When asked after November’s midterm election what kind of room for cooperation existed between a Republican-dominated Congress and a White House without any kind of re-election to prepare for, both President Obama and incoming-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the two branches of government could find common ground on trade and tax reform.

But the bridge on the former issue is looking increasingly threatened, if last week’s announcement by US Trade Representative Michael Froman—about rules concerning congressional oversight over Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations are concerned—is any indication.

“They’re losing votes,” Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) told The Sentinel. “Members are saying in meetings ‘why are you playing these games with us.’ We have a constitutional duty to review these agreements.”

Grayson described Froman’s announcement Thursday–that the administraiton would be implementing “procedures in the House and Senate to accommodate” lawmakers looking to see “an unredacted version” of the TPP–as “too little, too late.”

“It’s a very passive aggressive concession by the trade representative. We’re not getting anything resembling true cooperation. It’s very begrudging,” he said.

The “unredacted version” refers to the “composite bracketed text”–a version of a draft that attributes various policy proposals to the twelve national delegations hashing out the agreement. Grayson said Monday afternoon that he was in Orlando, part of his congressional district, but assumed the USTR would be allowing him to see this information, upon his return to Washington.

“This is roughly five years too late,” he noted.

Last week, The Hill reported that only 15 Democrats are currently expected to grant President Obama Trade Promotion Authority—a key procedural measure through which Congress would relinquish its right to amend the TPP and other trade agreements. According to a benchmark set by House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), that whip count falls short of what’s needed to advance TPA by roughly 35 Democratic members.

Some of the hearings that the administration has held with members and senators to make the case for so-called “fast track” negotiating authority have been staged in classified settings. The secrecy has fueled anger among Democrats who already bemoan being called upon to back the result of an opaque process, with many constituents already feeling cheated by trade agreements that have been signed by the US over the past two decades.

During one briefing, according to Grayson, “one member stood up and said to the USTR ‘you’re only hurting yourself,’” lashing out at the administration over the lack of transparency.

More reliably pro-business Republicans, however, have sang rare praises of the administration, in the context of how it has conducted trade policy.

“I think Ambassador Froman and the administration have provided more access than ever before,” Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-Ohio) told The Sentinel on Thursday, referring to the draft text. Tiberi spoke earlier in the morning at the same Bloomberg News symposium where Froman discussed his move “to accommodate” Congress.

Appearing alongside Tiberi, fellow House Committee on Ways and Means member, Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.)–the top ranking Democrat on the panel–noted that transparency and being relatively more open than past administrations might not suffice for the administration, in its bid to rally liberal support.

“I want more than returning the calls,” Levin said, noting that the USTR wasn’t being responsive to his concerns about the increased number of worldwide investor-state dispute resolution tribunals that would result from the TPP’s enactment.

The investor state resolution mechanism—special courts only open to investors claiming to be entitled to financial compensation resulting from losses allegedly caused by regulations—has repeatedly come under fire by Members of Congress, often times for setting up secretive legal procedures.

According to a Jan. 20 draft, arbitrators overseeing the process would be able to order the “closing [of] the hearing” if protected information is being discussed.

In a Feb. 25 Washington Post op-ed, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) denounced the process and said the panels would “tilt the playing field in the United States further in favor of big multinational corporations.”