It was disappointing to witness House Democrats, including 2

^{[naviga:font size="1"]nd[/naviga:font]}

District Congressman Joe Courtney, abandon President Obama and deny him the "fast-track" authority necessary to finalize the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. Two pivotal votes effectively killed the trade bill Friday.

Presidents have for decades sought fast-track provisions that allow administrations the necessary latitude to negotiate the final details of trade pacts, then bring the deals to Congress for up-or-down votes, without amendment. This recognizes the reality that it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to conclude a complex deal with multiple countries if your bargaining partners know Congress can alter the details, requiring renegotiation.

The Trans-Pacific deal is under negotiation with 11 other countries, among them Australia, Vietnam, Singapore, Japan, Canada, Mexico and Malaysia. It has become a bogeyman for the progressive wing of the party, which has grown in its influence. Opponents point to the American job losses associated with past trade deals as low-education, labor-intensive jobs moved overseas.

This deal, however, would be good for the United States economy in keeping with the president’s strategy to "pivot to Asia" and engage the Asia-Pacific economy, the fastest expanding in the world. The agreement would lift tariff restrictions inhibiting U.S. access to Asian markets, protect intellectual property, and include trade rules intended to discourage worker and environmental exploitation.

It was disappointing to see Congressman Courtney, who has worked hard to develop overseas markets for local businesses by sponsoring trade missions, side in this case with the economic isolationists.

Legitimate concerns had been raised about the bill — and in announcing his "no" votes the congressman pointed to a couple, including currency manipulation and consumer protection.

Language in the trade agreement that prohibits governments from discriminating against foreign companies could potentially be used to challenge American financial regulations. However, that fear could have been addressed in the legislation, by prohibiting use of fast-track authority for language that undercuts U.S. financial regulations.

As for currency manipulation, the administration promised to address the issue.

Politically, this was a major defeat for the president, who certainly shares significant blame for his inability to sell the deal within his own party. More unfortunately, however, it could defeat efforts to expand the U.S. economy and create jobs.