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

To: hedgetrimmer; Eagles Talon IV
The dishonesty is in calling these trade deals "agreements" when they are, in effect, treaties.

There is certainly dishonesty regarding this issue but it's not coming from the pro-CAFTA side.

Fast track does not dilute the power of Congress to regulate trade:

Under fast-track authority, trade agreements are submitted to Congress for an up or down vote under rules barring committee or floor amendments. Fast track does not give the President a blank check to negotiate trade agreements, nor does it undermine the constitutional prerogatives of Congress, which defines the objectives and limits of the President's negotiating authority in the legislation granting fast track. During any trade talks, the Administration must consult frequently with the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee, and special advisers designated by Congress. Only Congress has the final say on any trade agreement negotiated by the President.

Fast-Track Negotiating Authority: The Facts

Fast Track and trade agreements have been going on for a long time. If they were unconstitutional, as you are trying to claim here, they would have been challenged in court a long time ago. Are you aware of any pending or settled litigation challenging the constitutionality of trade agreements or Fast Track?

Ron Paul is also trying to sell this turkey and is a director of The Liberty Committee, which is a well funded PAC. Certainly he could use these resources to challenge this in court. Or, maybe, he knows he has no real argument and is just continuing to use this non-issue as a means for receiving media attention, raising funds and creating a national base of support. Do you think he has higher aspirations than the House of Representatives?

72 posted on 07/29/2005 9:01:15 AM PDT by Mase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: Mase
Under fast-track authority, trade agreements are submitted to Congress for an up or down vote

This means that Congress cannot amend the agreement. You can see that is unconstitutional can't you?
82 posted on 07/29/2005 9:20:10 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

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