Crs Report for Congress


Book Description

One of the major trade issues in the 107th Congress is whether or not Congress approves trade promotion authority (formerly called fast-track authority) for the President to negotiate trade agreements with expedited procedures for implementing legislation. Under this authority, Congress agrees to consider legislation to implement the trade agreements (usually nontariff trade agreements) under a procedure with mandatory deadlines, no amendment, and limited debate. The President is required to consult with congressional committees during negotiation and notify Congress before entering into an agreement. The President was granted this authority almost continuously from 1974 to 1994, but the authority lapsed and has not been renewed. A major issue has been the role of labor and the environment as objectives in trade agreements. Differences have been largely along party lines. On December 6, the House passed TPA bill H.R. 3005 along party lines by a vote of 215-214. The bill covers tariff and nontariff agreements entered into by June 1, 2005. For expedited procedures to apply to legislation to implement a trade agreement, the agreement would have to "make progress" toward meeting the outlined negotiating objectives and satisfy other specified conditions. The President would have to consult with congressional bodies, including the ...




Fast Track: A Legal, Historical, and Political Analysis


Book Description

Fast track was conceived as a mundane procedural mechanism to enhance the president's credibility in negotiating complex multilateral trade agreements by streamlining the congressional approval process into an up-or-down vote in return for enhanced congressional oversight. It allows the President to negotiate international trade agreements knowing that Congress will provide a timely vote on the agreement without amendments. Given its seminal importance to the trade debate, however, fast track has acquired greater significance and controversy. This incisive text examines whether fast track is an evolutionary advancement in U.S. international economic agreements or an end-run around the constitutional treaty provision; whether it is a reflection of the shared constitutional powers of Congress and the President in the area of foreign affairs or an unconstitutional abdication of Congress’s power to regulate foreign commerce and its ability to set its own procedural rules; whether fast track is needed to put the United States on even footing with other nations that have efficient international agreement approval mechanisms or a unique U.S. ratification short-cut not found elsewhere; whether there is a better way for the United States to approve and implement trade agreements; whether the arguments of the left and right on fast track need a new focus; and whether there is a role for the states to play in U.S. trade policy formation. Fast Track argues that the time has come for the United States to end its perennial debate over the process by which we approve international trade agreements – i.e., whether to resort to fast track or not – and begin a debate on how best to prepare American citizens to compete in a globalized world. There are signs that the United States is not ready and may even be falling behind. Without question, this book can help formalize a requisite national strategy. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.




More Information On Fast Track Trade Authority


Book Description

Fast track is an expedited procedure for Congressional consideration of trade agreements. It requires Congress to vote on an agreement without reopening any of its provisions while retaining the ultimate power of voting it up or down. Fast Track facilitated controversial pacts such as NAFTA and the World Trade Organization, which extend beyond traditional tariff-cutting to set constraints on domestic financial, energy, patents and copyright, food safety, immigration, and other policies. Because Fast Track's dramatic shift in the balance of powers between branches of government occurred via an arcane procedural mechanism, it obtained little scrutiny - until recently. This book explains how large multi-national corporations have gotten their way to the detriment of the people by ignoring local environmental and labor laws. The Trans-Pacific-Trade Partnership has been called "NAFTA on steroids."




Fast Track


Book Description

Fast Track is the story of the rise and fall of U.S. leadership in international trade. Fast Track authority is the process Congress devised to approve trade agreements, giving Congress input into negotiations in exchange for a timely up-or-down vote. Foes derided it as a procedural gimmick, but it helped forge a bipartisan consensus on trade policy. Despite its successes, it was also fragile. The bipartisan consensus has since frayed and Fast Track has lapsed, allowing other countries to fill the void. This book discusses how Fast Track worked and offers a path for rebuilding consensus in favor of its renewal.




Implementation of Fast Track Trade Authority


Book Description




Crs Report for Congress


Book Description

One of the major trade issues in the 107th Congress is whether or not Congress approves trade promotion authority (formerly called fast-track authority) for the President to negotiate trade agreements with expedited procedures for implementing legislation. Under this authority, Congress agrees to consider legislation to implement the trade agreements (usually nontariff trade agreements) under a procedure with mandatory deadlines, no amendment, and limited debate. The President is required to consult with congressional committees during negotiation and notify Congress before entering into an agreement. The President was granted this authority almost continuously from 1974 to 1994, but the authority lapsed and has not been renewed. A major issue has been the role of labor and the environment as objectives in trade agreements. Differences have been largely along party lines. On December 6, the House passed TPA bill H.R. 3005 along party lines by a vote of 215-214. The bill covers tariff and nontariff agreements entered into by June 1, 2005. For expedited procedures to apply to legislation to implement a trade agreement, the agreement would have to "make progress" toward meeting the outlined negotiating objectives and satisfy other specified conditions. The President would have to consult with congressional bodies, including the ...




Fast-Track Authority for Trade Agreements (Trade Promotion Authority)


Book Description

This report discusses one of the major trade issues in the 107th Congress: whether or not Congress approves authority for the President to negotiate trade agreements with expedited, or "fast track" procedures. Under this authority, Congress agrees to consider legislation to implement the nontariff trade agreements under a procedure with mandatory deadlines, no amendment, and limited debate. The President is required to consult with congressional committees during negotiation of nontariff trade agreements and notify Congress before entering into any such agreement. The President was granted fast-track authority almost continuously from 1974 to 1994, but the authority lapsed and has not been renewed.




Working Out the Tensions: Fast Track Authority as a Study in Executive/Congressional Cooperation


Book Description

Congress and the Executive have managed the Constitutional "invitation to struggle" over international trade issues, at least at first glance, with more ease than they seem to have where military power is involved. As with war powers, there is a division of responsibility between the branches and the problem of practicality. The Constitution in Article I, Section 8 puts trade under Legislative preview, but Congress recognizes the Executive is the branch able to negotiate international deals cutting tariffs or opening markets for U.S. exports. The "fast track" procedure first included in the 1974 Trade Act provided a mechanism to resolve tension between constitutional authority and practicality/ effectiveness in international affairs. However, Congress' refusal of President Clinton's 1994 request to renew fast track suggests the Legislative's determination to maintain control and, perhaps, that branch's greater sensitivity to public sentiment.