Flight Service wrote: Well it's Drudge so....
So... it has links to completely legit sites?
Anyway, it's really confusing.
It appears that TPA, that is the fast track bill, has failed to pass. There are lots of procedural votes, though, so if you look at the wrong vote record, it looks like it barely passed. I don't know the bill number yet to check the real record though.
https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/hr1314/BILLS-114hr1314eas.pdf
Some folks say TPA gives more authority to the President and some say it does the opposite. It's 146 pages.
This clears it up nicely: 9:18:11 A.M. H.R. 1314 Mr. Ryan (WI) moved that the House agree to the Senate amendment. 9:18:27 A.M. H.R. 1314 DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 305, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on the Ryan (WI) motion to concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 1314. At the conclusion of debate on the Ryan (WI) motion to concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 1314 and pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 305, the question will be divided. 9:18:28 A.M. H.R. 1314 POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - Pursuant to clause 1(c) of Rule 19, further proceedings on the Ryan (WI) motion to concur in Senate amendment to H.R. 1314 were postponed. 9:44:08 A.M. The Speaker announced that the House do now recess. The next meeting is subject to the call of the Chair. 10:55:17 A.M. The House convened, returning from a recess continuing the legislative day of June 12. 10:56:23 A.M. H.R. 1314 DEBATE - The House resumed debate on the Ryan (WI) motion to agree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1314. 11:45:00 A.M. H.R. 1314 POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - Pursuant to clause 1(c) of Rule 19, further proceedings on the Ryan (WI) motion to concur in Senate amendment to H.R. 1314 were postponed. 1:22:42 P.M. H.R. 1314 Considered as unfinished business. 1:22:46 P.M. H.R. 1314 The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. 1:48:54 P.M. H.R. 1314 On motion to concur in portion of Senate adt comprising title II (except sec 212) Failed by recorded vote: 126 - 302 (Roll no. 361). 1:54:52 P.M. H.R. 1314 MOTION TO RECONSIDER - Mr. Boehner moved to reconsider the vote by which the portion of the Senate amendment comprising title II (except for section 212) was rejected. The Chair put the question on the motion to reconsider and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Levin demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the motion to reconsider until a time to be announced. 1:55:51 P.M. H.R. 1314 On motion to concur in portion of Senate amendment preceding title II Agreed to by recorded vote: 219 - 211 (Roll no. 362). 1:58:47 P.M. H.R. 1314 POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - Pursuant to clause 1(c) of Rule 19, the Boehner motion to reconsider agreeing to the portion of Senate amendment comprising title II (except section 212) was postponed.
But this report seems to contradict that:
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/12/breaking-taa-crushed-126-302/
I am really confused.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-12/house-kills-obamas-tpp-bill-after-pelosi-led-democrat-rebellion
http://www.indyweek.com/citizen/archives/2015/06/12/fast-track-trade-and-the-tpp-david-price-says-no-with-an
[Update, 2:45 p.m. TAA went down to defeat. TPA was approved but can't be sent to the White House without TAA in the same package. Got it? Of course not, no one does. Read the comments below, and the links in them, for more on what looks to be a continuing Washington saga.]
Apparently TPP and TAA are the ones guys like me are scared of, because they are secret trade treaties. TPA is still too confusing, but I was under the assumption that it gave more executive power, something I am not in favor of no matter who is in the White House. Also apparently, HR1314 had both TAA and TPA in it, which is why so many Democrats were confused as to what to do.
Dr. Hess wrote: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-12/house-kills-obamas-tpp-bill-after-pelosi-led-democrat-rebellion
From that site: And, as expected, shortly after the failure to pass TAA the House passed the TPA...
U.S. HOUSE VOTES FOR OBAMA'S FAST-TRACK TRADE NEGOTIATING BILL
... But it did not matter because:
VOTE IS SYMBOLIC; TRADE BILL CAN'T GO TO OBAMA
Did the US public finally give big corporations, who have successfully purchased the US president long ago, the middle finger?
So... without TAA he can't sign TPA?
If the TPA took power away from the executive branch, as some republican TPA supports have noted, why would Obama sign it?
And, as expected, shortly after the failure to pass TAA the House passed the TPA... U.S. HOUSE VOTES FOR OBAMA'S FAST-TRACK TRADE NEGOTIATING BILL ... But it did not matter because: VOTE IS SYMBOLIC; TRADE BILL CAN'T GO TO OBAMA Did the US public finally give big corporations, who have successfully purchased the US president long ago, the middle finger?
Quoted from the comments of one of those random news sites may be the best nugget of wisdom:
Some offly insightful news commenter weirdo said: What the berkeley. Nancy Pelosi is the hero? I'm so berkeleying confused!
Dr. Hess wrote:And, as expected, shortly after the failure to pass TAA the House passed the TPA... U.S. HOUSE VOTES FOR OBAMA'S FAST-TRACK TRADE NEGOTIATING BILL ... But it did not matter because: VOTE IS SYMBOLIC; TRADE BILL CAN'T GO TO OBAMA Did the US public finally give big corporations, who have successfully purchased the US president long ago, the middle finger?
Hey, we quoted the same E36 M3.
But why can one depend on the other if they have separate votes?
I think it is some kind of procedural thing. By voting down an amendment to the bill, the whole bill would have to go back to the senate or something. The whole thing is confusing. When the Senate voted for it, I looked it up on the dot gov site. There was no name that made any sense and even reading the bills made no sense. I had to find the bill the Senate voted for by date and the published yea-nea count so I could look to see how my congress critters voted.
Anyway, it looks like we have a brief reprieve. This: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-12/youre-fired-%E2%80%93-now-train-your-much-cheaper-foreign-replacement
has some info on the crap that is in those bills. More H1B's to replace anyone left in the middle class with a job.
tuna55 wrote: I am really confused.
Yes, the plan is working perfectly.
Economics, The Comic Book Version:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-14/tpp-explained-comic-book-cartoons
Hey, we won, so it didn't pass.
Except Boehner changed his vote at the last minute so he could bring it up again.
Because that makes sense in bizarro world. I can just imagine this with my kids:
Kid #1 "Daddy I want to eat marshmallow tacos for breakfast!"
Kid #2 "marshmallow tacos for breakfast rock!!"
Kid #3 "Yay for marshmallow tacos!"
Kid #4 "Daddy I want to eat marshmallow tacos for breakfast!"
-thirty minute debate ensues-
Me: "no, this conversation is over. You cannot ever have marshmallow tacos for breakfast!"
Kid #1: "OK, I changed my mind, Daddy. We'll argue about it tomorrow."
While in bizarro world... the weirdest sentence in politics:
Republican leaders will try to resurrect the trade deal Democrats sank less than a week ago, planning a revote Thursday and insisting they will corral enough votes to approve fast-track negotiating powers that President Obama needs to complete a legacy-building Pacific Rim agreement.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/17/gop-leaders-vow-resurrect-obama-trade-deal/?page=1
Not that it's a redeeming enough feature to change my mind, but at least one good thing seems like it might come out of this:
http://www.autonews.com/article/20150629/OEM/306299968/after-chicken-tax-a-flood-of-foreign-trucks
Interesting....goes along with my son who said this weekend he is looking at a new F150, the price: $62k. WTF His current truck was $55k. Maybe a bit of competition will bring down the pricing. That's an insane amount of money to pay for a truck.
This seems to be a pretty good explanation of what it was about (warning; it is rather long). Hard to say though, since no one really knows what was in it.
http://economixcomix.com/home/tpp/
I think the main thing to take out of this, and other things like it: Economists, in general, should not be trusted. There is very little basis to believe they know what they are talking about.
... "Obamatrade"? Seriously?
You'll need to log in to post.
