r/politics • u/sweatycat New York • 20h ago

California to Negotiate Trade With Other Countries to Bypass Trump Tariffs

https://www.newsweek.com/california-newsom-trade-trump-tariffs-2055414
88.9k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

6.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

216

u/Searchlights New Hampshire 19h ago edited 19h ago

A President should not have the authority single-handedly to disrupt the entire economy with gigantic taxes. I'm not addressing whether he's legally allowed. I know that he's legally allowed. I'm saying it is wrong. It violates the social contract.

No taxation without representation.

129

u/Severe_Experience190 18h ago

He's not legally allowed. The power to tariff lies with Congress as outlined in the constitution, he's using the claim of an 'invasion' from immigrants to enact war time powers and using that to justify tariffs. It's a gross abuse of power.

5

u/Nunya_Business- 17h ago

Great point but I just wanted to clarify some things. You are right that the power to enact tariffs lies with the legislature, however over the years the legislature has delegated a lot of its trade powers to the executive branch so as to make treaties and international relationship easier. Specifically they give the president broad authority to enact tariffs when they are to combat “unfair trade practices “. Trump has abused this by coming up with bs calculations as to how much a country is charging US exports even if these numbers are not based on solid economic reality or theory. Congress of course has the power to stop the tariffs but congress has not been a functioning branch of government for a long long while.

40

u/TraceBullet 18h ago

No taxation without representation.

You're absolutely right. Everyone who is sick and tired of this mad king's unjust tariffs should be rallying behind those words.

11

u/99-Runecrafting 18h ago

No no no. He doesn't have the right. He fucking usurped the powers of the other branches of government and nobody is there to stop him

6

u/sal_leo 17h ago

Is it really still usurping when Republicans in Congress are allowing and supporting him in his bullshit? They're complicit in giving away their own power to their orange Russian-compromised overlord. 

3

u/99-Runecrafting 16h ago

Its still a usurper situation. Congress does not have the power to hand away its power, unless it's by an amendment to the constitution.

The Constitution is above the law. Its the document that gives the law its power, and the very fabric and structure of our government is built off of it. The amendments ate tacked on, but the first 4 articles of the constitution are where the real meat and potatoes are baked in. The real thing that sets our society apart from the rest of the world. Its not the bill of rights. Even china's constitution "guarantees" the freedom of speech.

Its the separation of powers that makes us special. While were certainly not the only country to separate powers in this manner, we were definitely among the first.

This separation is important. Even Congress's power is checked by the constitution itself. However they are the only ones who can make changes to it.

But without those changes being made, they are bound by its words. Its still stolen power, even if they behave like it's being handed to the executive.

5

u/BockSuper 18h ago

A President should not have the authority single-handedly to disrupt the entire economy with gigantic taxes.

But he's not?

He's not going solo. Not at all.

He has the FULL and UNCONDITIONAL backing of a majority of congress.

If congress was against, say, tarrifs on Canada they could just've voted it down 5 min after he announced it.

6

u/thebruce44 17h ago

He's not doing this single-handedly. Every single member of the GOP that is not voting to impeach is complicit.

5

u/vanastalem Virginia 17h ago

He's not legally allowed. Congress can levy taxes, he cannot but did it anyway.

5

u/msaik Canada 17h ago

I know that he's legally allowed

Rand Paul of all people spent 30 minutes on Wednesday making the argument that he's not legally allowed. A good speech that everyone should watch IMO.

1

u/Anti_shill_cannon 17h ago

Republicans in congress are doing this too

They could stop this when they want to

1

u/kelpkelso 15h ago

Join Canada 🇨🇦 If the USA loosing one state, I bet they’d Impeach him so fast. Loosing land instead of gaining

1

u/Salt_Ad_811 15h ago

You have representation. He is an elected official exercising a power vested in him under the constitution. It's a dumb idea, but he can do it. It will end poorly if they remain in place or long at all. I suspect he will negotiate some fake concessions and announce them as huge accomplishments to pat himself on the back for to save face and will then retreat and remove them again prior to the mid terms starting up.

1

u/ChaseGjamz 15h ago

Agreed, thank you for a sane comment other than civil war promoting.

1

u/Searchlights New Hampshire 15h ago

I'm going to go out on a limb and say war is a bad idea

1

u/cphuntington97 15h ago

Congress had 15 calendar days to address the tariffs. Then they passed this (see Section 4) which states, "Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day…" which is a violation of both the letter and spirit of the emergencies act.

Congressional represenatives don't want power. They want to keep their jobs. They want to throw up their hands and say, there's nothing we could do!

-9

u/Jolly-Knowledge8704 18h ago

Then why didn’t Obama use his 60 senators for 180 to address this?

And give you your safe legal rare abortions?

13

u/Historical-Night9330 18h ago

Whats the point youre trying to make exactly? How does that justify this at all? Just saying democrats suck?

2

u/Top-Government-4996 17h ago

They have no point, your third question contains the answer.

10

u/Top-Government-4996 18h ago

This is a self-own, I’m sorry that your support system didn’t care more about your intellectual development as a young person. I’m sorry because their negligence in educating you has produced an individual that views critical thought as optional. Admitting you don’t know answers to extremely simple questions only serves to undermine the notion that you actually care about any of these issues. It reveals you have a political affiliation that you presuppose is correct, and that you care little to inform yourself about whether this presumption may be misinformed.

Obama used the tariff power himself against China during his own presidency, so it’s probably safe to assume it wasn’t a power he or his party felt needed taken from the office of President. As for abortion, it’s easy to forget that 2008 was 17 years ago. The Democratic Party was far more divided on social issues at that time like abortion and same-sex marriage, and there were definitely not 60 senators that would have been willing to put their names on an abortion codification. Obama himself was not supportive of same-sex marriage in his first term. I found all of this in a quick google search, you could have done the same if you were actually interested in the questions you asked. 

This is why it’s easy to conclude that you are an incurious person that thinks you have learned all that you need to learn, and now it is your responsibility to educate others on “the truth.” It’s like asking “isn’t it weird you can’t see the Earth’s curve when looking out over the ocean?” If you were genuinely curious about that, you’d do some research and try to learn about why Earth has been considered round before we even knew what it looked like from a photo. However, most people asking this share your aversion for curiosity and have already concluded that the Earth is flat, so this “question” is nothing more than a rhetorical device to allow this person to evangelize their ideas to unbelievers. This reply is for anyone that encounters simpletons like the user I am replying to: When they’re “just asking a question” they are telling on the fact that they are entirely driven by ideology, and engagement with their ideas is pointless. 

A simpleton like you does not have ideas, just memorized slogans and talking points from whatever alternative media outlet is making money off of ad revenue from your viewership. You can deny it, but the only people that will take you seriously are those that have fallen victim to the same grift as you.

3

u/undercided 17h ago

He decided to try to address healthcare first. The ACA was passed with bipartisan support even after Leiberman famously stalled for removal of a public option and Nelson required removal of abortion terms. The passing of ACA legislation took up the first 15 months of Obama's term. Then Congress pivoted to thinking about the midterms, where Obama lost the House from the resulting rightwing backblast of "big government" and the rise of the Tea Party. Without the House, Obama couldn't get any kind of abortion legislation support in his second half of the first term.