Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions

Legislation to reauthorize Trade Promotion Authority (“TPA”), sometimes called “fast track,” was introduced as the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA- 2015; H.R. 1890/S. 995) on April 16, 2015. The legislation was reported by the Senate Finance Committee on April 22, 2015, and by the House Ways and Means Committee the next day. TPA, as incorporated into H.R. 1314 by substitute amendment, passed the Senate on May 22 by a vote of 62-37. In the House of Representatives, the measure was voted on under a procedure known as “division of the question,” which requires separate votes on each component, but approval of both to pass. Voting on June 12, TPA (Title I) passed by a vote of 219-211, but TAA (Title II) was defeated 126-302. A motion to reconsider that vote was laid by Speaker Boehner shortly after that vote. The previous grant of authority expired on July 1, 2007. TPA requires that if the President negotiates an international trade agreement that would reduce tariff or non-tariff barriers to trade in ways that require changes in U.S. law, the United States can implement the agreement only through the enactment of legislation. If the trade agreement and the process of negotiating it meet certain requirements, TPA allows Congress to consider the required implementing bill under expedited (“fast track”) procedures, pursuant to which the bill may come to the floor without action by the leadership, and can receive a guaranteed up-or-down vote with no amendments. Under TPA, an implementing bill may be eligible for this expedited consideration if (1) the trade agreement was negotiated during the limited time period for which TPA is in effect; (2) the agreement advances a series of U.S. trade negotiating objectives specified in the TPA statute; (3) the negotiations were conducted in conjunction with an extensive array of required notifications to and consultations with Congress and other stakeholders; and (4) the President submits to Congress a draft implementing bill, which must meet specific content requirements, and a range of required supporting information. If, in any given case, Congress judges that these requirements have not been met, TPA provides mechanisms through which the eligibility of the implementing bill for expedited consideration may be withdrawn in one or both chambers. The most recent previous renewal of TPA covered agreements reached between December 2002 and the end of June 2007. Current legislation would apply to agreements reached before July 1, 2018, with a possible extension to July 1, 2021. The United States is now engaged in several sets of trade agreement negotiations. Legislation to reauthorize TPA was introduced, but not considered, in the 113th Congress. The issue of TPA reauthorization raises a number of questions regarding TPA itself and the pending legislation. This report addresses a number of those questions that are frequently asked, including the following: What is trade promotion authority? Is TPA necessary? What are trade negotiating objectives and how are they reflected in TPA statutes? What requirements does Congress impose on the President under TPA? Does TPA affect congressional authority on trade policy

Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions

Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), formerly called fast track, is the authority Congress has granted to the President for limited periods of time to negotiate reciprocal trade agreements. The authority lays out U.S. trade negotiating objectives, procedures for congressional-executive notification and consultation, and expedited legislative procedures under which bills implementing trade agreements negotiated by the executive branch are to be considered. The most recent authority was enacted in December 2002 and expired as of July 1, 2007. Legislation to reauthorize TPA has been introduced in the 113th Congress. The United States is engaged in several sets of trade agreement negotiations. The issue of TPA reauthorization has raised a number of questions regarding TPA itself and the pending legislation. This report addresses a number of those questions that are frequently asked, including: • What is trade promotion authority? • Is TPA necessary? • What are trade negotiating objectives and how are they reflected in TPA statutes? • What requirements does Congress impose on the President under TPA? • Does TPA affect congressional authority on trade policy

The shape of primordial non-Gaussianity and the CMB bispectrum

We present a set of formalisms for comparing, evolving and constraining primordial non-Gaussian models through the CMB bispectrum. We describe improved methods for efficient computation of the full CMB bispectrum for any general (non-separable) primordial bispectrum, incorporating a flat sky approximation and a new cubic interpolation. We review all the primordial non-Gaussian models in the present literature and calculate the CMB bispectrum up to l <2000 for each different model. This allows us to determine the observational independence of these models by calculating the cross-correlation of their CMB bispectra. We are able to identify several distinct classes of primordial shapes - including equilateral, local, warm, flat and feature (non-scale invariant) - which should be distinguishable given a significant detection of CMB non-Gaussianity. We demonstrate that a simple shape correlator provides a fast and reliable method for determining whether or not CMB shapes are well correlated. We use an eigenmode decomposition of the primordial shape to characterise and understand model independence. Finally, we advocate a standardised normalisation method for $f_{NL}$ based on the shape autocorrelator, so that observational limits and errors can be consistently compared for different models.Comment: 32 pages, 20 figure

