CAFTA threatens sovereignty

Ag Weekly ^ | Jul 08 2005 | Cathy Roemer

[hedgetrimmer]

"The upcoming vote on CAFTA promises a replay of mafia-style tactics used to coerce votes from reluctant House members," he said. "Already, arms are being twisted; deals and pork payoffs are being made with your tax dollars; political threats have been issued -- and that's only the beginning."

This is exactly what industry representatives and Washington insiders told me this week.

[SunnyD1182]

The cost of CAFTA only continues and continues to go up.

[hedgetrimmer]

Article 10.5.2 says international tribunals must use "customary international law" as established by "principle legal systems of the world" when deciding cases.

This is utterly and completely in violation of the foundation of our sovereign government, that the Constitution, is the supreme law for AMERICANS and that international tribunals must not take precedence over the United States legal system.

[xcamel]

CAFTA:

Communists And Fascists Taking America

[hedgetrimmer]

FYI

[Paul Ross]

CAFTA: Communists And Fascists Taking America

Indeed.

[hedgetrimmer]

When Congress voted on the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, our trade deficit with Canada and Mexico was $8 billion. Now its $115 billion.

Twelve years ago our nation's trade deficit stood at $38 billion.Now due to a series of bilateral and multilateral trade agreements, it has jumped to $618 billion.

[Just A Nobody]

Tom DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center, Warrenton, Va., said U.S. sovereignty is absolutely the No. 1 concern with CAFTA.

"Sovereignty is a question of who is in control," he said. "A nation should be in control of it own destiny and should not voluntarily relinquish that control.

"CAFTA is a danger to our independence and to our sovereignty, and it is the job of the U.S. government to protect Americans first," he said.

Gee, where have I heard this before??? Wonder if anyone will listen now?

[Torie]

All of this process stuff, is really just a desire for economic autarky. Paul is a hopeless nutter and kook. Trade agreements are often enfored by independent third parties. If one doesn't like how it pans out, then repeal the treaty. The disingenuous of this all is just killing me. What also is odd is just how much hand wringing there is over this rather insignificant event, from an economic perspective.

America is going to have to compete on the economic world stage without a nanny trade regime, or slowly wither away and die. America is more and more the planet itself in so many ways. There is no turning back. Deal with it.

[Frank T]

"When Congress voted on the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, our trade deficit with Canada and Mexico was $8 billion. Now its $115 billion."

I prefer any free trade agreement that diminishes the ability of government to regulate the business of free people.

Free trade is kryptonite to big, centralized government.

[ken21]

jousting with the saboteurs?

lol!

> There is no turning back. Deal with it.

you are correct.

[Nowhere Man]

Prepare to see health standards of grocercy store produce go to hell. After CAFTA, the grocery stores will be flooded with human feces fertilized fruits and vegetables from Central America.

It's already happened, here in the Pittsburgh area, there were over 500 people infected with Hepatitis A along with 3 or 4 deaths. The reason, vegitables grown in Mexico were contaminated with human feces. I do concur that if CAFTA passes, more of this crap (pun intended B-)) will go on.

[Fee]

NAFTA destroyed US light manufacturing, China destroyed US heavy manufacturing/electronics manufacturing, India will destroy our IT base, and now CAFTA will finish our small farmers. The US will make money, but not you and me. Looks like my children and grandchildren will stand in the rain and look at those 5000+ SF homes that they will never afford, and no builder will build a 2000 SF homes anymore because there is no market for it. Looks like HUD will have former middle class clients.

[hedgetrimmer]

There is no turning back

As long as the federal government is corrupted by the globalist promoting corporatist interests, you are right. But if Americans start electing Americans who will uphold our countries laws then it can be turned back.

It is a strange attitude that someone posting on a site named "freerepublic" should be telling people who want to keep the republic free, to accept global corporatist rule and to just "deal with it".

[Torie]

Just mark me down as a NWO globalist. We are omnipresent. We cannot be defeated, not because of some powerful political conspiracy, but because the ecnomic realities cannot be denied by any political structure, in practice. Economics simply overwhelms any rampart, always has, always will. Putting your finger in the dike is futile.

[hedgetrimmer]

Economics simply overwhelms any rampart

Then I wonder how the American Revolution was won. Certainly economics was on the side of the British corporations who chartered the settlement of this country.

If the tenets of Americanism would be revived in this country, then your kind would be vanquished post haste. This is why you all deplore patriotism, unrevised US history, freedom of association, sovereign borders and the rights of citizens over the interests of transnational corporations. If you had any affection for America, you would stand up for citizens rights, representative government and not international tribunals, and stop stealing from the American taxpayer to advance your business interests through trade capacity building in countries that use slave and child labor.

[Torie]

Your post is one long rant, and I will let it stew in its own juices, but let me say one thing. When it came to the Brits subduing America in in the 18th century, the economics for doing so really, really sucked (America was so far away, so big, the populations so disbursed, the economy so agrarian), particularly after the French supplied gunpowder and naval power to give it that extra muscle to make it more decisive, quicker, than it otherwise would have been. It was sort of like the Russian adventure in Afghanistan.

[hedgetrimmer]

Your post is one long rant,

Not at all. How do you defend government by international tribunal over elected representation? I am curious to know.