FoxNews avoids Fast Track Trade Authority would be unconstitutional

[johnwk]

Wednesday evening during the 6 o’clock hour, FoxNews reported on the president’s strategy to secure fast track trade promotion authority in the House. But instead of reporting that the powers which the president wants to exercise as mentioned in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015” (Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority which just passed the Senate) are powers exclusively placed in Congress’ hands, FoxNews decided to ignored the proposed usurpation of power and switched the subject by talking about the Pacific Rim free trade deal, which is an entirely different matter than Obama seeking Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority.

It seems our big media is intentionally avoiding any discussion concerning the unconstitutionality of fast track trade promotion authority as found in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”. However, our Constitution is crystal clear with regard to who is in charge of regulating commerce with foreign nations!

Congress is assigned exclusive power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations".

Congress has exclusive power to enact legislation.

Congress also has exclusive power to lay and collect tariffs at our water's edge.

And, all bills raising revenue [and this includes decisions to lay tariffs] shall originate in the House of Representatives.

The above provisions of our Constitution, having been placed in Congress’ hands, exclude the president from exercising such powers. The irrefutable fact is, there is no provision in our Constitution allowing the president to negotiate regulations of commerce with foreign nations and then molding them into a Bill and sending it to Congress for an approval or disapproval by a mere majority vote.

Bills regulating commerce, which is statutory law, are to be authored by Congress, debated, amended as needed to reflect the interests of the States and the people, and when passed by both Houses are to be sent to the President for his signature or veto. This is how our representative system of government is supposed to work under our Constitution.

In effect, Fast Track Trade Promotion authority proposes to allow the president to exercise Congress’ legislative powers with reference to regulations of commerce, and leave Congress with the president’s approval or veto power, and as such, circumvents the States and People’s representatives from their constitutionally assigned legislative powers.

FTTPA is a blatant attack upon our representative system of government with respect to making laws regulating commerce with foreign nations. And yet, FoxNews continues to ignore this attempt by the President to usurp Congress’ assigned powers.

The bottom line is, a constitutional amendment would have to be passed to allow the president to exercise the powers contained in the current Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority Bill that just passed the Senate. So, why is FoxNews not reporting that our Senate has passed a Bill [the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”] which proposes to allow the president to usurp Congress' exclusive powers? Why is there no objections from FoxNews concerning the Senate’s proposal to circumvent our representative system of government by allowing the president to usurp Congress’ exclusive legislative powers as applied to regulations of commerce?

JWK



To support Jeb Bush is to support our Global Governance crowd and their WTO, NAFTA, GATT, and CAFTA, all used to circumvent America First trade policies, while fattening the fortunes of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Fox News only cares about the $$$. Why are you acting like you're surprised?

 

[Care4all]

Congress is the only one that can declare warring as well, and only with 2/3's in favor in both the house and the Senate, according to our constitution, yet our Congress gave up this duty of theirs and handed it over to President Bush, without the 2/3's vote required to go to war against Iraq....

Both, are unconstitutional, you would think?

However, both are not....and the only thing I can think of that makes them both still constitutional is that Congress, who are suppose to be the ones responsible, through a vote, have chosen to delegate this duty of theirs??? I dunno?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“It seems our big media is intentionally avoiding any discussion concerning the unconstitutionality of fast track trade promotion authority as found in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”. However, our Constitution is crystal clear with regard to who is in charge of regulating commerce with foreign nations!”

What's 'crystal clear' is your ignorance and stupidity.

Only the Federal courts can determine whether an act of Congress is Constitutional or not, acts of Congress are afforded the presumption of constitutionality (US v. Morrison), and the proposed measure in no way provides the president with 'legislative authority.'

Indeed, the Act clearly stipulates that only Congress has the authority to change US law. Moreover, the Act authorizes Congress to end the expedited process if a given administration fails to comply with the measure's provisions.

Obviously opposition to the Act has little, if anything, to do with its provisions or constitutionality, and everything to do with the president likely to sign it into law.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Foxitis

Take two Tylenol and SHUT THE FUCK UP LOSER

 

[charwin95]

Foxitis

Take two Tylenol and SHUT THE FUCK UP LOSER

50mg Norco will be better.

