Representatives Scott Peters and Susan Davis Disappoint on Trade Bill

by on June 16, 2015 · 5 comments

in California, Civil Rights, Economy, Environment, History, Labor, Organizing, Politics, San Diego

susan davis herFB

Rep. Susan Davis (D-San Diego)

By Doug Porter

On Friday the House of Representatives used a legislative maneuver to block President Obama’s path to fast track legislation on the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).

One good thing about Friday’s vote is that we now know where Representatives Susan Davis and Scott Peters stand on the issue. Both voted to advance the measure despite weeks of intensive citizen/grassroots/labor lobbying for a no vote. Both did so knowing they’d face the wrath of the coalition opposed to TPP in future elections.

For Davis, this may not mean much; for Peters, the consequences look to be serious–a labor-backed search committee is already looking at alternative candidates to run in the June 2016 primary. The word is that there’s a million dollar war chest to be spent defeating him.

The House separated the bill passed by the Senate into two parts: Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for displaced workers and the Fast Track process. Both parts needed to pass for the bill to pass. The House voted down the TAA portion by a dramatic 126 – 302 vote, thus voting down the entire bill.

Scott Peters

Rep. Scott Peters (D?-San Diego)-

If ain’t over ‘till it’s over, though. The package can be re-voted this week; it’s likely a provision saying such a vote must take place within two working days will be extended to allow a vote on Thursday.

From the Guardian’s coverage of the organized labor-led campaign:

Organized labor’s victory – one of its biggest triumphs in years – grew out of a new strategy the AFL-CIO adopted two years ago. Trumka announced that labor would henceforth seek to form broad coalitions out of recognition that it was no longer as powerful and was having a harder time securing legislation it supported.

The anti-fast track coalition was immense – labor was at its heart, and it included environmental, faith, immigrant and food safety groups. The coalition spanned the Democratic base, including 2,000 groups, among them the American Civil Liberties Union, Consumers Union, the Electric Frontier Foundation, Friends of the Earth and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

“This is the first time Congress considered a trade deal since we as a country became much more cognizant of surging inequality and the crisis in middle-class jobs,” said Joseph McCartin, a labor historian at Georgetown University. “The old playbook of the president being able to get the votes at the last minute doesn’t seem to apply anymore.

Richard Barrera

Richard Barrera

Richard Barrera, secretary-treasurer of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, released a statement via Facebook:

“We are deeply disappointed that Congress members Scott Peters (CA-52) and Susan Davis (CA-53) have prioritized the interests of corporations and the one percent over working families.

We are disheartened that Congress members Peters and Davis would vote to advance trade agreements that would put more than 300,000 San Diego jobs at serious risk of outsourcing when two in five San Diego households can’t afford to make ends meet (even with full-time work) and 26% of working families households still fall below the Self Sufficiency Standard. Something just doesn’t add up.

It is imperative that we hold our members of Congress accountable for their choices on issues affecting San Diegans. These Congressional districts need leaders who will stand together with working families to protect good jobs, the environment and healthy communities in the future.

The local rumor mill would have us believe that Peters is contemplating a run for Mayor in 2020. I wonder if he’ll switch parties along the way…

____________

The above is an excerpt from Doug Porter’s column at SDFP.

 

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

Michael K Rohde June 16, 2015 at 2:34 pm

It is important to hold these alleged Democrats accountable. Why Davis should be immune to this I do not understand. Our Middle Class is in last place among industrial democracies, our natural peers. We used to be first. We invented the middle class. It has been gutted because of legislation like the North American Treaty and this one, which favors corporations over labor. Davis and Peters have to be made to pay for these votes. They are not Democratic votes. They are blatantly unDemocratic in their effects. The Party has to stand up to these pretenders.

Michael K Rohde

Reply

Frank J June 16, 2015 at 4:40 pm

Its as though Peters is ready to move on, knowing he will be primaried (media term, not mine ;). Bye Blue Dog, go fetch the red bone.

Reply

RB June 17, 2015 at 1:14 pm

It is funny for Peters and Davis to be singled out for a vote to give President Obama the ability to negotiate a trade deal. Of course none of this anger is directed towards our Teflon coated President or the NAFTA designers, the Clintons.

Reply

MT June 17, 2015 at 2:39 pm

It would be great to see a primary challenger run against Davis. But the last time one was attempted (during her support for the Iraqi war), her constituents nonetheless sent her back to Washington with a comfortable margin.

Reply

tj June 25, 2015 at 4:25 pm

pandering to the uber-GREEDY 1%ers is nothing new… & provides a big pay-off for such anti-USA majority/ family politicians.

PNTR, NAFTA, Gramm/ Leach/ Bliley, etc have so gutted the American MAJORITY – that those who so sold-out the majority’s interest might be likened to the worst traitors ANY country has ever seen.

Their punishment for their Anti-American activities? FAT campaign contributions, FAT pensions, FAT consulting fees, FAT speaking fees, etc, etc….

Slick Willie was broke (millions in debt) when he left office. A few years later their family net worth was purportedly in excess of $100,000,000.00. Slick turn about, no?

Hillary or Jeb… for our fearless leaders….

God, help us to repent, & please Bless America… again… pretty please?

imo

Reply

Leave a Comment

Older Article:

Newer Article: