Ten years in the making, the most important trade pact in a generation was expected to come steps closer to reality on Tuesday. Yet just hours before the US Senate was scheduled to vote on whether to allow president Barack Obama to push the deal through to a final vote, a group of Senate Democrats decided to block the bill from passing.

Thanks to the alphabet soup of acronyms and the byzantine path the Trans-Pacific Partnership has taken, many people have ignored the pact. But as a deal gets closer, tempers are fraying and TPP is making its way up the news agenda. Obama has attacked allies and enemies in his drive to get TPP approved. Here’s your guide through the maze – what we can see of it anyway.

What was supposed to happen on Tuesday?

The Senate was scheduled to vote on Trade Promotion Authority (TPA). The bill, which needed at least 60 votes to advance, failed to pass through the Senate in a 52-45 vote. If passed, the TPA would give Congress the ability to review and vote for or against a final trade agreement, but it wouldn’t be able to amend it or filibuster it. By granting the president the authority to negotiate trade agreements, Congress streamlines the process. This is why the TPA is often referred to as “fast-track”.

The current TPA bill comes with a big loophole: if Congress feels the TPP doesn’t meet its expectations, it can revoke the TPA and try to change the terms of the trade agreement.

Democrats said they would vote in favor of the bill if Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell would combine the fast-track bill with trade legislation addressing currency manipulation, job placement for workers who have lost their jobs as a result of foreign trade, and trade preferences for sub-Saharan Africa.

“Until there is a path to get all four bills passed ... we will, certainly most of us, have to vote no,” Oregon senator Ron Wyden told reporters Tuesday.

So why does Obama want to fast-track the TPP?

The trade agreement is a big deal. Besides the US, it involves 11 other countries and covers about 40% of the world’s economy. In addition to trade, the agreement covers intellectual-property rights and financial regulations. Negotiations have been long and difficult. He wants to present a pact for a final vote and not have to constantly re-negotiate with Congress, special interest groups in the US, and the other countries.

Who are the other countries?

Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. The notable exception is China. In part, the deal is meant to tackle China’s dominance in the region. China has its own trade plans under discussion but could one day be part of the TPP.

Who is against this trade deal?

Among those speaking out against the agreement are unions, workers’ rights groups and environmentalists, all of whom have traditionally been Obama supporters. Many in the president’s own party – including senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren – oppose the trade deal. Free speech advocates and financial reformers are also worried about the deal. Warren is specifically afraid that if it is passed, a future president could use the TPP to change regulations like Dodd-Frank that are meant to safeguard US investors.

Who supports the agreement?

Big businesses like Nike – from whose headquarters Obama controversially chose to shill for the deal last week – support the agreement because it would reduce the tariffs on the shoes they produce overseas and then ship to the US. (Right now 98% of shoes in the US are imported.) They also argue free trade will benefit US companies and create more jobs at home. The deal would clarify trade rules that currently ensnare businesses large and small in red tape and arguably make trading in the Pacific rim far easier.

Wasn’t there another agreement that promised much the same but cost the US jobs?

Yes. That was Nafta – the North American Free Trade Agreement – signed in 1994 between the US, Canada and Mexico. As Bernie Sanders points out, post-Nafta the US lost nearly 700,000 jobs, and over 60.8% of the lost jobs were in manufacturing.

Obama is really tired of people making the Nafta comparison. While speaking at Nike HQ on Friday, he told the audience that Nafta was a different agreement, passed 20 years ago. “In fact, this agreement fixes some of what was wrong with Nafta by making labor and environmental provisions actually enforceable,” he said.

He argues the agreement will not cost US jobs and will raise standards for workers in countries like Vietnam, where many large US companies currently outsource work.

So who is right, and what does the agreement actually say?



Well, that’s the thing: we don’t know. The agreement is secret. The most detail we have had so far comes from Wikileaks, which leaked chapters on intellectual property proposals that have caused consternation online. “If you read, write, publish, think, listen, dance, sing or invent; if you farm or consume food; if you’re ill now or might one day be ill, the TPP has you in its crosshairs,” said Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.

Meanwhile Obama keeps insisting that the deal is not secret at all.



... how?

Well, he says that people will get to see it before he officially signs off on it. This is what he said on Friday:

[Y]ou’ve got some critics saying that any deal would be rushed through; it’s a secret deal, people don’t know what’s in it. This is not true. Any agreement that we finalize with the other 11 countries will have to be posted online for at least 60 days before I even sign it. Then it would go to Congress – and you know they’re not going to do anything fast. So there will be months of review. Every T crossed, every I dotted. Everybody is going to be able to see exactly what’s in it.

So what now?

Now we wait to see if the bill comes up for a vote again in the next few weeks.

What if the TPA passes through the Senate then?

It will go through to the House, where leaders have warned Obama they might not have enough votes to pass the bill. With an election coming – and even some Republicans lining up to take pot-shots at the TPP – expect the fight over this trade agreement to get more heated and no less complex.