 

[johnwk]

Congress is the only one that can declare warring as well, and only with 2/3's in favor in both the house and the Senate, according to our constitution, yet our Congress gave up this duty of theirs and handed it over to President Bush, without the 2/3's vote required to go to war against Iraq....

Both, are unconstitutional, you would think?

However, both are not....and the only thing I can think of that makes them both still constitutional is that Congress, who are suppose to be the ones responsible, through a vote, have chosen to delegate this duty of theirs??? I dunno?

For Congress to delegate its constitutionally assigned legislative powers is to violate that provision in our Constitution which guarantees a Republican Form of Government, and circumvents the States and People's right to their representation in the making of law.

JWK

"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)

 

[johnwk]

Fox News only cares about the $$$. Why are you acting like you're surprised?

Why do you think I am "surprised"? The fact is, I posted the thread for the benefit of those who think FoxNews is "fair and balanced".


JWK

Our federal government personifies a living creature, a predator: it grows, it multiplies, it protects itself, it feeds on those it can defeat, and does everything to expand its powers and flourish, even at the expense of enslaving a nation’s entire population.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

What we see here is a tendency for both sides to think that dictatorial like authority is exceptable. There seems to be a growing tendency for everyone to think that one person, the president, can unilaterally make all the decisions and excercise all political power. It seems to resemble a dictatorship but as long as our rulers mention the word "democracy", "rights", or "constitution'" the people are pacified into thinking it is one. We are a bunch of suckers!

 

[SuperDemocrat]

“It seems our big media is intentionally avoiding any discussion concerning the unconstitutionality of fast track trade promotion authority as found in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”. However, our Constitution is crystal clear with regard to who is in charge of regulating commerce with foreign nations!”

What's 'crystal clear' is your ignorance and stupidity.

Only the Federal courts can determine whether an act of Congress is Constitutional or not, acts of Congress are afforded the presumption of constitutionality (US v. Morrison), and the proposed measure in no way provides the president with 'legislative authority.'

Indeed, the Act clearly stipulates that only Congress has the authority to change US law. Moreover, the Act authorizes Congress to end the expedited process if a given administration fails to comply with the measure's provisions.

Obviously opposition to the Act has little, if anything, to do with its provisions or constitutionality, and everything to do with the president likely to sign it into law.

It is odd that you think that the federal courts have that responsibility when the legislative branch can eliminate the supreme courts jurisdiction over certain cases. It is a power that has been used and quite frankly should be used more often.

 

[Pete7469]

Fox might be the only "news" source I can even tolerate, but I can barely tolerate it.

Rupert Murdoch is still a globalist.

 

[Pete7469]

50mg Norco will be better.

I'm thinking 5 kg of Excedrin PM would set some of these liberals up just right, and raise the collective intelligence of society a few notches as well.

A retroactive self abortion is just what the doctor ordered!

 

[johnwk]

Fox might be the only "news" source I can even tolerate, but I can barely tolerate it.

Rupert Murdoch is still a globalist.

Well, Rupert Murdoch is on the Council on Foreign Relations’ Membership Roster which promotes global governance.

JWK

 

[johnwk]

What we see here is a tendency for both sides to think that dictatorial like authority is exceptable. There seems to be a growing tendency for everyone to think that one person, the president, can unilaterally make all the decisions and excercise all political power. It seems to resemble a dictatorship but as long as our rulers mention the word "democracy", "rights", or "constitution'" the people are pacified into thinking it is one. We are a bunch of suckers!

I agree with your post! Our rulers also allow us to vote for members of Congress to pacify us and give us hope our voices will be heard and acted upon. But in the end, as we see happening more each day, we are now being ruled by the iron hand of a dictator.


JWK


When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Islamic terrorist activities begin in our southern Border States or cities like New York City?

 

[boilermaker55]

And after the vote! Which section of government sends the troops to war?

Congress is the only one that can declare warring as well, and only with 2/3's in favor in both the house and the Senate, according to our constitution, yet our Congress gave up this duty of theirs and handed it over to President Bush, without the 2/3's vote required to go to war against Iraq....

Both, are unconstitutional, you would think?

However, both are not....and the only thing I can think of that makes them both still constitutional is that Congress, who are suppose to be the ones responsible, through a vote, have chosen to delegate this duty of theirs??? I dunno?

