Subject: Re: Small follow up call on trade?
From: Dan Schwerin <[email-masked]>
To: Marissa Astor <[email-masked]>
Cc: Jennifer Palmieri <[email-masked]>, Jake Sullivan <[email-masked]>, Robby Mook <[email-masked]>, John Podesta <[email-masked]>, Kristina Schake <[email-masked]>, Eryn Sepp <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 01:07:54 -0400

So everyone has it, here's some info about Sandy Levin's position, which
HRC was asking about today:

Levin has been consistently opposed to ​pursuing TPA before an agreement on
TPP is reached:

   - Writing in Politico on Mar. 17, 2015, Rep. Levin said, "With
   negotiations reported to be entering the final stages, it is critical ​that
   Congress focus at this point not on how to 'fast track' approval of an
   agreement — through passing Trade Promotion Authority — but on making sure
   the TPP itself is on the right track."

   - On Dec. 5, 2014 Rep. Levin addressed reporters to "discuss the TPP and
   the need to continue to focus on the continuing negotiations of that
   agreement instead of focusing on TPA." Levin said, "If you put the focus on
   TPA when you have so many outstanding issues, essentially what it does is
   force or stimulate members to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to TPP before so many of
   the outstanding issues have been resolved."

   - In January 2014, Rep. Levin released a statement strongly opposing the
   Camp-Baucus TPA legislation. Levin cited several characteristics a TPA must
   have to gain his support, including: (1) a meaningful role for Congress;
   (2) a requirement that USTR be transparent with Congress during
   negotiations; (3) negotiating objectives that include labor,
   environmental, and access to medicine provisions; and (4) provisions
   that strengthen enforcement of existing trade agreements.​​

On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Marissa Astor <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> How is 9:30am for this call since the HRC call is at 10am ET tomorrow?
>
> On Apr 14, 2015, at 12:41 AM, Dan Schwerin <[email-masked]>
> wrote:
>
> Swapping Jake's email so he sees this
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:38 AM, Jennifer Palmieri <
> [email-masked]> wrote:
>
>> All for it.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Apr 13, 2015, at 11:00 PM, Robby Mook <[email-masked]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Gang--should we do a small call with just us tomorrow morning to (1)
>> decide on a united point of view on trade position and (2) decide who
>> should call whom and gather what info before we got a on a call w HRC to
>> argue our united case?
>> > Seems like the most efficient path to getting her locked into something.
>> > Thoughts?
>>
>
>