Senate passes bill to stop the tariff bleeding

[blackangst1]

Although it will years to see the results of the recent tariffs, as well as tariffs imposed on the USA in response by other countries, we may never know. A bi-partisan bill sponsered by Corker passed the senate 88-11 to give Congress a role in determining when the U.S. can impose tariffs on other nations on “national security grounds. Lawmakers of both parties have accused Trump of abusing that power, which is given to him by Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, by imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum from allies such as Canada and European Union member nations.

Amazing they get anything passed in a bi-partisan way in todays climate, but this looks good initially.

 

[sdifox]

Lol masters say jump and the politicians say how high

 

[Paratus]

Already knew tariffs were bad for Main Street but if the GOP is on board it must be bad for Wall Street too.

 

[dank69]

Great, now Canada will just burn down the White House again.

 

[Engineer]

Although it will years to see the results of the recent tariffs, as well as tariffs imposed on the USA in response by other countries, we may never know. A bi-partisan bill sponsered by Corker passed the senate 88-11 to give Congress a role in determining when the U.S. can impose tariffs on other nations on “national security grounds. Lawmakers of both parties have accused Trump of abusing that power, which is given to him by Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, by imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum from allies such as Canada and European Union member nations.

Amazing they get anything passed in a bi-partisan way in todays climate, but this looks good initially.

I asked the question yesterday about on what grounds are these tariffs considered national security? Handbags? Refrigerators?

I know that CONgress sets tariffs other than national security. I was wondering how long before the big boys pushed CONgress into something like this. Now if they can get the house on board and past a veto proof majority. I have doubts about the house.

Edit: This is a nonbinding resolution...doesn't hold the weight of the electrons that you're reading. T-Rump won't be bound by this or any other resolution unless it's a LAW (and I'm still not sure).

The bipartisan 88-to-11 tally on the non-binding resolution sends a message to the White House about how frustrated senators are over Trump's disruptive moves on tariffs.

 

[Moonbeam]

Trump might say something mean to a Republican rebel and get him primaried out of office from the right. Tepid, always be tepid.

 

[blackangst1]

I asked the question yesterday about on what grounds are these tariffs considered national security? Handbags? Refrigerators?

I know that CONgress sets tariffs other than national security. I was wondering how long before the big boys pushed CONgress into something like this. Now if they can get the house on board and past a veto proof majority. I have doubts about the house.

Edit: This is a nonbinding resolution...doesn't hold the weight of the electrons that you're reading. T-Rump won't be bound by this or any other resolution unless it's a LAW (and I'm still not sure).

I can answer that. Protection of IP. China has few laws regarding protection of IP or patents (and the laws they DO have are simply ignored), nor do they respect those protections from other countries. It is not uncommon for them to take a product (could be electronics, clothing, drugs, anything, really), reverse engineer it, and create their own clone. If youve been to China (I have) it is not unusual to see stores all over the place selling something for 40-80% of actual cost, because its a clone.

For this regard, although I believe this was Trumps intent, his sanctions arent worded in that way. That why Im against them. IMHO, they dont specify enough, nor are they harsh enough. I know the anti-Trump crowd believes its just him pitching a fit, I dont believe it is. The US's accusation of IP theft isnt a new thing, either. Its just no other POTUS has been willing to tackle it.

Heres a good outline: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...intellectual-property-theft-column/458320002/

As for your edit, neither one of us know about law to say. I guess if it passes it'll be up to the courts to do their job: interpret. .

 

[Starbuck1975]

The shareholders and donors must be getting nervous

 

[Engineer]

As for your edit, neither one of us know about law to say. I guess if it passes it'll be up to the courts to do their job: interpret. .

It's not a bill, per CNN, that is to become law but a non-binding resolution. It may reach law status at some point but as now, it's nothing more than a scolding from the Senate. I'm not sure that the house will even do that. Unless turned into a law, this has NO teeth.

 

[Engineer]

The shareholders and donors must be getting nervous

I'm sure.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Great, now Canada will just burn down the White House again.

look, not to be a dick or anything, but it was actually the Brits who did it. Canada wasn't even an established country at that point.

 

[Engineer]

look, not to be a dick or anything, but it was actually the Brits who did it. Canada wasn't even an established country at that point.

Wooooossssshhhhhh, lol!

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44394156

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Wooooossssshhhhhh, lol!

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44394156

Fair point, I didn't read the post with my sarcasm meter handy, now that i do, it's pegging in the red.

 

[dank69]

look, not to be a dick or anything, but it was actually the Brits who did it. Canada wasn't even an established country at that point.

Yeah right. Who am I going to trust? Some random guy on the internet or President Trump?