Senate Votes To Repeal Canada Tariffs (1 Viewer)

[ColdHardTruth]

As we get closer to the '28 elections, I get the feeling that Republicans in Congress are going to have an epiphany about their Constitutional powers. Especially if it looks like a Democrat might win.

They should be looking at 2026 because that will be when the Democrats retake the house and the senate. At that point, Trump will be soundly neutered with a rusty butter knife.

 

[Fearandloathing]

And then it would go back and see if Congress had the votes to overcome the veto.



Let’s see if the MAGAs in the House can find a set of balls amongst them

It has been my experience that to go looking for a 'pair' in these situations is merely an academic exercise. There's no one in the Republican caucus with a spine so balls don't really matter

 

[Cordelier]

Okay, to repeal any law to include the 1977 law all congress needs to do is pass legislation repealing it or any law. If the president signs it, then the 1977 law is repealed, no longer on the books. A simple majority is all that is needed unless there’s a filibuster in the senate which then would require 60 votes.

I don’t see how the SCOTUS could find congress repealing a previous passed law would be deemed unconstitutional. That’s not going to happen in this case because the republicans control both chambers.

I don't think there's any question that any law can be repealed by passing another law to repeal it. The question is how do you nullify a President's invocation of an emergency power if Congress feels it is an abuse of the power it has given him? Essentially, now it requires Congress pass a Joint Resolution (which requires a Presidential signature or a veto override). As it was passed, the NEA required a Concurrent Resolution (which is binding without Presidential approval). I can understand the need for bicameral approval - but shouldn't it be up to Congress - as the judge of it's own rules - to decide what form of Resolution is required?

 

[Perotista]

I don't think there's any question that any law can be repealed by passing another law to repeal it. The question is how do you nullify a President's invocation of an emergency power if Congress feels it is an abuse of the power it has given him? Essentially, now it requires Congress pass a Joint Resolution (which requires a Presidential signature or a veto override). As it was passed, the NEA required a Concurrent Resolution (which is binding without Presidential approval). I can understand the need for bicameral approval - but shouldn't it be up to Congress - as the judge of it's own rules - to decide what form of Resolution is required?

Yes, what form of resolution or repeal or change to the existing law ought to be left to congress.

 

[Cordelier]

Yes, what form of resolution or repeal or change to the existing law ought to be left to congress.

What about exercising power under the law, though? If both Houses agree that the President is exceeding the intent of the law, shouldn't they be allowed to rein him in?

 

[craig]

Trump is committing another impeachment offence. Perhaps the third time is the charm.

 

[EnigmaO01]

Four Republican senators helped Democrats pass a resolution Wednesday that would effectively repeal President Trump's tariffs on Canada.

Why it matters: The vote shows how deeply concerned some Republicans are about Trump's tariff policies, just as he rolls out even steeper tariffs on U.S. imports.

MSN

It would matter more if more than four were "deeply concerned."

 

[EnigmaO01]

They should be looking at 2026 because that will be when the Democrats retake the house and the senate. At that point, Trump will be soundly neutered with a rusty butter knife.

Can we wait that long?

 

[EnigmaO01]

Trump is committing another impeachment offence. Perhaps the third time is the charm.

I wish I had your optimism.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Trump’s overall job performance is on a slow downward trend. Whether that equates to popularity or not?

1 Feb 49.4% approve/44.7% disapprove

1 Mar 48.7% approve/ 47.9% disapprove

1 Apr 47.7% approve/49.9% disapprove

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/donald-trump/approval-rating

Perhaps how all Americans view Trump, positive/favorable or negative/unfavorable would have more to do with popularity than job approval/disapproval. That too is on a slow downward spiral.

1 Feb 48.9% favorable/47.7% unfavorable

1 Mar 47.1% favorable/48.9% unfavorable

1 Apr 46.2% favorable/50.0% unfavorable

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump

Although both Trump’s overall job approval and his favorable/unfavorable’s are better so far than at anytime during his first term.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179_test_v4.html

And if you like, you can compare Trump’s numbers to Biden’s

https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating

1. Trump has been in office now for just a week over two months. He still has the balance of nearly 4 years to serve as President. As a result, there is plenty of time to determine what things he's done are working out well, or if some things need to be changed, or reigned-in.