Primordial non-Gaussianity and the CMB bispectrum

We present a new formalism, together with efficient numerical methods, to directly calculate the CMB bispectrum today from a given primordial bispectrum using the full linear radiation transfer functions. Unlike previous analyses which have assumed simple separable ansatze for the bispectrum, this work applies to a primordial bispectrum of almost arbitrary functional form, for which there may have been both horizon-crossing and superhorizon contributions. We employ adaptive methods on a hierarchical triangular grid and we establish their accuracy by direct comparison with an exact analytic solution, valid on large angular scales. We demonstrate that we can calculate the full CMB bispectrum to greater than 1% precision out to multipoles l<1800 on reasonable computational timescales. We plot the bispectrum for both the superhorizon ('local') and horizon-crossing ('equilateral') asymptotic limits, illustrating its oscillatory nature which is analogous to the CMB power spectrum

General CMB and Primordial Bispectrum Estimation I: Mode Expansion, Map-Making and Measures of f_NL

We present a detailed implementation of two bispectrum estimation methods which can be applied to general non-separable primordial and CMB bispectra. The method exploits bispectrum mode decompositions on the domain of allowed wavenumber or multipole values. Concrete mode examples constructed from symmetrised tetrahedral polynomials are given, demonstrating rapid convergence for known bispectra. We use these modes to generate simulated CMB maps of high resolution (l > 2000) given an arbitrary primordial power spectrum and bispectrum or an arbitrary late-time CMB angular power spectrum and bispectrum. By extracting coefficients for the same separable basis functions from an observational map, we are able to present an efficient and general f_NL estimator for a given theoretical model. The estimator has two versions comparing theoretical and observed coefficients at either primordial or late times, thus encompassing a wider range of models, including secondary anisotropies, lensing and cosmic strings. We provide examples and validation of both f_NL estimation methods by direct comparison with simulations in a WMAP-realistic context. In addition, we show how the full bispectrum can be extracted from observational maps using these mode expansions, irrespective of the theoretical model under study. We also propose a universal definition of the bispectrum parameter F_NL for more consistent comparison between theoretical models. We obtain WMAP5 estimates of f_NL for the equilateral model from both our primordial and late-time estimators which are consistent with each other, as well as with results already published in the literature. These general bispectrum estimation methods should prove useful for the analysis of nonGaussianity in the Planck satellite data, as well as in other contexts.Comment: 41 pages, 17 figure

Primordial non-Gaussianity and Bispectrum Measurements in the Cosmic Microwave Background and Large-Scale Structure

The most direct probe of non-Gaussian initial conditions has come from bispectrum measurements of temperature fluctuations in the Cosmic Microwave Background and of the matter and galaxy distribution at large scales. Such bispectrum estimators are expected to continue to provide the best constraints on the non-Gaussian parameters in future observations. We review and compare the theoretical and observational problems, current results and future prospects for the detection of a non-vanishing primordial component in the bispectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background and large-scale structure, and the relation to specific predictions from different inflationary models.Comment: 82 pages, 23 figures; Invited Review for the special issue "Testing the Gaussianity and Statistical Isotropy of the Universe" for Advances in Astronom

General CMB and Primordial Trispectrum Estimation

We present trispectrum estimation methods which can be applied to general non-separable primordial and CMB trispectra. We present a general optimal estimator for the connected part of the trispectrum, for which we derive a quadratic term to incorporate the effects of inhomogeneous noise and masking. We describe a general algorithm for creating simulated maps with given arbitrary (and independent) power spectra, bispectra and trispectra. We propose a universal definition of the trispectrum parameter $T_{NL}$, so that the integrated bispectrum on the observational domain can be consistently compared between theoretical models. We define a shape function for the primordial trispectrum, together with a shape correlator and a useful parametrisation for visualizing the trispectrum. We derive separable analytic CMB solutions in the large-angle limit for constant and local models. We present separable mode decompositions which can be used to describe any primordial or CMB bispectra on their respective wavenumber or multipole domains. By extracting coefficients of these separable basis functions from an observational map, we are able to present an efficient estimator for any given theoretical model with a nonseparable trispectrum. The estimator has two manifestations, comparing the theoretical and observed coefficients at either primordial or late times. These mode decomposition methods are numerically tractable with order $l^5$ operations for the CMB estimator and approximately order $l^6$ for the general primordial estimator (reducing to order $l^3$ in both cases for a special class of models). We also demonstrate how the trispectrum can be reconstructed from observational maps using these methods.Comment: 38 pages, 9 figures. In v2 Figures 4-7 are altered slightly and some extra references are included in the bibliography. v3 matches version submitted to journal. Includes discussion of special case