Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

I just called my Congress critters to give them feedback on their TPP votes

You should, too.

Angus King voted against Fast Track, Collins for.

The Collins staffer tried to argue that Collins was only voting for open debate, but come on. Let's put a stake in the heart of TPP right away!

0
No votes yet
Updated: 

Comments

letsgetitdone's picture
Submitted by letsgetitdone on

I did earlier today, before the Senate vote Passing Fast Track 65-33. God, they almost had enough votes to ratify a real treaty. Fortunately the Administration didn't go for that, so all that's at issue is a Congressional-Executive Agreement.

Submitted by lambert on

Although, optimistically, sometimes when a vote is lost, everybody just goes with the flow, so the "real" vote might not be so bad.

letsgetitdone's picture
Submitted by letsgetitdone on

True. But there's a lot of water left to flow under the bridge yet before the final vote is recorded Before that TPP gets passed the Democrats who voted for Fast Track are going to get a lot of pushback on the sovereignty issues from both the right wing and the left. When the rhetoric starts going to the question of their loyalty to the United States vs. their loyalty to the corporates, their vote for Fast Track will begin to bite them and they may realize that if they vote for TPP they are dead meat in 2016. That will affect at least 3 Democratic Senators and all the Dem House incumbents who vote for Fast Track, then we'll see how much they are willing to risk to back TPP.

nippersdad's picture
Submitted by nippersdad on

but the case against the TPP courts are now so blatantly unconstitutional and the usual suspects so clearly corrupt that I wonder if one could not actually take it to court in a class action suit?

This would really be more of a publicity stunt than anything else, I realize, but what if one were to put in a request on GoFundMe for the money to take every Senator who voted for cloture to court for treason? I think that the PR would be wildly effective in the Press, thus making other Congress Critters think twice about voting for this thing.

What do you think?

Submitted by lambert on

Article III:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

nippersdad's picture
Submitted by nippersdad on

But what do you mean by their having "got us"? Have they got our backs or have they got us trapped in a hole?

Couldn't the imposition of a supra-national court system that is explicitly and deliberately out of reach of the citizenry, wherein they have no legal recourse, be considered giving aid and comfort to extra governmental organizations anathema to the legal system which the framers sought in the supremacy clause?

At this point there are millions who could attest to how prior trade bills were sold as a fraudulent bill of goods and these new ones are looking to be no different because of the lack of transparency, hence a class action suit.

I am mainly thinking of the PR value, though. Rhetorical bomb throwing is in fashion these days thanks to the teabagging contingent. While it would almost certainly never make it to federal court (we don't have the time for a trial anyway) it would almost undoubtedly make it into the court of public opinion, where it would hurt a Congress with a 12% approval rating just prior to election season.

Just throwing it out there. I would love to try it, but don't know enough about the issue to want to make a fool of myself needlessly.

Submitted by lambert on

... in a way that most people don't define it, I think. (The enemies in this case being a post- or trans-national class of capitalists cosmopolitan super-rich, I would think; though saying "corporations" might be more effective...)

In a way, we're seeing the fallout from the efforts of the right to weaken the state and treat it as an enemy... But the state is now so weakened that it's fallen into the hands of those who the right, at least at ground level, oppose.

nippersdad's picture
Submitted by nippersdad on

but enemies out there trying to take their sammiches and put them in FEMA camps managed by Century 21, or something. I lost track of their rationales long ago. I don't really listen to anything they have to say anymore. I do believe, however, that the argument would have traction with those who are still in possession of frontal lobes. EW, surprisingly, seems to be a pretty bi-partisan phenomenon thus far.

I talked to a federal lawyer in Atlanta today and they are cogitating the idea. They did not reject it out of hand, so it will be interesting to see if they get back to me.

Submitted by lambert on

"Talked to a Federal lawyer in Atlanta." Well, if you want to get a trial balloon propagated, you know how to do that....

letsgetitdone's picture
Submitted by letsgetitdone on

We should get all the new Democratic candidates to commit on the TPP. Indeed, acknowledging the possibility that both Fast Track and TPP may pass. What would the new candidates as well as the candidates for re-election be willing to do to repeal both of them?