ShareThis Page
Nation

Congressional negotiators reach trade deal

| Friday, April 17, 2015, 12:01 a.m.

WASHINGTON — Top congressional lawmakers struck a long-sought, bipartisan agreement Thursday for the broadest trade policy pact in years, allowing President Obama to negotiate trade accords for Congress' review and move forward with talks on a sweeping partnership with Pacific nations.

Obama quickly said he will sign the bill if Congress passes it.

“It's no secret that past trade deals haven't always lived up to their promise,” Obama said in a statement. “And that's why I will only sign my name to an agreement that helps ordinary Americans get ahead.”

Chief among the challenges of passing the bill are divisions within the president's own party. Liberal and pro-business Democrats are bitterly split over the deal's potential for generating or losing American jobs. Under the legislation, Congress gets an up-or-down vote on any such deals, but in exchange cannot make changes — a concern for labor, environmental and other interest groups. The divisions hover over 2016 presidential politics, too, as Democratic contender Hillary Rodham Clinton kicks off her campaign to unite the party.

House Speaker John Boehner applauded the deal but said much of the burden of its success rests with Obama.

“He must secure the support from his own party that's needed to ensure strong, bipartisan passage,” Boehner said in a statement that was echoed by the Chamber of Commerce.

For Obama, the “fast track” legislation comes at an opportune time. He's negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which proposes a trade agreement involving the United States, Japan, Vietnam, Canada, Mexico and seven other Pacific rim nations.

Labor unions and others say the Pacific pact would hurt job growth and encourage other countries to abuse workers and the environment. The Obama administration rejects those claims and says U.S. goods and services must have greater access to foreign buyers.

One Democrat, Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, said the agreement marked only a start and could be derailed by amendments that might be added when lawmakers consider the bill in committees or on the floor. Brown and other Democrats who are aligned with organized labor are often highly suspicious of or hostile to trade legislation. They argue such measures facilitate agreements that wind up destroying jobs in the United States and creating jobs in nations that lack the environmental and worker safety protections that exist in the United States.

“Negotiating objectives without enforcement mechanisms don't get you very far,” Brown said.

“Over and over again, we've been told that trade deals will create jobs and better protect workers and the environment,” said Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa. “Those promises have never come to fruition.”

Not only did Obama express support, but Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Ash Carter each issued statements welcoming the bipartisan bill.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said he expects the committee to consider the legislation next week.

Traditionally, trade legislation has been accompanied by a parallel bill that provides funding under the Trade Adjustment Assistance program for American workers who are adversely affected by international accords. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, announced the parallel bill shortly after the trade agreement was announced. Wyden introduced separate legislation to renew an expired health care tax break for workers eligible for trade adjustment assistance. The bill would provide a tax credit equal to 72.5 percent of the cost of health insurance.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me