Illustration by POLITICO / AP and Getty Photos 4 Senate Dems could help hand Obama fast track

The fate of President Barack Obama’s “fast-track” trade bill in the Senate may come down to whether four Democratic senators are willing to buck labor unions and liberal activists to give the White House a historic victory on free trade.

The White House and Republican leaders made moves this week to shore up votes in the House on the trade promotion authority bill, amid concerns that its passage could be in doubt. But before the House ever gets to the bill, the Senate will vote on the fast-track measure, and a solid victory there could boost votes in the lower chamber.


Few will be surprised if Sen. Patty Murray of Washington backs the bill, but she’s stopped short of declaring a final position ahead of the looming Senate debate. Another legislative veteran, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, also appears a likely vote for the legislation.

But two newer members, Sens. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Tim Kaine of Virginia, may require more convincing to take a vote that would antagonize union groups and the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, which have made defeating the bill a top priority.

The behind the scenes lobbying — a Democratic White House twisting the arms of Democratic senators — has intensified ahead of a vote expected this month in the Senate. If the Obama administration can convince these Democrats to buck their base, Obama will score a major win and be well on his way to finishing one of the biggest free trade deals in world history. But the votes will come at a cost. Many liberals, led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, are promising to fight to the trade promotion bill every step of the way.

“I’m still trying to make up my mind,” Shaheen told POLITICO as action on the bill was heating up in the Senate Finance Committee last month. “I have generally supported trade. As governor, I led the first trade mission overseas. I think it’s been good for New Hampshire, but I also am concerned about our need to address what happens to workers who are displaced because of trade.”

Reflecting Shaheen’s concern, a bill to renew the five-decade-old trade adjustment assistance program to help retrain workers who have lost their jobs because of import competition or production moving abroad will be moving through Congress alongside the fast-track trade promotion authority bill. But many Democrats, like the New Hampshire lawmaker, are worried about the decision to keep the bills separate, fearing Republicans will approve the fast track bill but not the TAA package.

The legislation, which is expected to face a tougher battle in the House, would set the stage for Obama to wrap up talks on the 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership, a proposed agreement covering nearly 40 percent of world economic output. It would allow the president to submit the agreement to Congress for straight up-or-down votes without any amendments.

But to finish the agreement, the White House first must persuade Congress to approve the fast-track trade bill over the opposition of many of Obama’s fellow Democrats, especially in the House.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, caught in the middle between the two groups, has criticized the bill approved last month by the the Senate Finance and Ways and Means committees, but has not led a Democratic charge against the legislation, as Obama has stepped up his effort to win votes.

There are also concerns some conservative Republicans could oppose the bill just to deny Obama a victory, a possibility that Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch sought to squelch on Wednesday.

“I hope there’s nobody on the Republican side who would vote against this merely because they don’t like the president,” the Utah Republican said at a POLITICO Morning Money event. “I’m hopeful we won’t lose anybody on that basis. That’s cheap politics as far as I’m concerned.”

Seven Democrats on the Finance Committee have already voted once in favor of the bill. Holding onto their votes and adding the support of Feinstein, Murray, Shaheen and Kaine could put the administration over the 60 votes it needs in the Senate to ward off a filibuster and win approval of the bill. But that also depends on few Republicans peeling away from the bill.

A big bipartisan vote in the Senate would also help ease passage in the House, where many liberal Democrats are opposed to the bill and some conservative Republicans could be reluctant to give Obama the authority. Republican leaders have tried to counter that argument by insisting the trade promotion authority puts Congress in the “driver seat” on trade.

Feinstein, the former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee who took on the CIA over its interrogation tactics, has already shown she has a tough hide on trade by voting in 2002 to give George W. Bush the trade promotion authority legislation over the loud protests of Democrats in the House, where the final bill passed by just three votes.

She took even a possibly even harder trade vote in 2005, when she supported a free trade agreement with five Central American countries and the Dominican Republic, which cleared the Senate just 55-45 and the House 217-215, the lowest tallies for any modern trade agreement.

But so far, Feinstein has stayed silent on the fast-track bill, which would allow Obama to submit the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership and other trade agreements to Congress for straight up-or-down votes without any amendments, a procedure critics call undemocratic.

Aides said Feinstein is still reviewing the legislation which could hit the Senate floor in the next two weeks and will continue to talk with the administration’s point man, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman, and other interested parties as she makes up her mind.

Meanwhile, many consider Murray a solid ‘yes’ for the legislation. Like Feinstein, she voted to give Bush the authority 13 years ago, and like many other lawmakers from from her export-dependent state, she has a long record of backing free trade agreements, including the 2005 CAFTA pact. Washington’s other senator, Maria Cantwell, was one of the seven Democrats who voted for fast track in the Finance Committee.

Murray supports the package of trade bills that came out of the Finance Committee, but is withholding final judgment pending the outcome of the Senate debate. Aides said she will be working with colleagues on ideas for improving the legislation and managing its path through the floor.

“I think that I’m looking at how Washington state businesses have an opportunity to sell overseas,” Murray said on Tuesday, when asked about how she would vote.

Shaheen, a former New Hampshire governor, has shown support for trade during her four years in Congress. In 2011, she backed Obama on three free trade deals, including one with Colombia that many other Democrats opposed because of concern about the country’s long history of violence against trade unionists.

Kaine, a former Virginia governor who has not faced a vote yet on a major trade agreement, is being courted by both the White House and opponents of the trade bill. As a former chief executive, Kaine knows his state’s high-tech and agricultural industries are constantly looking for new exports but also is sensitive to the concerns of labor unions opposed to the pact.

“He has heard directly from voices on both sides of this issue and looks forward to a robust debate on the Senate floor soon,” a Kaine spokeswoman said.

“While Sen. Kaine is generally supportive of free trade on account of how it’s helped fuel Virginia’s economy, he also feels labor and environmental concerns should be taken into consideration as part of any final agreement,” she added.

Some other Democrats are also still still in play. Both Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware have said they’re still mulling over the bill.

But the number of Democrats opposed to the legislation continues to increase. In recent days, Sens. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico and Brian Schatz of Hawaii have come out against the fast-track bill, and Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia told POLITICO on Tuesday he was also opposed.

Republicans control the Senate with 54 votes, so theoretically the proponents of fast track need only six Democratic votes to get to victory. But they’re down at least one vote already on the Republican side after Sen. Richard Burr opposed the bill in the committee, reflecting a traditional concern in his state of North Carolina, which has been battered by textile import competitions over the past several decades.

In addition, four other Republicans voted against the fast-track trade bill when Bush was president, including Sens. Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia. Both Graham and Sessions have indicated they could oppose it this time as well, while Capito is still mulling her position, a spokeswoman said.

Still, Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Thune was optimistic enough of Republican support on Tuesday to express hope the bill would pass by a 65-vote majority. That would be a little bit below the 71-vote average for free trade agreements in the Senate since 2003.

But in a possible sign of concern about Republicans fleeing the bill, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell insisted the upcoming vote was more about giving the current president a legislative victory.

“I’ve said this repeatedly to my Republican colleagues — this is not a trade promotion authority just for Barack Obama. This is a six-year deal. It means the next president, whoever that is, can be engaged with the rest of the world and try to promote American exports,” McConnell said.

Manu Raju contributed to this story.