How will they vote on TPP?

How will they vote on TPP?


(Will Raul cave like Crapo, Risch & Simpson did on TPA?)

There is no way to tell how Congressman Raul Labrador will vote on the upcoming deceitful Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) bill. As one of his biggest fans, I choose to believe in him and think he totally gets it and will vote nay. We should be very pleased with the Constitutional mind and integrity of Raul Labrador which his voting record reflects. However, I also expected Senator’s Crapo and Risch to vote down the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) that surrendered Congress’s Constitutional responsibility to negotiate trade agreements to a man with zero negotiating skills, but with an obvious anti-America agenda, our Manchurian President. I didn’t think they’d take the money, but it appears they did. Aware of Congressman Simpson’s voting record I was not at all surprised that he’d vote for Obama to take control.


The Guardian reports: “Fast-tracking the TPP, meaning its passage through Congress without having its contents available for debate or amendments, was only possible after lots of corporate money exchanged hands with senators.

“In other words, senators — each of whom swore an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution — have been bribed to ignore our founding document and deliver power over the country’s trade policy to the president and globalist bureaucrats who will manage the TPP.

“Remarkably, the votes on the legislation accomplishing this atrocity weren’t even close.

“On May 14, the Senate approved the TPA bill 65-33 and then 62 of those same senators voted a few days later to shut down debate on the matter.

“How much money would it take to convince those “impress majorities” to violate their oaths of office and sacrifice American sovereignty on the altar of “free trade?” The Guardian has identified the source of the money and the senators who participated in the bipartisan betrayal:

“Using data from the Federal Election Commission, this chart shows all donations that corporate members of the U.S. Business Coalition for TPP made to U.S. Senate campaigns between January and March 2015, when fast-tracking the TPP was being debated in the Senate:

“Out of the total $1,148,971 given, an average of $17,676.48 was donated to each of the 65 “yea” votes.

“The average Republican member received $19,673.28 from corporate TPP supporters.

“The average Democrat received $9,689.23 from those same donors.” – Unquote The


Real FREE TRADE is as it should be, FREE. But these masked agreements are chock full of restricting and illegal regulations that, like our experience with NAFTA, are ruinous to our interests, freedom and sovereignty and are forecast to be 10 times worse than NAFTA in scope and affect.

What do these issues have to do with free trade? Climate change • sustainable development• internet regulation • homeland security • the military • labor  patent and copyright including intellectual property rights  land use  food  agriculture and product standards  natural resources  the environment •professional licensing  competition  state-owned enterprises  government procurement policies as well as financial policies  healthcare  energy  e-commerce  telecommunications and other service sector regulations. And what do international courts have to do with trade? Nothing, but its all part of the pending Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) as per the 151 house democrats letter to Obama in November 2013 opposing fast track, the secrecy, and all these un-related issues that should not be included in these negotiations.

See: 10 Reasons Why You Should Oppose TPP and TTIP

States William F. Jasper, senior editor of The New American magazine, “The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPA) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) constitute an all-out assault on, and an existential threat to, America’s sovereignty and independence. These twin, trans-oceanic agreements are massive schemes that propose a very radical transformation of the global politico-economic system, with revolutionary integration and convergence of the major Atlantic and Pacific nations.

“Modern Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), TPP, and TTIP have become so comprehensive and complex that they guarantee conflict — both among the nations that are party to the agreement, as well as between private parties and the various nation-state parties. Resolving the conflicts means resorting to adjudication. As with NAFTA, the TPP and TTIP create conflict resolution tribunals (courts) that claim the authority to overrule national, state, and local laws, as well as national and state courts and national and state constitutions. Additionally, PTA members often opt to appeal their cases to the World Trade Organization tribunal, which claims global judicial authority. In practice, this amounts, virtually, to legislating globally from the bench, striking down laws and ordering revisions. This is not merely a theoretical threat, it is already happening.

“Unfortunately, some of the loudest critics on this score are notorious leftists who regularly parade against capitalism. Republican leaders have been able to use that fact as a reason to disregard the compelling evidence that these criticisms of TPP/TTIP are solidly based. First of all, it is important to note that in most cases the big, international mega-corporations long ago ceased to consider themselves American companies and also long ago ceased to favor free enterprise capitalism: They are corporate welfare drones, the masters of government bailouts, government loans, government subsidies and government contracts. They are little different from the giant State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) or ‘private’ corporations owned by communist princelings and commissars in China and Russia.

“In 1993, the year before NAFTA went into effect, the United States had a $1.66 billion trade surplus with Mexico; by 1995, the first year after NAFTA had entered into force that changed to a $15.8 billion deficit. By 2000, that annual deficit had soared to $24.5 billion, and by 2007 it hit $74.7 billion. For 2014, our trade deficit with Mexico dipped to only $53.8 billion. In 1993, the year before NAFTA, we imported around 225,000 cars and trucks from Mexico. By 2005, our imports of Mexican-made vehicles had tripled to 700,000 vehicles annually, and in 2012, Mexico’s export of vehicles to the United States surpassed 1.4 million. Chrysler, Ford, and GM transferred major production facilities (and jobs) from the United States to Mexico. Our trade deficits with Canada have followed a similar path since adoption of NAFTA.

