The Senate made it official on Wednesday, granting President Barack Obama the power to streamline passage of major trade pacts with Pacific Rim nations and the European Union by a vote of 60 to 38.

A razor-thin Senate vote Tuesday put President Obama on the cusp of claiming victory for his ambitious international trade agenda, clearing the way for legislation granting him “fast track” negotiating powers to potentially reach his desk by week’s end.

Many think our government is for sale. However, by taking a look at the facts below provided by the Open Secrets, it is easy to understand where they are coming from.

The Fast Track trade authority package was rejected Friday because two years of effort by a vast corporate coalition, the White House and GOP leaders -- and weeks of deals swapped for yes votes -- could not assuage a majority in the House of Representatives facing constituents' concerns that more of the same trade policy would kill more jobs, push down wages and open a Pandora's box of other damaging consequences.

Hours before one of the most consequential votes of President Barack Obama’s second term — whether to give him fast-track trade powers to clinch a sprawling Pacific Rim trade deal — Democrats and Republicans have no idea whether the votes are there to pass it.

On April 21st the Pittsburgh City Council took a stand against Fast Track.

Republicans in both chambers are increasingly confident that they have the votes to pass the linchpin legislation President Barack Obama needs to enact his trade agenda.

The “Progressive Coalition For American Jobs,” run by former Obama campaign staffers, purports to represent the progressive left on the trade deal that the progressive left hates.

About 20 million working people in this country need good jobs and an economy to rebuild the middle class. A threat to that growth and stability for many Americans is what is before Congress right now: fast track negotiating authority for trade agreements.

Critics say TPP represents an anti-democratic set of policies that have more to do with consolidating corporate power across international borders than boosting so-called "free trade"