Senate Finance Committee Passes USMCA Trade Agreement – Submits For Full Senate Vote…

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley held a mark-up hearing today to review the USMCA and vote the agreement out of committee.  After debate the agreement passed with a 25-3 vote.  Pat Toomey (R-PA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) voted against the agreement (full hearing video below)

The USMCA is now sent to the full Senate for a vote this month; however, it is interesting to hear the reasons why Toomey, Cassidy and Whitehouse oppose it.

Senator Whitehouse (D) opposes USMCA because it doesn’t address climate change and have the provisions within it to support the Paris Climate Treaty.  Senators Toomey (R) and Cassidy oppose USMCA because it is not friendly to the Wall Street multinationals.

Senator Toomey doesn’t like that the Senate cannot change the USMCA to make it more favorable to the Wall Street multinationals who are invested heavily in China.  Toomey, speaking on behalf of several, noted the Trans-Pacific-Partnership (TPP) is a better trade construct.  Quite a remarkable mask-dropping was visible during the hearing.

Obviously, the Senate is the epicenter of the Decepticon coalition.  The Decepticons are U.S. Senators who focus exclusively toward the construction of legislation, policy and economic issues that benefit large U.S. Wall Street multinational corporations.   The USMCA is adverse to those interests as it focuses maximum value to those business entities who are invested in a North American manufacturing and production economy.

(VIA CNBC) […] The agreement has also split up the 2020 Democratic presidential field. Former Vice President Joe Biden backs it. While Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., has indicated she will support the deal revised to include Democratic changes, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has opposed the pact.

Mexico has ratified the trade agreement. Canada may not approve it until later this month. The agreement does not take effect until all three nations ratify it.

The U.S. exports more goods to Canada and Mexico than any other countries.

Trump’s impeachment could complicate the Senate’s efforts to pass the deal. After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sends House-passed articles of impeachment to the Senate, the chamber will start a trial on whether to remove him from office.

The speaker has not pushed impeachment to the other side of the Capitol as Democrats pressure Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to call witnesses. Without a trial, the Senate has more flexibility to quickly pass USMCA.

“If it can be brought up before the impeachment vote, it’d be very important to get this — the sooner it gets done, for the good of the economy, the better,” Grassley told reporters after the committee voted for USMCA. He noted that impeachment would have to take priority over other matters if it comes before the Senate.  (read more)

This entry was posted in Big Government, Canada, Decepticons, Deep State, Donald Trump, Economy, Election 2020, Environmentalism, Legislation, media bias, Mexico, NAFTA, President Trump, Uncategorized, USMCA. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Senate Finance Committee Passes USMCA Trade Agreement – Submits For Full Senate Vote…

  1. thedoc00 says:

    The Senate deceptacons were even against the 2017 Tax Cut due to the unfavorable treatment of Hedge Fund Profits. Charles Payne gave a pretty good run of the issue at the time and supported the tax treatment. Ultimately the tax treatment was removed to get the votes needed for the Tax Cut.

    Liked by 5 people

  2. The Boss says:

    So….
    USMCA could be pushed through and signed into law while the world waits for Nancy the Constipated to shit or get off the pot. I’m liking it.

    Liked by 23 people

  3. no she will wait til the day before the usmca vote then submit the articles so the senate has to take that up,further delaying the usmca,again..

    Liked by 6 people

  4. Summer says:

    Democrats made some changes, allegedly significant. What exactly was inserted/removed?

    Like

    • sundance says:

      The trilateral trade panel dispute mechanism.

      Liked by 4 people

    • GB Bari says:

      Here is a very readable, relatively brief summary of the revised USMCA after the DemonRATs approved it in early December.

      https://moneyandmarkets.com/usmca-deal-details/

      Liked by 1 person

      • Summer says:

        Thanks for providing a rare glimpse at the Demoglobalist point of view, as presented by Ass Press.

        I learned that Democrats found a few minutes in their busy schedule to save this otherwise unimportant and inconsequential trade deal. The main reason they bothered to do so was to end the unbearable stress and inconvenience experienced by the farmers, which was caused by the belligerent Trump administration bickering with our neighbors over nothing for months.

        The concerned Democrats noticed that “revised NAFTA” was basically unenforceable so the Democrats made it at least enforceable. They also caught Trump colluding with pharmaceutical companies against the American People but Trump could not fool the Democrats. The Democrats defeated the Trump administration, closed the loopholes and ensured cheaper drug prices for the People. They also protected the workers, somehow.

        That does not mean this unimportant deal is not problematic, even after being revised by our betters on the left. However, the potential future benefits of the “revised NAFTA” are so negligent — literally a blimp on the radar in the 22 trillion economy — that it is almost embarrassing to even talk about “revised NAFTA” in a polite society. Not to mention trade per se is such a minuscule part of our economy…

        Liked by 2 people

  5. dayallaxeded says:

    Bigly disappointed in Kennedy! Lousyana just can’t catch a break!

