[Egon]

What is looks like is that through international trade agreements, that the federal government is providing for the welfare of business that trade internationally (whether they are based in the US or not), and they do not protect the welfare of the individual or the state, because it is the individual and the state being made to pay for federal government policies through job losses, and loss of economic bases state wide.

There are always going to be instances where the "general welfare" contradicts an individual's "welfare". The framers recognized this, which is why they explicitly made it part of the constitution. That said, I think you're right: it is over-stepped on a regular basis.

[hedgetrimmer]

That said, I think you're right: it is over-stepped on a regular basis.

Great, now we have a point we can agree.

Now lets talk about the US taxpayer. He is about to be stepped on by the extraction of money from their paychecks for "trade capacity building" in the CAFTA countries.

Where does the federal government get the authority to give money to an international body, called a "free trade" council to distribute taxpayer withholding money to central America?

Again, we are seeing that the government is not protecting the right of the individual to keep most of his paycheck, but now we are seeing the "right" of the corporation, ceded to them through the CAFTA agreement to distribute money in a foreign country so they can build the infrastructure and do business there.

Where does it say that the federal government must provide for the general welfare of foreign countries, as in providing money so that they can "participate in the global trading system", in the words of the WTO?