Posted on 05/31/2007 6:06:33 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
NAFTA SUPERHIGHWAY | An urban myth or reality?
Super suspicious foes
The government denies any such plans, but campaign against it continues.
By MATT STEARNS
McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON | If the government really has a secret plan for a 12-lane road-and-rail NAFTA Superhighway that will split the heartland from Mexico to Canada, it is playing with a great poker face.
There is absolutely no U.S. government plan for a NAFTA Superhighway of any sort, said David Bohigian, an assistant secretary of commerce.
Sen. Kit Bond, a Missouri Republican and a powerful member of committees that would authorize and pay for a NAFTA Superhighway, if one were being planned, dismissed the notion as unfounded theories with no credence.
And yet:
Responding to denials, Rep Virgil Goode, a Virginia Republican, the chief sponsor of the House resolution opposing the NAFTA Superhighway, scoffed: Ive heard that line before. Theyre just calling it something else Its a decrease in our security and an erasing of our borders.
Goode is hardly alone: His resolution has attracted 21 co-sponsors, from both parties.
Authorities say the whole idea, inspired by the free-trade agreement signed by the U.S., Mexico and Canada, is an Internet-based urban myth fueled by fear and suspicion.
Those accused of selling out U.S. sovereignty by shilling for a superhighway say that legitimate efforts to increase trade efficiencies through international cooperation, technological enhancements and infrastructure improvements have been turned into something sinister.
For example, conspiracy theorists see Kansas City as a pivotal point for the superhighway because of Kansas City SmartPort, an effort to turn the region into a transportation and logistics center. Officials are working with Mexico to establish an inland customs facility for exports of U.S.-made goods only, not, as some fear, as a security-reducing inland port for imports from Mexico and Asia, said Chris Gutierrez, president of SmartPort.
We get hit with it all the time, said Danny Rotert, a spokesman for Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Missouri Democrat. Its on some weird set of talking points. They say well actually cede sovereign U.S. land to Mexico. People call and complain about it all the time. We try to explain thats not the case.
Here is what Paul, a GOP presidential candidate, told a New Hampshire audience: They already have a plan for a highway running from Mexico up to Canada, a 12-lane highway with trains running in the middle. Its going to be an international highway. And theres been some secret funding already into our budgets to start this program moving. Theres going to be eminent domain powers used to confiscate tens of thousands of acres to build this.
Variations on the theme abound.
Conservative commentator Pat Buchanan says it will be a 10-lane highway, not 12, but adds that it will include oil and gas pipelines.
Running for Congress last year in Kansas, Democrat Nancy Boyda, who campaigned against the superhighway, warned that 30,000 acres of private land in Kansas would be taken to build it. Boyda defeated five-term incumbent Rep. Jim Ryun, who called the superhighway a myth.
Others see it as a first step in an effort to erase national borders and sovereignty and unite all of North America into a single union, with one currency.
Its a drift toward a European Union, Goode said. I dont want to have one currency for all North America. I support our country being our country.
Those convinced that the NAFTA Superhighway is coming point to several disparate efforts that they say prove that the government isnt telling the whole truth:
Bohigian, the trade official whose portfolio includes the SPP, said the effort is intended only to reduce the cost of trade and improve the quality of life through efforts such as decreasing the wait time for trucks idling at international borders. Reducing the average wait time from 35 minutes to six minutes has saved more than $1 billion, Bohigian said.
But Boyda said: These are legitimate questions. This is an issue about trade, jobs and security.
oh, Spanish! Well that makes a great deal of difference since there are no competent American companies to build highways.
The only time public works projects (including defense) whould go to a foreign-tax-paying entity is when they have technology that US firms do not have to substantially benefit the contract.
“Is Halliburton a corporate fascist? Boeing?””
Neither Halliburton, nor Boeing are US corporations anymore (or will be for long).
Halliburton is moving corporate HQ to Qatar.
Boeing president Phil Condit has publicly stated he does not want Boeing to be an American corporation (implying he has no nationalistic allegience to the USA.)
“Boeing’s CEO Phil Condit two years ago expressed his hope that the world, 20 years hence, would no longer see Boeing as an American company but a global one.”
http://www.buchanan.org/pa-98-0630.html
“Nobody takes WND seriously....(well almost nobody)”
Nobody should take ad hominem attacks, like yours, seriously.
Freerepublic was founded for the purpose of debating facts in the media from any and all sources while avoiding emotional ad hominems which is the tactic of leftists.
Can you show evidence that WND is any less credible than the Wash Post or NYT, for instance?
HAL is remaining an American company, it’s only moving its HQ to Dubai.
It’s no wonder, though, that American companies move overseas — we tax them to death.
I certainly take WND more seriously than any of the MSM.
Usually they just move the paperwork to Cayman islands or some such. Halliburton is moving execs and families.
What kind of disengenous little pissants give up their country for tax reasons when they are already making millions personally?
You might ask WHY corporations are fleeing the USA. Too many blood suckers. Trial lawyers and politicians with an endless appetite for buying votes with other people’s money to stay in power.
A publicly owned corporation looks out for it’s stock holders. We’ve made America inhospitable to business by eying corporations as a bottomless pit of money to plunder.
I know why very well. The corps do have sufficiewntly powerful lobbying capacity if they needed to change laws.
They aren’t going to avoid taxes by moving their CEO. The reason for the move is that deep-water drilling will be the future of oil exploration, and it’s more profitable in that part of the world. No one is “giving up their country.” But many companies do leave the US, and it’s no one’s fault but our government’s for making us so business-unfriendly.
Does Mr Bohigian mean this Superhighway that isn't being planned by these people??
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.