Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CAFTA undermines immigration laws
North County Times ^ | Sunday, July 17, 2005 | TOM TANCREDO

Posted on 07/17/2005 11:10:40 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer

Congress will soon take up the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), which many see as an extension of NAFTA and a precursor to the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas that would convert all of North and South America into one integrated market.

Opinions about CAFTA's impact on the regional economy vary widely among members of Congress based largely on what the agreement will do for their constituents. But in the rush to highlight who wins and who loses when these trade barriers come down, almost everyone has overlooked the troubling non-trade provisions that are tucked into the voluminous document.

CAFTA would do more than just phase out tariffs and open new markets ---- a lot more. For example, buried among its nearly 1,000 pages, the agreement contains an expansive definition of "cross-border trade in services." This definition would give people in Central American nations a de facto right to work in the United States. CAFTA is more than a trade agreement about sugar and bananas. It is a thinly disguised immigration accord.

The immigration provisions are cloaked as "service agreements" in the document that have become standard fare in most trade agreements.

One article of CAFTA reads, "Cross-border trade in services or cross-border supply of services means the supply of a service ... by a national of a party in the territory of another party." CAFTA goes on to stipulate that member nations take care to ensure that local and national "measures relating to qualification requirements and procedures, technical standards and licensing requirements do not constitute unnecessary barriers to trade in services," and to guarantee that our domestic laws are "not in themselves a restriction on the supply of the service."

What those provisions mean is that a foreign company would be empowered under CAFTA to challenge the validity of our immigration laws. If an international tribunal rules against us, Congress would then be forced to change our immigration laws or face international trade sanctions. These tribunals have the authority to rule that U.S. immigration limits, visa requirements, or even licensing requirements and zoning rules are "unnecessary burdens to trade" that act as "restrictions on the supply of a service."

This hidden legislation to open the U.S. border is only the beginning.

The chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means, which oversees most international trade matters, believes that these kinds of immigration provisions are fair game for future trade deals as well.

If CAFTA were really just about trade, the agreement would be little more than a few pages long, declaring that tariff treatment for U.S. and Central American goods will be on a reciprocal basis. But it isn't. In reality, CAFTA is about expanding a growing body of international law that supersedes our own.

If CAFTA is approved, Congress' "exclusive" authority to regulate immigration policy will be subjugated to the whim of international tribunals and trade panels ---- in much the same way that Congress' once supreme constitutional authority to "regulate commerce with foreign nations," has already been largely ceded to the WTO.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: aliens; borders; cafta; caftalicense; ftaa; hemispheric; immigrantlist; immigration; integration; nafta; redistribution; tancredo; wealth
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
To: hedgetrimmer
Thanks for the ping. I guess that answers my question about South American, etc.

But think of the benefits! A bike path and hiking trail practically from pole to pole, with rest stops and canteens all along the way! Wowzie!!!

/sarc

21 posted on 07/18/2005 12:36:52 AM PDT by Eastbound (Jacked out since 3/31/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Thanks for the ping, hedge. I will let my congressperson know to look carefully at that language.


22 posted on 07/18/2005 4:52:18 AM PDT by MACVSOG68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Are you trying to say it would be a bad thing to wake up one morning and find two hundred million third world illiterate invaders crowding our streets?


23 posted on 07/18/2005 5:37:53 AM PDT by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (Google search North American Community.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FBD

"- This appears to be the reason our immigration laws are not being enforced."

I also came to that conclusion several weeks ago. It was a real rude awakening for me when I realized what was going on.


24 posted on 07/18/2005 5:41:06 AM PDT by GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer; Willie Green; Wolfie; ex-snook; Jhoffa_; FITZ; arete; FreedomPoster; Red Jones; ...
For example, buried among its nearly 1,000 pages, the agreement contains an expansive definition of "cross-border trade in services." This definition would give people in Central American nations a de facto right to work in the United States.

Why isn't it on the front in the bold print so the Congressmen voting for the bill will see it?

25 posted on 07/18/2005 6:03:25 AM PDT by A. Pole (For today's Democrats abortion and "gay marriage" are more important that the whole New Deal legacy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
What those provisions mean is that a foreign company would be empowered under CAFTA to challenge the validity of our immigration laws. If an international tribunal rules against us, Congress would then be forced to change our immigration laws or face international trade sanctions. These tribunals have the authority to rule that U.S. immigration limits, visa requirements, or even licensing requirements and zoning rules are "unnecessary burdens to trade" that act as "restrictions on the supply of a service."


