You may recall that the last time we here in the Commonwealth (God save it!) elected a new senator -- which I believe was last Tuesday. We elect one a week. -- we threw out Senator McDreamy and elected an elitist Hahhhhhhhh-vid phony Indian because we are such elitist liberal simps we cannot be believed. Well, our new Senior Senator has looked at the president's nominee to be his trade representative and found him, well,wanting.

I asked the President's nominee to be Trade Representative-Michael Froman-three questions: First, would he commit to releasing the composite bracketed text [the full text of the TPP as it currently stands]? Or second, if not, would he commit to releasing just a scrubbed version of the bracketed text that made anonymous which country proposed which provision... Third, I asked Mr. Froman if he would provide more transparency behind what information is made [available] to the trade office's outside advisors. Currently, there are about 600 outside advisors that have access to sensitive information, and the roster includes a wide diversity of industry representatives and some labor and NGO representatives too. But there is no transparency around who gets what information and whether they all see the same things, and I think that's a real problem. Mr. Froman's response was clear: No, no, no.

All throughout her career, from her law students to big bankers to nominees to be trade representative, people have found that it is much better to be able to answer Professor Senator Warren's questions than not to answer them. (600 outside advisors? Really?) She also took off after the entire notion of the Trans Pacific Partnership.

"I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant," Warren explained. "In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States."

Bob Zoellick just had a stroke.

Of course, the guy got confirmed with only four votes against him, but what you had here was a perfect example of raising the issue, something the Democrats always seem more than a little reluctant to do.She also did it earlier in the week when she took on an issue that nobody is talking about, but that everybody should be, especially given the current Supreme Court's kneejerk response to the desires of corporations, something that was reinforced only today, by the way. She gave a speech decrying the influenceof big money in the judicial system. And she wasn't shy about tracing the whole thing back to Saint Ronnie, whence it began.

"We are up against a conservative movement that for 30 years, since President Reagan, has dedicated itself to packing the courts with pro-business, anti-regulation conservative allies," she said. "They are tough and they prepared."

In the last Gilded Age, the pushback began in the Senate from renegades and people unwilling to look corruption in the eye and declare business as usual. I mention this only in passing, of course.

Charles P. Pierce Charles P Pierce is the author of four books, most recently Idiot America, and has been a working journalist since 1976.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io