Dakota Beacon

“Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows.” This line was taken from Shakespeare’s play “The Tempest.” It was spoken by a fellow who was shipwrecked and was seeking shelter next to a sleeping monster.

Politics, too, sometimes makes strange bedfellows.

President Obama must feel miserable having to depend upon a Republican majority to pass his trade bill and cement his legacy.

House Minority Leader Pelosi and many Democrats must feel miserable having to break ranks with their president by refusing to support his legislation.

Conservatives in the House and Senate must feel miserable having to break ranks once again with House Speaker Boehner and Senate Majority Leader McConnell.

The piece of legislation known as the Trade Promotion Authority Bill, or simply the trade bill, is one of the more quirky measures with which congress has had to wrestle.

On June 12 liberals aligned themselves with conservatives to block a vote in the House of Representatives on sending President Obama his fast-track trade bill. Obama’s defeat was as embarrassing as the alignment of opposing political factions was rare.

To understand the discussion, a few definitions are in order.

Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): This is how the trade bill is identified. It creates an expedited process, fast-track, by which the president can move trade agreements quickly through congress in order to finalize negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). This is a 12-nation pact between the US and Asia-Pacific nations – excluding China.

Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA): This provision provides assistance to any worker displaced by a trade agreement with foreign countries. The displacement could result from moving production overseas or competitive pricing of imported goods brought into the US. It would compensate workers financially through relocation assistance, subsidized health care insurance, extended unemployment benefits, job training and wage insurance. Nevertheless, TAA is still opposed by unions and other liberal organizations.

But was the TPA solely a free trade measure? Not at all. The benefits of purely free trade are manifest. According to HSBC, one of the world’s largest banking service organizations for international trade, Americans save about $13,000 a year as a result of trade agreements. This is comprised of the value of products we import from other countries and the economic advantage gained from exports we send to other countries. Either way, trade is important to America. As President Reagan once pointed out, “…increased trade spells more jobs, higher earnings, better products, less inflation, and cooperation over confrontation.”

The TPA and TAA provisions were originally combined in the same bill but each provision was voted on separately. In May the Senate passed both provisions but the House passage of the TAA was crucial to advancing the fast-track bill. The defeat of the TAA provision would mean the defeat of the entire measure. As it turned out, on June 12 the House passed the TPA 219-211 but defeated the TAA 126-302. This set the stage for a Republican parliamentary maneuver and a new vote in the House on a revised measure that would separate the two provisions pending a negotiated compromise. On June 18 the House again passed the TPA 218-208 with out a vote on TAA. The measure will now be sent back to the Senate for a re-vote before the July 4 recess.

Here is why the TAA portion of the trade package failed in the House. There were non-trade related portions in the bill. For example, human rights, worker safety and environmental protection should not be fitted into a trade agreement. What should have been a strictly free trade measure was turned into a special interest boondoggle. The fast-track authority became a legislative vehicle for those who support protectionism and favoritism over free trade. This goes far beyond simply knocking down trade barriers.

Obviously, it depends on who the president is that makes all the difference in trade deals. President Obama has made clear he will negotiate, “…the most progressive trade deal the world has ever seen.” He is most interested in making sure new trade deals advance major portions of his progressive agenda across the world. This includes multinational labor and environmental regulations. It also inserts minimum wage guidelines into trade agreements that defeat the economic advantage to Americans.

Finally, why all the secrecy shielding the trade bill from the public? A partial answer was provided through WikiLeaks. Among other things, the bill would allow foreign corporations to sue the US government for actions that undermined their investment “expectations” and hurt their business.

As former Senator Jim DeMint phrased it, “If we cannot win a legislative debate on the merits of free trade, the deal wasn’t worth making.”

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).