    Liked by 3 people

  6. Paprika says:

    And what shenanigans will the Canadian PM and Parliament pull before they will ratify this even if Senate votes Yea?

    Won’t they also want to include Climate Change, human rights issues, LBGTQRSTZ…and etc?

    How long can they delay it? What can they demand or they won’t sign?

    Liked by 5 people

    • Jan says:

      If Canada stalls, Pres. Trump would likely make the deal w/Mexico. As I recall, the trade team largely ignored Canada and Twinkle Socks had to agree w/the trade team’s outline in order to be allowed back to the adult table.

      Liked by 8 people

    • margarite1 says:

      Interesting interview of Mr Wonderful in which he gives opinion of Trudeau and POTUS.

      Liked by 2 people

      • trump20162024 says:

        O’Leary is full of himself, but he makes a lot of valid points.
        Starving the US grubberment of money is a particularly important point.
        His comments about China’s middle class are correct in the long run, but he overestimates the trustworthiness and malleability of Xi and his fellow chicoms.
        Net/net, Canada’s loss is our gain.

        Like

    • WES says:

      Paprika:. Trudope is growing a beard!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ironclaw says:

      Canada already tried to hold out and they basically got told they had a week to sign on with the deal as it stood or they were out. They folded after 6 days.

      Liked by 1 person

      • drlou007 says:

        Now PT has a parliament to deal with. But if they don’t get it done, things will only get worse for Canada. Trump will see to it. How many months of losing 76K jobs can the country sustain?

        Like

  7. TarsTarkas says:

    I had read that the USMCA as originally written was very supportive of the Tech Giants which is a reason why I would vote against it, since the alternative is No NAFTA, which I’m fine with. Is the Tech-friendly language still in it?

    Like

    • drlou007 says:

      I had the same issue regarding what I heard about the lawsuit protections offered to tech. This made 0 sense and was an opportunity to curtail tech’s attack on the First A. As the bill got closer to a vote in the House, the issue disappeared and has yet to reappear as far as I know. If it is in the bill, the techs will continue to censor conservative thought which will ultimately end America as we know it.

      Like

  8. Talkofthetown says:

    Why can’t the Senate vote for it in the coming days. They have the votes know it will pass why wait.Schedule the vote.. I mean what else are they doing. Graham hasn’t done a damn thing so far. McConnell he just talks a lot take the vote.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jan says:

      It all depends on when Nasty turns over the Articles to the Senate. If she doesn’t do it this week, maybe the Senate votes on the USMCA.

      Keep in mind neither Pelosi nor McConnell want the USMCA passed. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce says no way, as does probably Soros. It undermines their efforts to make the U.S. a third world economy.

      Liked by 3 people

  9. Bruce_Dern's_Finger says:

    From the article: “Senator Whitehouse (D) opposes USMCA because it doesn’t address climate change and have the provisions within it to support the Paris Climate Treaty.”

    Perhaps sun spots are blinding the thinking of Senator Whitehouse and others that believe in the cult of Climate Change.

    Liked by 2 people

    • scrap1ron says:

      Sun spots? More likely lobbyist cash.

      Liked by 4 people

    • TarsTarkas says:

      Sun spots are ‘dark’ (cooler than the surrounding surface of the sun). However we’re having a dearth of them right now, which may be a sign of future global cooling.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ironclaw says:

        How dare you suggest that the Sun has anything to do with climate. We can’t allow that because even democrats aren’t stupid enough to think that the government can control the Sun. That’s why we have to blame carbon dioxide, it’s a very small trace gas and even democrats aren’t stupid enough to think that water is a poison.

        Liked by 1 person

    • MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

      Whitehouse is a reflection of the DA voters that elected such a idiot.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paris is a very fine example of the kind of international treaty we do not want: a treaty which establishes a non-elected, para-governmental entity which has enforcement powers(!) against the Sovereign Governments of its subscribing nations. (And, oh by the by, a rather stupendous budget!)

      The penultimate example of this kind of nonsense, of course, is the treaty that established the European Union …

      Look, I have no problem with the idea of discussing climate issues and working for solutions to things that – very obviously – affect everyone on this planet. But I stop well short of the idea of then imposing so-called “solutions.”

      And for that matter, “imposing science.” We actually know very, very little about how this magnificent planet works. We can observe that it has gone through massive(!) climate changes long before – so far as we know – human beings existed here. And, we do not know why! Can we … accept … this notion? Can we bear to … acknowledge … that God holds many Mysteries to Himself?

