Republicans and pro-free trade Democrats, stymied by the political maneuver on Friday that put fast-track legislation into limbo at least temporarily, have spent the days since then trying to figure out a new strategy to get that legislation onto President Obama's desk. As of last evening, they seem to have come up with one. Can it work? Can it turn Friday's victory into ashes? We could find out soon. A first vote on this so-called Plan B could
come as early as Thursday.
Here's Scott Wong and Mike Lillis at The Hill:
Decoupling fast-track from a separate program granting aid to workers displaced by trade would put pressure on the Senate to pass the legislation, a top priority for Obama that would allow him to complete negotiations on a sweeping trans-Pacific trade deal.
Don't be confused because you thought the House
already passed the fast-track bill Friday after Democrats defeated the workers' aid bill. It did pass it. But because of a Republican rule setting parameters on that vote, the workers' aid bill (known as Trade Adjustment Assistance) and the fast-track bill (known as Trade Promotion Authority)
both had to pass in order for fast-track to make it to the president's desk. A defeat for TAA was a defeat for TPA. Making TPA a standalone bill decoupled from TAA requires another vote.
In the House, the Friday vote on TPA was 219-211, with 28 Democrats favoring it. It's unlikely that a second vote will fail there. And if it does pass, it goes to the Senate. That's where things get complicated. Because at least some of the 14 Democrats who approved TPA almost a month ago did so only because it was tied to TAA. The Republicans think they can solve this problem with a clean—separate—bill on TPA and an insertion of TAA into another trade bill, the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).
But there's an issue of trust in the matter. Congressional Democrats invented TAA in the Nixon administration to ameliorate circumstances for workers displaced by trade agreements. Most of today's Democrats in Congress say reauthorizing TAA is an essential companion to any trade deal. Since fast-tracking ups the odds of passing trade deals—such as the nearly completed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)—most pro-free trade Democrats don't want to take a chance on passing TPA without the certainty that TAA passes, too. But a Senate-passed TAA could fail again in the House. So there's bound to be a good deal of wariness about a standalone TPA among at least some of those 14 Democrats who already voted for it coupled to TAA.
There's considerable criticism, most of it from left-of-center critics outside Congress, that TAA is underfunded and otherwise a mediocre remedy for the damage caused to many workers by trade deals. It's a Band-Aid for a festering wound. But, the overall view is that it's much better than nothing. Among Republicans, TAA is widely seen as welfare, something they prefer to remain solely the privilege of corporations. They would love to see it axed.
More analysis can be read below the orange tangle.
Naturally, the massive grassroots opposition to TPA needs to continue the fight in both House and Senate if President Obama, Republicans and their pro-free trade Democratic allieds proceed with this standalone approach.
Let's speculate for a moment and assume Republicans decide to go with the standalone approach and that such a bill passes the House and is sent to the Senate. We'll then be faced with trying to change the minds of some of those 14 Senate Democrats who contributed to making the May vote on TPA 62-37. Those Democrats are:
Michael Bennet of Colorado, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, Chris Coons of Delaware, Dianne Feinstein of California, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Patty Murray of Washington, Bill Nelson of Florida, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Mark Warner of Virginia and Ron Wyden of Oregon.
If no other factors were at work, it would only take moving three of those votes into the "no" column. But perhaps two or three or even four of the five Republicans who voted "no" on TPA the first time around might vote "yes" this time because TAA would be out of the picture.
What that means is changing the minds of as many as half those 14 Democrats. Which will be a steep climb for us fast-tracking's foes to make happen.
•••
Brooklynbadboy has a discussion on Plan B here and Brown Thrasher has one here.