Is The Trans Pacific Partnership Dead In The Water?

Last week’s U.S. House of Representatives rejection of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) is likely to mean that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will not be part of President Obama’s leadership legacies.

The President –  an ardent basketball fan – staged a full court press to advance his agenda on TPA, arguing that he needed the authority to complete TPP – the huge trade deal linking 12 Pacific Rim nations.

As explained in Logistics Management earlier this year, TPP would counter China’s aggressive policy to capture more commerce in the region.

At the same time, it would place investment rules for approximately 40 percent of the global economy.

Although the U.S. Senate was able to support TPA by a thin margin, pro-labor forces prevailed over the latest attempt to win over Congressional support of the necessary authorizations.

The United States has been negotiating multiple trade agreements for quite some time, although the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) lacks the formal trade authority as delegated from Congress.

Under what once referred to as the “fast track” would let the White House seize the initiative on trade, including the (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Promotion (TTIP).

That effort, according to analysts, seems to be dead in the water, thanks to Democrats who argue that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) only hastened the tide of outsourcing jobs to foreign soil.

Although House members narrowly approved TPA by a 219-212 vote last week, the version must reflect the exact details contained in the plan presented before the Senate.

Good luck with that, say U.S. exporters, who continue to face a wall of escalating tariffs and barriers to trade in the Pacific.

Related: Hillary Clinton Addresses Trans-Pacific Partnership