2. The Democrats seem to be pushing the idea that all recent successes are the result of Biden's policies coming to fruition, and all the failures belong to Trump. Typical way they seek "stolen valor" while also shifting blame.

When it comes to his economic policy vis a vis tariffs, as explained elsewhere he is using them for two primary, and one tertiary reasons.

The first reason is to compel other nations to stop using high tariffs (and VATs) against the USA or he will reciprocate.

The second is against foreign manufacturers who use near-slave labor in poor working conditions and paying very low wages while selling products in the USA at massive profit margins even with transportation costs.

The tertiary reason is to get foreign businesses to invest in manufacturing inside the USA to employ American workers.

 

[craig]

1. Trump has been in office now for just a week over two months. He still has the balance of nearly 4 years to serve as President. As a result, there is plenty of time to determine what things he's done are working out well, or if some things need to be changed, or reigned-in.

2. The Democrats seem to be pushing the idea that all recent successes are the result of Biden's policies coming to fruition, and all the failures belong to Trump. Typical way they seek "stolen valor" while also shifting blame.

When it comes to his economic policy vis a vis tariffs, as explained elsewhere he is using them for two primary, and one tertiary reasons.

The first reason is to compel other nations to stop using high tariffs (and VATs) against the USA or he will reciprocate.

The second is against foreign manufacturers who use near-slave labor in some instances via poor working conditions and very low wages while selling products in the USA at massive profit margins even with transportation costs.

The tertiary reason is to get foreign businesses to invest in manufacturing inside the USA to employ American workers.

So Trump is worried about slave labor? American workers can compete to manufacture those low cost items that Walmart and Amazon sell that we depend on but they will have to work for $10 dollars a day. Is that the plan?

 

[Perotista]

1. Trump has been in office now for just a week over two months. He still has the balance of nearly 4 years to serve as President. As a result, there is plenty of time to determine what things he's done are working out well, or if some things need to be changed, or reigned-in.

2. The Democrats seem to be pushing the idea that all recent successes are the result of Biden's policies coming to fruition, and all the failures belong to Trump. Typical way they seek "stolen valor" while also shifting blame.

When it comes to his economic policy vis a vis tariffs, as explained elsewhere he is using them for two primary, and one tertiary reasons.

The first reason is to compel other nations to stop using high tariffs (and VATs) against the USA or he will reciprocate.

The second is against foreign manufacturers who use near-slave labor in poor working conditions and paying very low wages while selling products in the USA at massive profit margins even with transportation costs.

The tertiary reason is to get foreign businesses to invest in manufacturing inside the USA to employ American workers.

Correct, it’s been just a bit over 2 months. Give it another couple of months then we’ll have a better idea how Americans are viewing the job Trump has done and is doing. When it comes to approval/disapproval ratings, even favorable/unfavorable I have a habit of throwing out both on how republicans and democrats view Trump. One will be giving Trump a 90% plus approval/favorable while the other will have him in the single digits on both. This is the way it is in today’s modern political era of polarization, the great divide, the super, mega, ultra-high partisanship. So, I concentrate on independents, the non-affiliated, the less to non-partisans. The election deciders since the strength of both major parties are even. No ax to grind. The reason for the rise in of disapproval inTrump’s overall job performance and the increase in how Americans view him unfavorably or negatively is caused by independents. 41% of independents view Trump favorably, 55% unfavorably while 42% approve of the job Trump is doing vs. 52% disapprove. I think come June or July, Trump will be down to around 40% in both his overall job approval and in his favorable ratings. Right where Trump was during his first term and where Biden ended up. Independents didn’t like Trump during his first term, and they didn’t like Biden either.

 

[uptower]

Four Republican senators helped Democrats pass a resolution Wednesday that would effectively repeal President Trump's tariffs on Canada.

Why it matters: The vote shows how deeply concerned some Republicans are about Trump's tariff policies, just as he rolls out even steeper tariffs on U.S. imports.

MSN

Jesus only four? Are they that scared of him?

 

[RaleBulgarian]

And then it would go back and see if Congress had the votes to overcome the veto.



Let’s see if the MAGAs in the House can find a set of balls amongst them

I won’t hold my breath.

