Will Fast Track Survive?

    There has been a lot of hand-wringing going on about the apparent demise of the so-called Doha round of world trade negotiations. Here, I've been hoping that the reports of the demise are, in fact, not a Mark Twain-like premature wish. But, buried in today's New York Times story on the last-ditch effort to make a deal is a little nugget that we should pay more attention to:

Reaching an agreement soon is important because next year President Bush will lose fast-track authority, which allows him to send a trade agreement to Congress for a simple yes-or-no vote without amendments.

    Yes, it's true that fast-track authority expires in 2007. The question is: will Democrats be united in opposing the renewal of fast-track authority? And are unions making opposition to fast-track authority a demand when candidates come knocking seeking support...and money?

    The dangers and inherent undemocratic nature of fast-track authority can be seen even better in the light of the behavior of this administration. Fast-track authority prevents elected representatives of the people--either in the House or Senate--from proposing any amendments to any so-called "free trade" agreements. It's a take-it-or-leave-it proposition when these deals come before the Congress. Excuse me if I think that that smells suspiciously like turning over more power to the executive branch and muzzling the voice of the people. In fairness, Democratic Administrations--read the Clinton Administration--like the power of fast-track so opposition to extending fast-track should not be seen as a partisan issue. No, it's about making sure the peoples' representatives have a real say in the shaping of trading relationships around the globe.