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

Skip to comments.

Say Yes! to Presidential Trade Authority!
Email ^ | Jack Oliver, Deputy Chairman, RNC" <eLeader@mail.echampions2000.com>

Posted on 01/09/2002 3:13:53 AM PST by Neets

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last
To: DeaconBenjamin
I believe that most free trade laws are a good idea and are good for the US economy. I don't mind shipping off broom making jobs to some 3rd world country. What I do mind is sending jobs, prodcuts, and equipment overseas that have not been cleared by national security (because of Ron Brown at Commerce, etc.). It scares me to know that the US under Klinton sent China buttloads of technology in about every field (industrial, mechanical, electronic, aeronautic, manufacturing, you name it) that will come back and bite us in the future because they have used it for their military.

Being a supporter of free trade, I believe that trade agreements should be passed by Congress as stipulated by law. I don't like vesting too much power in the executive branch, but I understand that there are tons of leftist who have unions lean on congressmen to stop these sort of things from going through. Fast track authority is there to avoid this, but I am sure that rubber stamping economic treaties is good thing. Unfortunately I don't have a better idea to make a bridge between free trade and union/socialist lobby group pressure.

21 posted on 01/09/2002 10:43:02 AM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator
I believe that trade agreements should be passed by Congress as stipulated by law.

What if that law is in conflict with the Constitution? Trade agreements are treaties. The basis for ratification of treaties is set forth in the Constitution. The Constitution does not grant Congress the unilateral authority to modify the terms by which trade agreements, or other treaties, are ratified (just as Congress lacks authority to otherwise amend the terms of the Constitution outside of the provisions of Article V [which requires state participation]).

Your support for fast track authority appears to be in conflict with your expressed preference for interpretation of the Constitution. In other words, fast track authority appears to be consistent only with a living, breathing Constitution. Do you agree?

22 posted on 01/10/2002 7:55:58 AM PST by DeaconBenjamin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 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