Fast Track (Trade Promotion Authority)

23 Republic Members of the House of Representatives, 17 July 2014, “TPA must be enacted into law before the President completes TPP … Concluding TPP – or any major trade agreement – without TPA undermines the Constitutional role of Congress over trade policy. Only Administrations that work closely with Congress and make it an equal partner in the negotiations are successful in passing and implementing trade deals … Because of the critical importance of TPA in ensuring a successful outcome in the TPP negotiations, we will not support TPP if the agreement, even an agreement in principle, is completed before TPA is enacted. Once TPA is enacted, we will have laid the necessary groundwork to bring to a conclusion a solid TPP agreement that will pass Congressional muster, and we will work with you to achieve this goal. Congress will not approve a TPP agreement that does not meet the objectives Congress first establishes through TPA. Therefore, TPA is the key to achieving the outcome we all want to see.” (All the Republican members of the House Committee on Ways and Means) [no link currently available]

 

151 Democrat Members of the House of Representatives, 13 November 2013, “Given our concerns, we will oppose “Fast Track” Trade Promotion Authority or any other mechanism delegating Congress’ constitutional authority over trade policy that continues to exclude us from having a meaningful role in the formative stages of trade agreement and throughout negotiating and approval processes.”

 

6 Republican Members of the House of Representatives, 12 November 2013 “Given our considerable concerns with this trade agreement, we will oppose “Fast Track” Trade Promotion Authority.”

 

23 Republican Members of the House of Representatives, 12 November 2013, “Given these factors, we do not agree to cede our constitutional authority to the executive through an approval of a request for “Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority.”

 

12 Democrat Members of the House of Representatives, 8 November 2013, “Any new proposed TPA must reflect the changing nature of international trade and ensure that Congress plays a more meaningful role in the negotiating process than in the 2002 TPA, which did not receive large bipartisan support in the House of Representatives.” (Ways and Means Members)

 

36 Democrat Members of the House of Representatives, 11 June 2013, “Indeed, given the vast scope of today’s “trade” agreements, we do not believe that a broad delegation of Congress’s constitutional trade authority is generally appropriate. Negotiations on the TPP FTA delve deeply into many non-trade matters under the authority of Congress and state legislatures.”