President Barack Obama was scheduled to meet with congressional Democrats at the White House on Wednesday evening in an effort to convince them to rescue his landmark Pacific Rim trade pact as it faces increasingly long odds. Obama is expected to send formal notification to Congress as soon as this week that he intends to sign the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deal eight years in the making that would establish trade rules among countries that comprise 40 percent of the global economy. The announcement of its completion on Oct. 5 sets off a monthslong process of technical and political considerations before the agreement can go into effect. When preliminary legislation vital to the trade deal came before Congress this summer, large numbers of Democrats opposed granting the president so-called "fast-track" authority to negotiate the multilateral agreement, with only a handful joining Republicans to advance it by the narrowest of margins. But now, with the GOP in the midst of an extended and painful leadership struggle and an approaching election year rendering them more reluctant to hand the president any victory, Obama is banking on convincing more Democrats to vote in favor of the deal when it ultimately comes to a vote.

Complicating his pitch, Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton this month struck a significant blow to the president's efforts by declaring her opposition to the deal. Clinton, who was involved in trade negotiations as secretary of state, abruptly reversed course amid widespread populist opposition that argues the agreement does little for U.S. workers and falls short of ensuring global human rights, environmental protections and a level economic playing field.

"I did say when I was secretary of state three years ago that I hoped it would be the gold standard," Clinton said during last week's first Democratic presidential debate. "It was just finally negotiated last week, and in looking at it, it didn't meet my standards."

The comments come after she publicly supported the deal in in 2012, noting in a speech in Australia that "this TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open, free, transparent, fair trade."She joined her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, in opposing the deal – opposition that could embolden Democrats to resist Obama's call for party unity.

Obama during a new conference Friday brushed off a question about Clinton's opposition.

"I’d have you direct questions to her," he said.

The administration has already begun its charm offensive, trotting out Ambassador Michael Froman, the U.S. trade representative, to make its case to the public. But many Democrats appear hardened in their opposition ahead of a 90-day review period that precedes an up-or-down vote on the deal – which could still change as participating nations continue to negotiate their own side agreements. And with lawmakers granting the president so-called "fast-track" authority to negotiate the multilateral agreement by the narrowest of margins this summer, Obama has little room for error.

“We are just entering the next round of the debate over how badly the Trans-Pacific Partnership would send Americans' jobs abroad, depress wages, put our food supply at risk and potentially drive up drug costs for seniors and veterans,” says Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., in an email. “That is why we have seen so many leaders come out against the deal, including presidential contenders of both parties.”

Democrats like DeLauro, who has led the charge against the agreement, are almost certainly out of reach for the administration. But the White House hopes to convince others who voted against fast-track but don’t oppose free trade agreements on principle.

“Progress has been made on important issues, with the outcome on a multitude of issues still requiring deeper scrutiny, and others falling short of the results we seek,” Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., said in a statement.





Levin voted against fast-track, known as Trade Promotion Authority, but is holding out for additional work that could be done to strengthen certain parts of the agreement that he finds lacking, especially those having to do with countries’ deliberate devaluation of their currency to gain an unfair export advantage and with Mexico’s labor standards.

“We have to get this agreement right, which is why no one should be surprised if the [review period] results in additional changes, particularly since many of these issues are the subjects of bilateral negotiations,” he said.

An aide described him as remaining hopeful the 12 participating nations could come to agreements on his issues of concern, which would get him to a point where he might be willing to vote in favor of the deal. And as the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee with deep experience on trade deals, Levin’s support could help sway skeptical lawmakers.

But even if a few more Democrats change their minds, it’s Republicans who have the opportunity to sink or save the deal. That leaves the White House looking to strike a difficult balance with GOP lawmakers, many of whom find themselves in rare agreement with Obama over the need to expand access to foreign markets for U.S. goods. But it isn't a given that Republicans who reluctantly granted Obama fast-track authority will remain on his side through a vote on the final agreement.

“Some of the things that happened in Atlanta [at the final negotiations] are going to lose some Republican votes,” a Democratic aide said. “And increasing the number of Democrats that support it is going to be really hard with Hillary coming out against it.”

Indeed, support from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is almost certainly contingent on potential side deals or additional negotiations to loosen provisions that prevent tobacco companies from suing countries that pass anti-smoking packaging laws.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch was among those who pushed hardest to pass fast-track legislation. But since the completion of negotiations, the Utah Republican has wavered, criticizing the administration for not tightening pharmaceutical intellectual property protections.

"The negotiating objectives we included in our TPA law aren’t just pro forma," Hatch said on the Senate floor earlier this month. "They aren’t suggestions or mere statements of members’ preferences. They represent the view of the bipartisan majority in Congress.”



Gary Clyde Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute for International Economics predicts it's going to be "very difficult to get any more Republican congressmen."

“The ones who didn’t vote for [fast-track] tend to be tea party types who have a ‘foreigners take us to the cleaners’ type of view of free trade deals.”

Already, rumors have emerged that the administration would wait until the lame duck session after next year’s elections to give Congress the chance to take its first vote on the deal. That would come in the form of implementing legislation that makes the necessary tweaks to the hundreds of laws affected by the 30-chapter document.

Meanwhile, Clinton’s opposition, along with the resonance of Bernie Sanders’ candidacy, could give a way out for some Democrats who may be looking for a reason to oppose the agreement while having voted in favor of fast-track.

“What Clinton has said, and Sanders, gives them a certain amount of cover to say they thought it would go this way and it didn’t come out to my standards,” Hufbauer says.

But Hufbauer says he is nearly certain Congress will ultimately pass the deal, either in the waning days of Obama’s presidency or during the next administration. And despite their opposition, most candidates – including Clinton – would not work to undo the deal.

“Clinton will come up with something that is sufficiently complicated and that will be lifting it up closer to the ‘gold standard,’” says Hufbauer. “She’ll figure out some good political angle, she’ll rediscover the geopolitical angle.”

Matthew A. Gold, a former principal negotiator for the U.S. at the NAFTA Free Trade Commission talks, believes many of the Democrats who voted against fast-track are putting up nominal opposition but deep down wouldn't mind seeing the Trans-Pacific Partnership enacted.

“It’s going to be approved. It’s a near certainty,” he says. “The bigger battle was getting fast-track enacted.”