 

[johnwk]

Is our media in the tank for the advocates of Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority?

It seems apparent by now that our big media personalities are in the tank for the advocates of FTTPA. Even FoxNews' media personalities seem to avoid discussing the unconstitutionality of Fast Track Trade Authority being exercised by our president. I say this because I have not heard one peep from Chris Wallace, Bill O'rielly, Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, Eric Bolling, Sean Hannity, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Greg Gutfeld, Dana Perino, Juan Williams, Megyn Kelly, or Neil Cavuto, how Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority proposes to allow the president to usurp Congress' exclusive legislative powers with regard to making laws regulating commerce with foreign nations.

Just the other day (6-4-15) Neil Cavuto had Ted Cruz on and failed to ask him why he voted to allow Obama to usurp Congress’ legislative powers in addition to excluding the States and People’s representatives from preforming their constitutionally assigned legislative functions___ creating a bill regulating commerce with foreign nations, debating it, amending it to reflect the general welfare of the United States and the best interests of the American people, and then sending it to the president for his signature or veto. Instead, Ted Cruz voted to allow the president to exercise Congress' exclusive legislative powers while leaving Congress with the president’s veto power, and this vote under TPA, to approve what the president has cooked up, only requires a majority vote by Congress and not the constitutionally required two thirds approval as commanded by our Constitution for deals with foreign nations our president would like to make the law of the land.

TPA as written in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015” is an irrefutable and blatant attack upon our representative system of government and our Constitution's separation of powers, and yet, FoxNews media personalities are not questioning Republican candidates running to be president who are now in the Senate [Rubio and Cruz] why they voted for this nefarious and unconstitutional power being handed to our president! WHY?

JWK


" I believe that there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." ___ Madison Elliot`s Debates, vol. III, page 87

 

[Borillar]

Wednesday evening during the 6 o’clock hour, FoxNews reported on the president’s strategy to secure fast track trade promotion authority in the House. But instead of reporting that the powers which the president wants to exercise as mentioned in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015” (Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority which just passed the Senate) are powers exclusively placed in Congress’ hands, FoxNews decided to ignored the proposed usurpation of power and switched the subject by talking about the Pacific Rim free trade deal, which is an entirely different matter than Obama seeking Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority.

It seems our big media is intentionally avoiding any discussion concerning the unconstitutionality of fast track trade promotion authority as found in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”. However, our Constitution is crystal clear with regard to who is in charge of regulating commerce with foreign nations!

Congress is assigned exclusive power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations".

Congress has exclusive power to enact legislation.

Congress also has exclusive power to lay and collect tariffs at our water's edge.

And, all bills raising revenue [and this includes decisions to lay tariffs] shall originate in the House of Representatives.

The above provisions of our Constitution, having been placed in Congress’ hands, exclude the president from exercising such powers. The irrefutable fact is, there is no provision in our Constitution allowing the president to negotiate regulations of commerce with foreign nations and then molding them into a Bill and sending it to Congress for an approval or disapproval by a mere majority vote.

Bills regulating commerce, which is statutory law, are to be authored by Congress, debated, amended as needed to reflect the interests of the States and the people, and when passed by both Houses are to be sent to the President for his signature or veto. This is how our representative system of government is supposed to work under our Constitution.

In effect, Fast Track Trade Promotion authority proposes to allow the president to exercise Congress’ legislative powers with reference to regulations of commerce, and leave Congress with the president’s approval or veto power, and as such, circumvents the States and People’s representatives from their constitutionally assigned legislative powers.

FTTPA is a blatant attack upon our representative system of government with respect to making laws regulating commerce with foreign nations. And yet, FoxNews continues to ignore this attempt by the President to usurp Congress’ assigned powers.

The bottom line is, a constitutional amendment would have to be passed to allow the president to exercise the powers contained in the current Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority Bill that just passed the Senate. So, why is FoxNews not reporting that our Senate has passed a Bill [the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”] which proposes to allow the president to usurp Congress' exclusive powers? Why is there no objections from FoxNews concerning the Senate’s proposal to circumvent our representative system of government by allowing the president to usurp Congress’ exclusive legislative powers as applied to regulations of commerce?