26 posted on 07/18/2005 6:43:33 AM PDT by Paul Ross (George Patton: "I hate to have to fight for the same ground twice.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer; FBD
This appears to be the reason our immigration laws are not being enforced.
Precisely the reason.

If I am not mistaken, our immigration laws are being enforced, or at least an attempt is being made, for OTM (other than Mexican) at the moment.

They ARE NOT being enforced for Mexican ILLEGAL CRIMINAL INVADERS because NAFTA gave the Mexicans and Canadians the legal right to invade.

This also explains why there was no outrage when el Presidente Fox, had a booklet printed with explicit directions on how to invade the US, condemned the US for not allowing the ILLEGALS to vote, challenged Arizona on the passage of a law to restrict freebies to ILLEGALS in the world court ... it is all part of NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA.

These lead to a couple of other "trade treaties" and voila ... no sovereignly, no country, just international rule and law under the UN. It is called ONE WORLD ORDER.

27 posted on 07/18/2005 7:15:47 AM PDT by Just A Nobody (I - LOVE - my attitude problem!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

28 posted on 07/18/2005 7:41:47 AM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody; 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 3rdcanyon; 4.1O dana super trac pak; ...

Check out post #27, just in case there's any doubt about what CAFTA will cost us in terms of border security...


29 posted on 07/18/2005 7:43:22 AM PDT by HiJinx ("A landowner has no duty to aid trespassers." ~ U.S. District Court Judge John M. Roll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: janetgreen
Wait until the CFR gets into the act! Will any American have a job?...

I read my printout from the CFR yesterday re "THE NORTH AMERICAN THINGY"! 21 pages. We think CAFTA is bad, everyone should go to the CFR site and read this thing!

30 posted on 07/18/2005 7:53:30 AM PDT by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: meema
We think CAFTA is bad, everyone should go to the CFR site and read this thing!

What the CFR has planned for America is a nightmare. We will no longer be a sovereign nation if they get their way.

We all need to write our Senators and Representatives and ask them straight out what their opinion of the CFR's plan is. That way we'll know where their loyalties are and vote accordingly in the next election.

31 posted on 07/18/2005 7:59:33 AM PDT by janetgreen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody
When NAFTA was coming up for a vote I went into Cong. Packards office and pointed out the language on the last page of the congressional summary which was over 40 pages long the exact provisions of the elimination of our sovereignty and the current and future planing for a one world government and was told that those things in NAFTA were only conjecture and had nothing to do with the agreement.

NATA had CAFTA and future agreements along with the formation of a similar Asian formation, a single currency, and the future melding of the Americas, European, and Asian groups into one written right into it and I couldn't get anyone to listen.
32 posted on 07/18/2005 7:59:53 AM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: HiJinx

Protect our borders and coastlines from all foreign invaders!

Be Ever Vigilant!

Minutemen Patriots ~ Bump!


33 posted on 07/18/2005 8:01:49 AM PDT by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: janetgreen
We will no longerbe a sovereign nation it they get their way.

And they know it, so they try to use weasel words at times to sort of backtrack.
Gov Weld was one of the participants in the part I read.

34 posted on 07/18/2005 8:04:48 AM PDT by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: janetgreen
We also need to make sure that we stop electing people to office that has any affiliation whatsoever with the CFR.

We also should produce legislation that will disband that organization on grounds of their seditious actions.
35 posted on 07/18/2005 8:15:26 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross

A spot on illustration of the issue.


36 posted on 07/18/2005 8:16:16 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)

>"It was a real rude awakening for me when I realized what was going on."<

-Likewise, for me.


37 posted on 07/18/2005 8:16:25 AM PDT by FBD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Justanobody

good point -Mexico and Canada get a free pass


38 posted on 07/18/2005 8:18:24 AM PDT by FBD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dalereed
I couldn't get anyone to listen.

You must be just one of the sheeple.
As I understand it, our Reps rarely know what is in these things. I wonder if they did not listen due to pure ignorance, or willful disrespect for you, our country and our sovereignty.

As someone up thread has said, it is time for "We the people" to take our country back.

39 posted on 07/18/2005 8:19:37 AM PDT by Just A Nobody (I - LOVE - my attitude problem!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dalereed
I couldn't get anyone to listen

Next time take a group of people.

The leftists also use techniques of harrasment and sit ins and such. What can we do to be more politically effective? Is it time to take on the tactics of the left? Or is there a better way?

Certainly a FAST grassroots campaign in each and every one of our neighborhoods is in order to help Americans understand, and to end run around the MSM.
40 posted on 07/18/2005 8:19:57 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson