republicans and the Administration still can't count on the 217 votes needed to pass Fast-Track, according to Politico. There are 245 Republicans and 188 Democrats in the House. Republicans are now “feeling new found optimism that at least 190 of their lawmakers” will support fast-track. So, that leaves 55 Republican opponents. Very near the maximum of 57 that TPP opponents have estimated could vote against it. Read more about TPP: State of Play in the House
Obama’s promise to “reform” the Veterans Affairs’ health care system hides a real agenda of privatization assert Kate Randall and Barry Grey in “The drive to privatize US veterans’ health care.” Read more about ‘Reform’ of VA Means Privatization for Profits NOT Vets!
David Kravets in “Senators Authorizing Syria Strike Got More Defense Cash Than Lawmakers Voting No” declares:
Senators voting Wednesday to authorize a Syria strike received, on average, 83 percent more campaign financing from defense contractors than lawmakers voting against war.
Ludwig Watzal in “U.S. Military Casualty Statistics Not the Senators’ Main Concern” calls out the Senate Armed Services' Committee hearing vetting former Republican Chuck Hagel for U.S. Secretary of Defense: Read more about Libby’s Political Stew: War-Torture-Drone Truthers & Liars
ANGRY US MAYORS: “That we would build bridges in Baghdad & Kandahar & not Baltimore & Kansas City boggles the mind!”
The following email came from NY Green Party’s Howie Hawkins:
Green Alert: Tell Congress to Vote No on Military Budget
The US conference of Mayors is expected to pass a resolution today calling on Congress to cut $127 billion from the Defense Budget by ending the wars in the Middle East and redirecting the funding towards Domestic Needs.
Unfortunately, Congress is headed in the other direction. The Obama administration has proposed the largest defense budget ever, over $700 billion, as much as the rest of the world combined and double the military budget of a decade ago.
On her last day as Speaker, Nancy Pelosi said she had no regrets. That she doesn't says so much.
We say it all the time, but it bears repeating. Obama is a conservative corporatist. He was always going to betray those who elected him, but he never would have accomplished so much of his conservative agenda without the active support and connivance of every Democrat in Congress, and most especially the Democratic leadership there. Read more about Whoop-de-doo, Pelosi Has No Regrets
(Another golden oldie, this time from the mid '00s, published just after the '06 midterm elections which, as any Democrat would've told you, was a really really super-duper important election -- in fact, The Most Important Election Since The Last Mass Extinction Event. Read more about Blast From Yer Past, no.3: It's Going To Be A New Day!
I guess I'm one of the few people who were there the first year as well as last year, and recall the last minute "fuck off" that we Little People received in Chicago from Her Nibs. Hint: She didn't show. Blah, Blah, order and security and Seriousness blah, but if this is true, I'm even more glad I saved the money for the garden instead of the trip to Austin: Read more about Why "We" Lose, Pt 34244
[Hello. I'm new here. Been reading the legacy. Something I've posted elsewhere still in an emacs buffer -- so, I'll just jump in.]
I, a progressive voter since 1963, am incensed with Dean, Pelosi, Reid, et al., and find them to be contemptible a55h0l35.
Nancy Pelosi's most notable achievement was to take impeachment off the table. Two years later, and Bush has been allowed to continue virtually unobstructed. The Bushit clock will have run out soon, and we can start marking Democratic Friedman units (at least, 180 coalition and 10 thousand Iraqi deaths per F-unit). Read more about Fearless and Loathing in GA.
I'm curious. If this is true:
Defying the White House, Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday the House will change its rules to avoid a required vote this year on a hotly disputed free-trade agreement with Colombia.
Why then is it so hard to say, change some rules and make war funding votes not happen? I'm sure there's a "reason." Read more about Just Wondering
But if it had been your kid you'd probably be a little on the side of the polemic, I'm betting. For those people, and all the children who are exploited for political gain when they suffer, but never really helped by those who use them, this is for you:
Read more about I Suppose "Nancy Hearts Kiddie Rapers" is Too Much...
The Center for Media and Democracy has some Tuff Kweshuns for MoveOn. I am a member of several organizations mentioned in the post (read the comments too) and I hate to say it, but I have to take the CMD's side in this. If it's a question of which losing bill to back for the sake of looking strong, the Lee amendment is the better choice:
Read more about A Question for MoveOn