 

[Tangmo]

This shows how a coalition in Congress can retake control of their constitutional prerogatives from the President.

Only in a highly selective instance of the Anglo Rule of Law neighboring country that is a member of the British Commonwealth (of nations) and with whom the US operates the North American Air Defense Command that always has a Canadian Air Force General as the deputy commander #2 with the USAF 4-star commanding general.

While the US has 10,000 troops at the border of Mexico to include past military expeditions into Mexico -- and a possible new US military incursion into Mexico -- the US-Canadian border remains as the longest unprotected border in the world going back deep into the 19th century. (The War of 1812 is well known of course.)

Only 4 Republicans joined Senate passage of the tariff exemption provision which was enough for its success, while 48 Maga Republicans voted against it. MAGAs in the US House are right now digging the grave of this provision for when it arrives over there any time now.

Canada is the sole and only, exclusive, instance of Congress "retaking control" of its prerogatives on tariffs and even in this lone and solitary instance, the House is the provision's mortician. There will be no other of any such instance by the Senate. The Senate's vote on this shows nothing beyond its being about Canada. Sad to say of course but true. This vote by the Senate is great but hopeless. Meaningless. Of no consequence.

 

[Tangmo]

As we get closer to the '28 elections, I get the feeling that Republicans in Congress are going to have an epiphany about their Constitutional powers. Especially if it looks like a Democrat might win.

There's that liberal magical feeling again, irrepressible as it always is.

One can say anything about 2028 because it may as well be a hundred years away. The only trend line -- since 2015 in fact -- is MAGA.

It also means to sit back passively in the parlor reclining chair to wait confidently if not smugly for the epiphany to self materialize out of the MAGA air.

 

[Tangmo]

And then it would go back and see if Congress had the votes to overcome the veto.



Let’s see if the MAGAs in the House can find a set of balls amongst them

There's enough to see already.

It passed the Senate with 51 votes while the minimal 67 votes needed to repel a veto are a fantasy.

And yes the House gravediggers haven't even voted on it yet. There's no way the proposal gets 2/3rds of the House.

My god man.

 

[Tangmo]

Mitch McConnell should rot in hell for that!

And for packing the judiciary with MAGA MANIACS such as Aleen Cannon of Maralago.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Can we wait that long?

It will not be easy, but we will survive.

 

[Tangmo]

I wish I had your optimism.

We're better off without it, believe me.

Right now America needs hombres not chess players with their Chardonnay.

Because fascists play for keeps.

 

[Tangmo]

It will not be easy, but we will survive.

Heard frequently as the Titanic musicians played.

 

[Middleground]

Four Republican senators helped Democrats pass a resolution Wednesday that would effectively repeal President Trump's tariffs on Canada.

Why it matters: The vote shows how deeply concerned some Republicans are about Trump's tariff policies, just as he rolls out even steeper tariffs on U.S. imports.

MSN

I would not go as far as stating these Senators are "deeply concerned" about the Canada tariffs. More like the retaliatory Canadian tariffs, as well as the Canadian boycott of American products, have greatly affect the economy of their respective states.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

1. Trump has been in office now for just a week over two months. He still has the balance of nearly 4 years to serve as President. As a result, there is plenty of time to determine what things he's done are working out well, or if some things need to be changed, or reigned-in.

NOTHING he has done is working out well. This is pure unadulterated bullshit.

Turn of the Faux off.

2. The Democrats seem to be pushing the idea that all recent successes are the result of Biden's policies coming to fruition, and all the failures belong to Trump. Typical way they seek "stolen valor" while also shifting blame.

Your use of "stolen valor" is offensive. It's inaccurate in this case and in any event that law was ruled unconstitutional. Trump is responsible for what is occurring in this country at this moment. DO NOT attempt to cover for him.

When it comes to his economic policy vis a vis tariffs, as explained elsewhere he is using them for two primary, and one tertiary reasons.

The first reason is to compel other nations to stop using high tariffs (and VATs) against the USA or he will reciprocate.

Trump is trying to rape the public. PERIOD.

The second is against foreign manufacturers who use near-slave labor in poor working conditions and paying very low wages while selling products in the USA at massive profit margins even with transportation costs.

The tertiary reason is to get foreign businesses to invest in manufacturing inside the USA to employ American workers.