JWK



To support Jeb Bush is to support our Global Governance crowd and their WTO, NAFTA, GATT, and CAFTA, all used to circumvent America First trade policies, while fattening the fortunes of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation.

Republicans and lots of Democrats like these "free" trade agreements that fuck over American workers. No surprise that this is being ignored.

 

[johnwk]

Wednesday evening during the 6 o’clock hour, FoxNews reported on the president’s strategy to secure fast track trade promotion authority in the House. But instead of reporting that the powers which the president wants to exercise as mentioned in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015” (Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority which just passed the Senate) are powers exclusively placed in Congress’ hands, FoxNews decided to ignored the proposed usurpation of power and switched the subject by talking about the Pacific Rim free trade deal, which is an entirely different matter than Obama seeking Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority.

It seems our big media is intentionally avoiding any discussion concerning the unconstitutionality of fast track trade promotion authority as found in the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”. However, our Constitution is crystal clear with regard to who is in charge of regulating commerce with foreign nations!

Congress is assigned exclusive power to "regulate commerce with foreign nations".

Congress has exclusive power to enact legislation.

Congress also has exclusive power to lay and collect tariffs at our water's edge.

And, all bills raising revenue [and this includes decisions to lay tariffs] shall originate in the House of Representatives.

The above provisions of our Constitution, having been placed in Congress’ hands, exclude the president from exercising such powers. The irrefutable fact is, there is no provision in our Constitution allowing the president to negotiate regulations of commerce with foreign nations and then molding them into a Bill and sending it to Congress for an approval or disapproval by a mere majority vote.

Bills regulating commerce, which is statutory law, are to be authored by Congress, debated, amended as needed to reflect the interests of the States and the people, and when passed by both Houses are to be sent to the President for his signature or veto. This is how our representative system of government is supposed to work under our Constitution.

In effect, Fast Track Trade Promotion authority proposes to allow the president to exercise Congress’ legislative powers with reference to regulations of commerce, and leave Congress with the president’s approval or veto power, and as such, circumvents the States and People’s representatives from their constitutionally assigned legislative powers.

FTTPA is a blatant attack upon our representative system of government with respect to making laws regulating commerce with foreign nations. And yet, FoxNews continues to ignore this attempt by the President to usurp Congress’ assigned powers.

The bottom line is, a constitutional amendment would have to be passed to allow the president to exercise the powers contained in the current Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority Bill that just passed the Senate. So, why is FoxNews not reporting that our Senate has passed a Bill [the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”] which proposes to allow the president to usurp Congress' exclusive powers? Why is there no objections from FoxNews concerning the Senate’s proposal to circumvent our representative system of government by allowing the president to usurp Congress’ exclusive legislative powers as applied to regulations of commerce?

JWK



To support Jeb Bush is to support our Global Governance crowd and their WTO, NAFTA, GATT, and CAFTA, all used to circumvent America First trade policies, while fattening the fortunes of international corporate giants who have no allegiance to America or any nation.

Republicans and lots of Democrats like these "free" trade agreements that fuck over American workers. No surprise that this is being ignored.

Exactly! "Republicans and lots of Democrats", and they have no problem selling their vote!


See:Corporations shell out $1.2mn in Senate contributions to fast-track TPP


“What the documents showed was that out of a total of nearly $1.2 million given, an average of $17,000 was donated to each of the 65 “yes” votes. Republicans received an average of $19,000 and Democrats received $9,700.

“It’s a rare thing for members of Congress to go against the money these days,” Mansur Gidfar, spokesman for the anti-corruption group Represent.Us, told the Guardian. “They know exactly which special interests they need to keep happy if they want to fund their re-election campaigns or secure a future job as a lobbyist.”