“The Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) authors and other pseudo-free trade propagandists had cherry-picked data and simply invented statistics to fraudulently sell their product: NAFTA. If they were car salesmen, they would have gone to jail for fraud and misrepresentation. Instead, they are back doing the same thing, concocting rosy statistics to sell the TPP and TTIP.” – Unquote William F. Jasper, senior editor of ‘The New American’ magazine


“Since before the public release of the text of the TPP Agreement, Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who had previously entered the secret reading room in Congress where the TPP Agreement was kept, warned about the creation of a TPP Commission, which he has described as being “extremely broad” and having “the hallmarks of a nascent European Union.” Following the release of the TPP Agreement, Sessions further described the TPP Commission as “a Pacific Union — which meets, appoints unelected bureaucrats, adopts rules, and changes the agreement after adoption.”

“Sessions was referring to chapter 27 of the TPP, entitled “Administrative and Institutional Provisions,” which establishes and outlines the functions of the TPP Commission. Article 27, section 1, of the TPP plainly states: “The Parties hereby establish a Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission (Commission) which shall meet at the level of Ministers or senior officials, as mutually determined by the Parties. Each Party shall be responsible for the composition of its delegation.” Article 27, section 2, outlines the various functions and powers of the TPP Commission as follows:

The Commission shall:

(a) consider any matter relating to the implementation or operation of this Agreement;

(b) review within 3 years of entry into force of this Agreement and at least every 5 years thereafter the economic relationship and partnership among the Parties;

(c) consider any proposal to amend or modify this Agreement;

(d) supervise the work of all committees and working groups established under this Agreement;

(e) establish the Model Rules of Procedure for Arbitral Tribunals referred to in Article 28.11.2 and Article 28.12, and, where appropriate, amend such Model Rules of Procedure for Arbitral Tribunals;

(f) consider ways to further enhance trade and investment between the Parties;

(g) review the roster of panel chairs established under Article 28.10 every 3 years, and when appropriate, constitute a new roster; and

(h) determine whether the Agreement may enter into force for an original signatory notifying pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 30.5.1 (Entry into Force).

“On November 5, 2015, in a press release, Senator Session called these powers of the TPP Commission “open-ended.” Citing The TPP Commission’s broad authority over the creation of new rules and procedures, global migration, and global environmental standards, Sessions said:

This global governance authority is open-ended: “The Commission and any subsidiary body established under this Agreement may establish rules of procedures for the conduct of its work.” It covers everything from the movement of foreign nationals: ‘No Party shall adopt or maintain … measures that impose limitations on the total number of natural persons that may be employed in a particular service sector … in the form of numerical quotas or the requirement of an economic needs test”; to climate regulation: “The Parties acknowledge that transition to a low emissions economy requires collective action.”

“Furthermore, the TPP Commission is also tasked with approving the accession of new states or separate customs territories to the TPP, according to Article 30.4 of the TPP Agreement. Congress will not have a say as to whether or not to approve or block new states attempting to join the TPP; the power and decision of accession resides solely with the TPP Commission.

“With all this in mind, it would behoove congressional lawmakers to avail themselves of the aforementioned facts prior to casting their votes on the TPP Agreement. At the very least, this information should cause grave concern to anyone wishing to preserve America’s national sovereignty and independence. Congress may vote on the TPP as early as the first week in March.” – Unquote Christian Gomez from The New American magazine


This overwhelming bombardment of ruinous new rules and regulations under the TPP will surely steer our republic into history and our former sovereign country will evolve into the intended new member state of at first a regional government probably called the North American Union or Trans Pacific Union under the auspicious of the UN to be graduated toward full membership as a member of a new global government, eventually as a result of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) being passed later, which of course, would be run by unaccountable, unelected global power elitists who know best for us on all things.

The imminence of it all from William F. Jasper: “Under TPA rules, President Obama has to give Congress 90 days’ notice before signing the TPP. He gave that on November 5, which means that he could, and most likely will, sign the agreement as early as February 3, 2016. Thirty days after signing, he may submit TPP implementing legislation to Congress, which means that Congress may begin taking action on TPP as early as March 2. A worst-case scenario would see both houses immediately approving the TPP on that day, March 2 (only a few scant weeks away), before the American people have the slightest idea what is happening to them.

“The TPP program for political, social, and economic “integration” is indeed a suicide pact, modeled after the long-range integration scheme used to create the European Union, whose architects admitted it was a plan to force the sovereign nations to commit “hara-kiri” piecemeal, gradually yielding up their sovereignty over more and more of their national and local affairs until they are completely merged and swallowed by the newly created, omnipotent central state. (See herehere, and here.)

“That is the plan, and we have only weeks to stop it. It can be done; we’ve done it with similar threats — with similarly imposing odds — such as the North American Union/Security and Prosperity Partnership (NAU/SPP) and the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).” – Unquote William F. Jasper, senior editor of ‘The New American’ magazine

Furthermore the firebrand Washington State Senator named Matt Shea states that TPA is unconstitutional as it is a treaty in intent and calling it an agreement does not make it so. Article 11 Section 2 states that a 2/3 vote of the Senate is mandatory for a treaty to become law and no foreign law or tribunal is about the U.S. Constitution. – Unquote William F. Jasper, senior editor of ‘The New American’ magazine

Watch how they vote!

“I think Congressmen should wear uniforms, you know, like NASCAR drivers, so we could identify their corporate sponsors.” – Author unknown