SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Tell Us How You Really Feel About Fast Track Opponents, New York Times
Feb 11, 2015
The New York Times' Jonathan Weisman (2/9/15) reports that President Barack Obama's chances of getting "fast track" authority to negotiate trade agreements are shrinking as "the political fringes expand on each end."
Later on, he notes that while some conservative groups support giving Obama fast track-the ability to sign a treaty that Congress cannot amend, but only vote up or down-this is opposed by "groups more on the fringe."
Weisman also reports that "administration officials say the voices on the left and right may be loud, but they are still a small fringe."
Toward the end of the article, Weisman writes that 150 out of 188 Democrats in Congress signed a letter opposing fast track. He notes that House Speaker John Boehner in the last Congress said he would need 50 Democratic votes to pass fast track, which would imply that there were about 72 anti-fast track Republicans. (Weisman suggests that that number may be bigger now.)
A hundred and fifty plus 72 is 222 congressmembers, or 51 percent of the House of Representatives. That's a pretty big "fringe."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR)
Jim Naureckas
Jim Naureckas is editor of FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting). He is the co-author of "Way Things Aren't: Rush Limbaugh's Reign of Error." He was an investigative reporter for In These Times and managing editor of the Washington Report on the Hemisphere.
The New York Times' Jonathan Weisman (2/9/15) reports that President Barack Obama's chances of getting "fast track" authority to negotiate trade agreements are shrinking as "the political fringes expand on each end."
Later on, he notes that while some conservative groups support giving Obama fast track-the ability to sign a treaty that Congress cannot amend, but only vote up or down-this is opposed by "groups more on the fringe."
Weisman also reports that "administration officials say the voices on the left and right may be loud, but they are still a small fringe."
Toward the end of the article, Weisman writes that 150 out of 188 Democrats in Congress signed a letter opposing fast track. He notes that House Speaker John Boehner in the last Congress said he would need 50 Democratic votes to pass fast track, which would imply that there were about 72 anti-fast track Republicans. (Weisman suggests that that number may be bigger now.)
A hundred and fifty plus 72 is 222 congressmembers, or 51 percent of the House of Representatives. That's a pretty big "fringe."
Jim Naureckas
Jim Naureckas is editor of FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting). He is the co-author of "Way Things Aren't: Rush Limbaugh's Reign of Error." He was an investigative reporter for In These Times and managing editor of the Washington Report on the Hemisphere.
The New York Times' Jonathan Weisman (2/9/15) reports that President Barack Obama's chances of getting "fast track" authority to negotiate trade agreements are shrinking as "the political fringes expand on each end."
Later on, he notes that while some conservative groups support giving Obama fast track-the ability to sign a treaty that Congress cannot amend, but only vote up or down-this is opposed by "groups more on the fringe."
Weisman also reports that "administration officials say the voices on the left and right may be loud, but they are still a small fringe."
Toward the end of the article, Weisman writes that 150 out of 188 Democrats in Congress signed a letter opposing fast track. He notes that House Speaker John Boehner in the last Congress said he would need 50 Democratic votes to pass fast track, which would imply that there were about 72 anti-fast track Republicans. (Weisman suggests that that number may be bigger now.)
A hundred and fifty plus 72 is 222 congressmembers, or 51 percent of the House of Representatives. That's a pretty big "fringe."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.