Posted on 08/02/2016 2:53:58 PM PDT by VitacoreVision
The voters of the United Kingdom stood up for British national sovereignty with their recent decision to leave the European Union (EU), and now Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is suggesting that he might take the lead in the United States leaving the World Trade Organization (WTO).
When NBCs Chuck Todd asked Trump on Meet the Press if his punitive tariff plan for businesses that leave the United States could be nixed by the WTO, Trump responded strongly, It doesnt matter. Then were going to renegotiate or were going to pull out. These trade deals are a disaster, Chuck. World Trade Organization is a disaster.
Two issues divide global elites in America and Europe from their average citizens like no others immigration and so-called free trade deals. Both of these issues involve the move toward regional governments, and eventually a world government, and away from national independence. And Trump has taken the side favored by the general population in the United States.
Trumps comments resulted from a discussion of his plan to place punishing tariffs on businesses that fire all their workers and move their plants to other countries, such as Mexico. He has promised to impose tariffs ranging from 15 to 35 percent on companies that then try to sell their foreign-manufactured products inside the United States. The particular target that has raised Trumps ire is Indiana-based Carrier, which is moving its manufacturing south of the border. If theyre going to fire all their people, move their plant to Mexico, build air conditioners, and think theyre going to sell those air conditioners to the United States, theres going to be a tax, Trump vowed.
Of course, Todd cautioned Trump that such a plan would cause economic problems all over the world, giving the British exit from the EU as an example. Trump remained adamant, responding simply, Were going to do it.
Leaders from both parties took issue with Trump. House Speaker Paul Ryan, the highest-ranking elected Republican in the country, defended the WTO, saying it plays an important role of ensuring other countries meet their obligations and dont violate agreed upon rules. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee was quick to disagree with Trump, as well: While the WTO sint perfect, our membership in this organization is essential to making American products more competitive and attractive around the world.
Brady carried former President George W. Bushs free trade agenda, leading the successful effort to gain passage of the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). Bradys voting record is not considered particularly conservative, receiving a mere 56 percent Freedom Index score from The New American magazine, and an F on the Liberty Index from the Conservative Review. The Freedom Index score is determined by the fidelity of a member of Congress to the Constitution when they cast their votes in Congress.
The neoconservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute (AEI) also took issue with Trump. Claude Barfield, a senior fellow at with AEI, harshly condemned Trump. He clearly popped off without knowing anything about the WTO.
So, just what is the WTO? And how is Trumps opposition to it likely to affect the outcome of the presidential election? And finally, would American exit from the WTO cause economic problems for the United States?
The WTO is the successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and was created in 1994. The WTO, unlike GATT, was given the power to dictate settlements in trade disputes between nations. America has been sued before the WTO 126 times, including the recent case involving the rules of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which required country-of-origin labeling (COOL) for beef and pork. When Canada and Mexico challenges these rules at the WTO, Congress meekly repealed the opportunity for U.S. citizens to know from what nations their meat came from, and make up their own minds as to whether to buy that meat.
This is an example of how the national sovereignty of the United States is diminished by multilateral trade agreements such as the WTO. And this was part of the reason for Brexit the vast majority of the laws governing Great Britain did not come from the British Parliament, but rather from faceless bureaucrats at EU headquarters in Brussels.
Supporters of the WTO warn that the United States would be punished economically were it to leave the WTO. They argue that tariffs would be hiked on U.S. goods, intellectual property (patents and copyrights) would be stolen by foreigners, and foreign governments would subsidize competitors of American-made goods.
But is this true? After all, how many countries would really want to give up access to the largest market in the world the United States? And if free trade is truly a win-win, as its proponents often claim, why would they forego buying American-manufactured goods, just to punish the United States?
One must also consider the alternative of remaining in the WTO, and continuing to see our nations independent status whittled away over time. In June 1994, Representative Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, and delivered a summary of the consequences of America joining the WTO:
I am just saying that we need to be honest about the fact that we are transferring from the United States at a practical level significant authority to a new organization. This is a transformational moment. I agree. This is very close to Maastricht [the European Union treaty by which the EU member nations surrendered a huge amount of their national sovereignty], and twenty years from now we will look back on this as a very important defining moment. This is not just another trade agreement. This is adopting something which twice, once in the 1940s and once in the 1950s, the U.S. Congress rejected. I think we have to be very careful, because it is a very big transfer of power.
