White House says it will seek "fast-track" trade authority

WASHINGTON Fri Mar 1, 2013 6:05pm EST

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks to the National Governors Association in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington February 25, 2013. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks to the National Governors Association in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington February 25, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House on Friday said it would work for approval of politically contentious legislation that would ease the way for new trade deals, as it tries to wrap up talks on an Asia-Pacific free-trade agreement this year.

But the brief reference to the legislation known as "trade promotion authority" in an annual report on the president's trade agenda failed to impress some key Republicans who have been pressing for action on the issue for years.

House of Representative Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, a Michigan Republican, urged President Barack Obama to "demonstrate his commitment to a vigorous and productive trade policy" by opening talks with Congress on the "fast track" powers and "nominating a qualified and committed U.S. trade representative."

The current U.S. trade representative, Ron Kirk, plans to step down soon. That will leave the position of chief U.S. trade negotiator vacant as the United States prepares to launch trade talks with the European Union and as it seeks to finish talks on a Trans-Pacific Partnership pact by the end of the year.

Trade promotion authority, also known as TPA or "fast track," allows the White House to submit deals to Congress for straight up-or-down votes without any amendments.

It is considered essential to assuring other countries that any deal they reach with the United States will not be picked apart by U.S. lawmakers during the approval process.

Both Camp and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Democrat from Montana, have announced plans to pursue TPA legislation. But many lawmakers believe a strong push from Obama is needed because trade bills are unpopular with many Democrats.

After four years of telling Congress they would seek TPA at "the appropriate time," the annual trade agenda released on Friday by the U.S. trade representative's office contained the administration's most forward-leaning language yet.

"To facilitate the conclusion, approval, and implementation of market-opening negotiating efforts, we will also work with Congress on Trade Promotion Authority. Such authority will guide current and future negotiations, and will thus support a jobs-focused trade agenda moving forward," the report said.

ASIA-PACIFIC TRADE PUSH

The Obama administration, even without the authority, has pursued the proposed Trans-Pacific accord between the United States and 10 other countries in the Asia-Pacific region.

But negotiators hope to finish those talks this year, possibly as early as the annual meeting of leaders from Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation nations in October in Bali.

That could be hard if the White House does not have TPA.

"Whether you're talking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership or a U.S.-EU FTA, they're both going to be complicated and having them subject to amendment will make it tough to get them through the Senate," said Timothy Punke, a former Senate aide who is now a partner at Monument Policy Group.

Congress last approved TPA legislation in 2002, following a bitter fight. Republicans, who generally favor free trade, passed the bill over the objections of Democrats, many of whom blame past trade agreements for U.S. job losses.

Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said on Friday he was pleased the White House was "finally" asking for renewal of the legislation.

But "making TPA a reality requires more than talk, it demands real leadership and action from the president," Hatch said, calling the legislation an essential "lynchpin" for Obama's trade agenda.

Senator Rob Portman, an Ohio Republican and former U.S. trade representative under President George W. Bush, welcomed the statement but said it was critical the administration "focus needed resources to developing and passing TPA."

The U.S. business community has made passage of TPA one of its top priorities this year.

"We think it's a critical tool to effectively negotiate agreements and get them passed by Congress," said John Engler, president of the Business Roundtable and a former Michigan Republican governor.

Christopher Wenk, senior director of international policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said his group welcomed the administration's acknowledgement that "TPA needs to be on the agenda" as it pursues an expanding list of trade initiatives.

(Reporting by Doug Palmer; Editing by Todd Eastham and Paul Simao)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (4)
Globalman wrote:
Republicans fault blah blah blah. I think President Obama forgets it was his idea in the first place. So why did he do so? I do not understand his strategy.

Mar 01, 2013 11:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
Pete_Murphy wrote:
The problem with “market-opening trade agreements” with badly overpopulated nations (like we find with many Pacific nations) is that they always begin with the U.S. opening its market first. Then, if any market-opening happens on the other side, we find that their per capita consumption is stunted by serious over-crowding.

Early last year, we entered into a new free trade agreement that was supposed to be a big win for American workers. Has anyone noticed that our trade deficit with South Korea worsened by 25% last year – much more than the small increase in our overall trade deficit?

The inverse relationship between population density and per capita consumption makes free trade with overpopulated nations a sure-fire loser for the U.S., as proven time and again. It’s no coincidence that, since our last trade surplus in 1975, our cumulative trade deficit of $12 trillion closely matches the growth in our national debt. Misguided trade policy based on flawed, early 1800s trade theory is killing the U.S.

Pete Murphy
Author, “Five Short Blasts”

Mar 01, 2013 2:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Pete_Murphy wrote:
The problem with “market-opening trade agreements” with badly overpopulated nations (like we find with many Pacific nations) is that they always begin with the U.S. opening its market first. Then, if any market-opening happens on the other side, we find that their per capita consumption is stunted by serious over-crowding.

Early last year, we entered into a new free trade agreement that was supposed to be a big win for American workers. Has anyone noticed that our trade deficit with South Korea worsened by 25% last year – much more than the small increase in our overall trade deficit?

The inverse relationship between population density and per capita consumption makes free trade with overpopulated nations a sure-fire loser for the U.S., as proven time and again. It’s no coincidence that, since our last trade surplus in 1975, our cumulative trade deficit of $12 trillion closely matches the growth in our national debt. Misguided trade policy based on flawed, early 1800s trade theory is killing the U.S.

Pete Murphy
Author, “Five Short Blasts”

Mar 01, 2013 2:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.

A tourist takes a plunge as she swims at Ngapali Beach, a popular tourist site, in the Thandwe township of the Rakhine state, October 6, 2013. Picture taken October 6, 2013. REUTERS/Soe Zeya Tun (MYANMAR - Tags: SOCIETY) - RTR3FOI0

Where do you want to go?

We look at when to take trips, budget considerations and the popularity of multigenerational family travel.   Video