Here is a list of Republican traitorous dirt bags:



Alexander, Tenn.; Ayotte, N.H.; Barrasso, Wyo.; Blunt, Mo.; Boozman, Ark.; Burr, N.C.; Capito, W.V.; Cassidy, La.; Coats, Ind.; Cochran, Miss.; Corker, Tenn.; Cornyn, Texas; Cotton, Ark.; Crapo, Idaho; Cruz, Texas; Daines, Mont.; Ernst, Iowa; Fischer, Neb.; Flake, Ariz.; Gardner, Colo.; Graham, S.C.; Grassley, Iowa; Hatch, Utah; Heller, Nev.; Hoeven, N.D.; Inhofe, Okla.; Isakson, Ga.; Johnson, Wis.; Kirk, Ill.; Lankford, Okla.; McCain, Ariz.; McConnell, Ky.; Moran, Kan.; Murkowski, Alaska; Perdue, Ga.; Portman, Ohio; Risch, Idaho; Roberts, Kan.; Rounds, S.D.; Rubio, Fla.; Sasse, Neb.; Scott, S.C.; Sullivan, Alaska; Thune, S.D.; Tillis, N.C.; Toomey, Pa.; Vitter, La.; Wicker, Miss.



JWK

 

[johnwk]

Granting the president Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority is an entirely different issue from the Pacific Rim free trade deal, a deal with a number of foreign nations cooked up by Obama. While the Pacific Rim free trade deal has been kept under wraps, the proposal to grant Fast Tract Trade Authority to the President [the “Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015”] is there for everyone to examine, and it is a nefarious attack on our representative system of government with respect to Congress (the people’s and State’s representatives), making laws regulating commerce with foreign nations.


In effect, Fast Track Trade Promotion authority as I have been pointing out proposes to allow the president to exercise Congress’ legislative powers with reference to making regulations of commerce, while it would leave Congress with the president’s approval or veto power, and as such, circumvents the States and People’s representatives from their constitutionally assigned legislative powers. So why is Fox News not reporting the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 is unconstitutional?


Our founders were very careful when assigning a few and limited powers to the President, and this is demonstrated by our Constitution’s command that any deals cooked up by the president with foreign powers would need a three fourths approval by the Senate to have the force of law.



Our Founder's fear of an omnipotent president, especially with regard to consummating deals with foreign powers is expressed in Federalist No. 75 by Hamilton with regard to the President’s limited treaty making authority and sheds light on why the President was not granted an arbitrary power to make “CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law.” Hamilton points out the president:


“might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it would require superlative virtue to withstand. An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”


The irrefutable fact is, our wise founding fathers, by the adoption of our Constitution, commanded that any deals consummated by the president with foreign nations would have to be approved by a three fourths vote of the Senate to become law. This threshold is violated under FTTPA. Additionally, our Founders also intentionally excluded our president from the legislative process with regard to the making of laws regulating commerce with foreign nations and granted him a limited power to sign a Bill created by Congress regulating commerce or vetoing the Bill, which is likewise violated under FTTPA.


It is also important to note that all bills raising a federal revenue, and this would include the setting of tariffs, are to originate in the House of Representatives, which is the people’s voice. Fast Track Trade Authority is designed to silence the people’s voice in the making of law which affects the raising of revenue!


So why is not one Fox News media personality expressing an outrage over the proposed Fast Track Trade Promotion Authority? And why has almost every Republican Senator voted to violate our Constitution in several ways and is on board with allowing our president to usurp Congress’ exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, not to mention Republicans who are campaigning to be our next president who likewise support this nefarious attack upon our representative system of government?


JWK



"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)

 

[Freewill]

Congress is the only one that can declare warring as well, and only with 2/3's in favor in both the house and the Senate, according to our constitution, yet our Congress gave up this duty of theirs and handed it over to President Bush, without the 2/3's vote required to go to war against Iraq....

Both, are unconstitutional, you would think?

However, both are not....and the only thing I can think of that makes them both still constitutional is that Congress, who are suppose to be the ones responsible, through a vote, have chosen to delegate this duty of theirs??? I dunno?

Sorry but your math is a bit flawed. The vote for military action in Iraq went down like this:
House: 296-133 =67 percent

Senate: 77-23 77 percent

I don't blame you for getting it wrong it is the reality that the left wing pushes, now you know the truth don't spread their lies from now on: Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Of course the above vote was with Mrs. Clinton's and John Kerry's blessing, does that bother you?

Now let's use your criteria. What was the vote on Clinton's 72 days of terror bombing Serbia?

House: 0-0

Senate 0-0

How about Obama's use of force in Libya?

House 0-0

Senate 0-0

Any logical and fair person would see that it was Bush that did the right thing, not so much for Clinton and Obama. And I say that as someone who would have voted no for war in Iraq. But we went and I find it a stab in the back to our troops not to support them.