Unfortunately, Gingrich said he leaned toward joining the WTO, and later, as the soon-to-be speaker of the house, led the lame-duck Congress to approve of American entry into the WTO.
As The New American said in its September 2, 2013, edition, By approving our nations membership in the WTO and approving numerous free trade agreements that have followed, Congress has seriously undermined our national independence by unilaterally surrendering its constitutional power to regulate foreign trade to supranational tribunals and organizations.
Many Americans mistakenly believe that free trade agreements have something to do with free enterprise or free market economics. Actually, these agreements are not free trade, but rather managed trade managed by international bodies such as the EU and the WTO. But this mistaken idea that free trade is somehow free enterprise can fool many otherwise conservative Republicans into supporting these agreements.
If these agreements were truly free market concepts, one would expect liberals to oppose them. However, the elites on the left side of the political spectrum largely support the WTO and other such free trade arrangements, as well. For example, Ed Gerwin, a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute, a Democratic think tank, was quick to lambast Trumps suggestion that the United States leave the WTO. Its so incredibly poorly thought out, Gerwin said. Gerwin dismissed Trumps position as insane.
Gerwin contended that a U.S. exit would lead to unprecedented global economic chaos, plunge the U.S. into recession and destroy millions of good jobs. Theyd make Brexit look like an English garden party.
Labor union bosses are struggling with convincing their members that Trump is wrong on trade. Thea Lee, deputy chief of staff at the AFL-CIO, told Politico, If you poke just a little bit below the surface, you find that he offers no solution, no vision of how we ought to be involved in the global economy except that hes going to put his CEO friends in charge of negotiating better deals.
The idea that somehow this man is a champion of fair trade and pro-worker trade policies is absurd, Lee insisted.
Lees caustic comments are yet another illustration of the divide between elites (in this case, the union bosses) and average Americans (in this the unions rank-and-file members). The union bosses are concerned that many of their union members agree with Trump, and will vote for him. Trump is counting on the support of union members who like his trade ideas to help him win key industrial states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan in the general election.
Mitt Romney lost all three states to Barack Obama in 2012. Had he won them, he would have won the election.
More importantly, the American people are going to have to decide whether they are going to allow the continued loss of our national sovereignty through these global trade agreements, favored by global elites at the expense of the average American. This will be determined not only by how they mark their presidential ballot, but also their congressional ballot.
Get out of the UN at the same time. International Bank? Cut them off too.
Yes, please, please, please, leave, leave, leave!
How did nations trade before the wto
WooHoo...About time...
Love the Trump.
WIN WIN WIN
GATT. Before that World War II kind of put a crimp on things. Before that Smoot-Hawley.
I’m starting to like him more and more. I planned on voting for him already, but with hope that he will keep his word, this is making me feel better about that.
While we are at it, leave the UN too. Kick their asses out of NYC.
Each action like this is a bullseye hit on not just Trump supporters, but many Bernie supporters as well.
Trump is not just going for Republican voters, he’s going after AMERICAN voters. So long overdue.
Each strike like this and Clinton flails more and more.
And now the “Khan Con” is now being exposed by legitimate media.
Go Trump!
George Putnam used to say on his radio show, when breaking for a commercial, “NAFTA, GATT, WTO, the New World Order.”
A true patriot, he warned us about the globalist agenda decades ago. Rest in peace.
I love him more every day. Hillary is an unidicted criminal liar and influence whore. She also has memory problems on what she told the parents of the fallen in Benghazi that she left to die or — SHE LIED AGAIN.
One World, One People.
Open Borders
Free Trade
Karl Marx
If anyone ever bothered to read a little, you would find that Marx was fully in Favor of this for the sole reason that it would DESTROY NATIONS from within.
Bump.
Those two facts alone prove that we hold the cards when it comes to international trade, if we will only rediscover the backbone to take the lead. We should be pressing that dual advantage to reinvigorate our own economy. Other countries and/or companies want to siphon off our manufacturing base and jobs? Fine, then they won't have access to our consumer base without paying large tariffs. They want to engage in a trade war? Fine, then they can starve.
THAT'S how this game should be played.
Finally, someone will to talk about the emperor riding the elephant in the room.....
Get out anyway and give the UN an eviction notice too.
“Get out anyway and give the UN an eviction notice too.”
Amen!
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.