      Liked by 6 people

      • “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” – Isaiah 55:8-9 (ESV)

        Liked by 5 people

        • ms doodlebug says:

          One of my favorite scriptures. It keeps me personally grounded and reassures me the ways and thoughts of mankind that we see are not the ways and thoughts of God.

          Like

  10. Chance says:

    This type of corruption is exactly the reason that U.S. Senators where originally elected by the state legislatures (Article I, §3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution) prior to 1913.

    Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment!!! Install term limits on all U.S. Congress members!!!

    If it’s good enough for the presidency, it’s good enough for congress!!!

    Liked by 9 people

    • Diana Allocco says:

      State legislatures are no walk in the purity park either, which is why we (mistakenly, I agree) got the 17th amendment in the first place. The American people keep trying to fight entrenched corruption but it pops up again like whack-a-mole.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Meriadoc says:

        Fully agree about the 17th, Diana, and would add that the corruption goes right down the the county and city level of government in many places. What we’ve come to call “the swamp” is more like an inland sea, with tributaries flowing into every level of governance in the country. Draining this sea will be the work of a generation or two.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Meriadoc says:

        Fully agree about the 17th, Diana, and would add that the corruption goes right down the the county and city level of government in many places. What we’ve come to call “the swamp” is more like an inland sea, with tributaries flowing into every level of governance in the country. Draining this sea will be the work of a generation or two.

        Like

    • konradwp1 says:

      Gasp! Term limits? You can’t be serious!!
      It takes time to build a web of corruption. New Senators can’t immediately be appointed to committees controlled foreign aid. They can’t be allowed to climb up the ladder until others have enough incriminating information on them to ensure they can be trusted to behave!

      (I’d add the “/sarc” tag, but …)

      Liked by 2 people

      • TarsTarkas says:

        IMO imposition of term limits would entrench the bureaucracy even more than it already is. Plus it would encourage more frenetic looting by the term limited.

        Liked by 3 people

        • jrapdx says:

          IMO that’s correct. Term limits only shift the timeline of corruption, not eliminate it. Making a real dent in the pattern of bribery (aka “lobbying”) and influence peddling requires new rules for monetary contributions that officials could accept.

          More specifically, for all Presidential appointees and all those serving in Congress it should be forbidden to accept any lobbying “gift” in any form with a value greater than say $100. Basically officials would be required to restrict income to the salaries associated with their positions.

          Obviously in reality the rules would be a bit more complicated, but still the idea is sharply reducing the opportunity for “special interests” purchasing the loyalty of officials we employ.

          Would Congress ever pass such a law? Seems doubtful at best, but if there’s enough clamor and demand from the voters, restrictions on the current bribery-tainted free-for-all just might begin to take hold.

          Liked by 1 person

  11. unconqueredone says:

    Toomey seems determined to make Trump supporters hate him, and there’s little chance the D’s in PA will vote for him. Wonder which organization he plans to lobby for in 2022. What a disappointment to those who voted him in.

    Liked by 4 people

  12. MfM says:

    Toomey is a Rhino and GOPe.

    The only reason he got elected 4 years ago is he rode Trump’s coattails… and he hates Trump’s guts.

    I know plenty of people who voted for him… because the Democrat was much worse. PA should be able to do better.

    Liked by 4 people

  13. jarmssite says:

    Toomey is a US Chamber of Commerce guy. GOPe all the way.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. FL_GUY says:

    Do these SOBs have custom tailored suit jackets with barcodes on the back?

    Liked by 4 people

  15. They will try anything to screw our President Trump.

    Liked by 4 people

  16. konradwp1 says:

    AGW sceptics have serious scientific concerns about the AGW conjecture.

    Senator Whitehouse is infamous for demanding that any organization that raises any scientific concerns that cast doubt on the AGW conjecture to be prosecuted using anti-mafia RICO legislation.

    He is on record demanding lawfare be used against the scientific method. He is little better than those that have demanded sceptics be imprisoned or executed to silence their voices.

    Liked by 3 people

  17. vfm#7634 says:

    Looks like the good voters of PA have someone to primary…

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Well, USMCA is by no means “a great treaty,” but it is better than NAFTA. It was, at least, negotiated in part by people who actually know something about the fine art of negotiation. Which is a very big step forward from status quo.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Rj says:

    You can bet the USMCA is packed full of foreign aid and we must not forget how there is also amnesty in there also. In 2019 we added over 275 billion dollars to our debt on over 26.7 million illegals. Francis Fox Piven calls for the overwhelming of our financial system as to crash it. We as a country are spending 10.5 million a day for borders in other countries while we can’t even protect ours while USAID is in many forms being used to flood this country.

    Liked by 3 people

  20. ezgoer says:

    GOP base voters will back a primary challenge to donor-owned @SenToomey who voted against USA workers & families to oppose USMCA. Get your resume ready traitor.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s