Green Mtn
location: Observing the Progressive madness with considerably less amusement.
listening to: Grandchildren, the best reason for saving the future.
registered: 2004.04.03
posts: 2617
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
The last couple of paragraph's should be noted.
Too, there are some supportive evidence links that don't show up,
so you may want to access the site in order to obtain all the
sources. NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO
By Henry Lamb
EcoFreedom.org, August 1, 2005
http://www.eco.freedom.org/el/20050801/lamb-2.shtmlThese acronyms, NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO, are a weird blend of
alphabet soup that provides nourishment for almost all participants
- except the United States.
The people who lost their jobs when 354 textile plants closed , just
since 1997, are not nourished by this alphabet soup. The people in
Asian sweat shops are.
The farmers in Iowa, and across the country, whose exports are
declining , are not nourished by this alphabet soup. Non-American
farmers are.
As our trade deficit worsens, our trading partners get healthier,
while Americans suffer.
These trade agreements were sold to Congress, and to the
American people, as "Free Trade" agreements. Nothing could be
further from the truth. These agreements are actually mountains of
regulations, developed and enforced by unelected bureaucrats.
They are, in fact, agreements by participating nations, to allow
unelected bureaucrats to manage trade among the participants.
These trade agreements have extraordinary legal power. The
decisions of an appointed international tribunal have the power to
force participating nations to conform their laws to comply with the
tribunal's decisions - or face economic penalties.
Since these trade agreements are international in nature, and have
the force of law, they are actually treaties, which require a super-
majority in the Senate for ratification. By calling them "trade
agreements," instead of the treaties they are, only a simple
majority is needed for passage.
After 10 years of watching plant closings and swelling trade
deficits, the administration, and many in Congress, have pushed
through the Central American Free Trade Agreement - CAFTA. The
consequences of this entanglement go far beyond the adverse
economic impacts.
This agreement is another step toward the creation of a trade-
governing mechanism in the Western hemisphere similar to the
European Common Market, and its subsequent European Union.
The sales pitch in the U.S. claims the agreement will open new
markets for U.S. products. In reality, it opens new opportunities for
American industry to move to countries where labor costs are a
fraction of U.S. labor costs, and where environmental and
regulatory compliance costs are almost non-existent.
These agreements open U.S. markets to products produced without
the safety and environmental standards, and the attendant costs,
that U.S. products must include. That's why an America flag made
in America costs twice as much as a flag made in Mexico, or China.
That's why the Florida tomato industry evaporated, when NAFTA
went into force. That's why the American economy is losing its
capacity to produce the products Americans need. Each new
agreement makes the U.S. more and more dependent upon other
nations, for the products it requires.
Once the capacity to produce is lost, the possibility of rebuilding
that capacity is remote. Consider what it would take to rebuild the
steel industry to the level that it could supply American demand.
Not only is the cost prohibitive, but the regulatory climate is also
prohibitive. It is the regulatory climate that has prevented the
energy industry from keeping up with demand. That's why our
dependence on foreign sources of energy has continued to rise,
from decade to decade.
Congress, and the American people, should realize that the
ultimate goal of these trade agreements has nothing to do with
what is best for the United States, or its people. It has everything to
do with benefitting everyone else. Congress, and the American
people, should realize that the prosperity this nation has built is
the result of self-reliance, which we should not allow to be traded
away.
Finally, there is the matter of national sovereignty. Proponents of
these trade agreements praise the dispute resolution process that
forces compliance by all participants. They claim this provides a
degree of predictability on which business can depend. It also
forces Americans to submit to a force of law that was not enacted
by elected representatives. This grinds underfoot the whole
concept of "...government empowered by the consent of the
governed."
When Americans are forced to comply with a ruling of an appointed
international tribunal, the idea of national sovereignty goes out the
window. This, of course, is prerequisite to the emergence of global
governance. NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO are more than
nourishment for the one-worlders. They are vitamin-packed,
steroid-enriched injections of global governance.
Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental
Conservation Organization (ECO), and chairman of Sovereignty
International .
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
G
Green Mtn
(view)
The last couple of paragraph's should be noted.
Too, there are some supportive evidence links that don't show up,
so you may want to access the site in order to obtain all the
sources. NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO
By Henry Lamb
EcoFreedom.org, August 1, 2005
http://www.eco.freedom.org/el/20050801/lamb-2.shtmlThese acronyms, NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO, are a weird blend of
alphabet soup that provides nourishment for almost all participants
- except the United States.
The people who lost their jobs when 354 textile plants closed , just
since 1997, are not nourished by this alphabet soup. The people in
Asian sweat shops are.
The farmers in Iowa, and across the country, whose exports are
declining , are not nourished by this alphabet soup. Non-American
farmers are.
As our trade deficit worsens, our trading partners get healthier,
while Americans suffer.
These trade agreements were sold to Congress, and to the
American people, as "Free Trade" agreements. Nothing could be
further from the truth. These agreements are actually mountains of
regulations, developed and enforced by unelected bureaucrats.
They are, in fact, agreements by participating nations, to allow
unelected bureaucrats to manage trade among the participants.
These trade agreements have extraordinary legal power. The
decisions of an appointed international tribunal have the power to
force participating nations to conform their laws to comply with the
tribunal's decisions - or face economic penalties.
Since these trade agreements are international in nature, and have
the force of law, they are actually treaties, which require a super-
majority in the Senate for ratification. By calling them "trade
agreements," instead of the treaties they are, only a simple
majority is needed for passage.
After 10 years of watching plant closings and swelling trade
deficits, the administration, and many in Congress, have pushed
through the Central American Free Trade Agreement - CAFTA. The
consequences of this entanglement go far beyond the adverse
economic impacts.
This agreement is another step toward the creation of a trade-
governing mechanism in the Western hemisphere similar to the
European Common Market, and its subsequent European Union.
The sales pitch in the U.S. claims the agreement will open new
markets for U.S. products. In reality, it opens new opportunities for
American industry to move to countries where labor costs are a
fraction of U.S. labor costs, and where environmental and
regulatory compliance costs are almost non-existent.
These agreements open U.S. markets to products produced without
the safety and environmental standards, and the attendant costs,
that U.S. products must include. That's why an America flag made
in America costs twice as much as a flag made in Mexico, or China.
That's why the Florida tomato industry evaporated, when NAFTA
went into force. That's why the American economy is losing its
capacity to produce the products Americans need. Each new
agreement makes the U.S. more and more dependent upon other
nations, for the products it requires.
Once the capacity to produce is lost, the possibility of rebuilding
that capacity is remote. Consider what it would take to rebuild the
steel industry to the level that it could supply American demand.
Not only is the cost prohibitive, but the regulatory climate is also
prohibitive. It is the regulatory climate that has prevented the
energy industry from keeping up with demand. That's why our
dependence on foreign sources of energy has continued to rise,
from decade to decade.
Congress, and the American people, should realize that the
ultimate goal of these trade agreements has nothing to do with
what is best for the United States, or its people. It has everything to
do with benefitting everyone else. Congress, and the American
people, should realize that the prosperity this nation has built is
the result of self-reliance, which we should not allow to be traded
away.
Finally, there is the matter of national sovereignty. Proponents of
these trade agreements praise the dispute resolution process that
forces compliance by all participants. They claim this provides a
degree of predictability on which business can depend. It also
forces Americans to submit to a force of law that was not enacted
by elected representatives. This grinds underfoot the whole
concept of "...government empowered by the consent of the
governed."
When Americans are forced to comply with a ruling of an appointed
international tribunal, the idea of national sovereignty goes out the
window. This, of course, is prerequisite to the emergence of global
governance. NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO are more than
nourishment for the one-worlders. They are vitamin-packed,
steroid-enriched injections of global governance.
Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental
Conservation Organization (ECO), and chairman of Sovereignty
International .
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
