In April, we tried to explain Trade Promotion Authority in an editorial. Against those who claim the process allows Congress to secretly ram through trade deals, we contrasted the transparency that TPA brings to trade deals with the Obama administration’s secretive Iran negotiations:
TPA simply guarantees a quick up-or-down vote in Congress on upcoming agreements the Obama administration negotiates, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The new legislative incarnation of TPA does more to protect U.S. sovereignty and congressional prerogatives than versions that were previously in force. It provides for unprecedented congressional oversight of the negotiating process and it bars agreements from making any changes to U.S. law without further congressional action.
It also requires that any trade agreement be made public for 60 days before it is signed. In short, it establishes the sort of transparent process that might have assuaged most of the skeptics’ concerns, had it been employed during President Obama’s nuclear negotiations with Iran.
On Fox News Wednesday, House Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., made the same argument.
“We don’t like the Iran deal that President Obama is doing,” Ryan said. “Imagine if we had TPA for the Iran deal that he’s negotiating. If we had TPA for the Iran deal, we would know what’s in the deal, the country would see what’s in the deal, and Congress would have veto power over the deal before he even gets a deal. I wish we had TPA for this Iranian agreement because then we could stop this Iranian agreement. That’s why we’re doing TPA for these trade agreements.”
