 |
 |
||
click
Posted on 09/05/2004 5:52:32 PM PDT by backtothestreets
The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) would be the campaign issue of this election if either party did not endorse it. The effect of this accord will make our Constitution bow to this international body. The original deadline of May 2004 was purposely and deliberately changed to Jan 2005, after our elections.
"We direct our Ministers to ensure that negotiations of the FTAA Agreement are concluded no later than January 2005 and to seek its entry into force as soon as possible thereafter, but in any case, no later than December 2005."
SOURCE: Deadline
"We have a great vision before us: a fully democratic hemisphere, bound together by good will and free trade. That is a tall order. It is also the chance of a lifetime. And it is the responsibility we share."
President George W. Bush
April 21, 2001
"Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA): The FTAA will extend the benefits of free trade to countries throughout the Hemisphere. When completed, the FTAA will be the largest free trade area in the world, with a combined GDP of more that $10 trillion and 800 million people. The Bush Administration is committed to concluding FTAA negotiations by January 2005 and to implement the agreement no later than December 2005. The President will seek Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) from the U.S. Congress to enable his Administration to negotiate trade agreements more easily."
SOURCE: Fact Sheet President's Speech at the Summit of the Americas
"President Bush and the other Leaders welcomed recent progress made on the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) at the November, 2003 FTAA Ministerial in Miami, endorsed the Miami framework, and reaffirmed the agreed timetable of completing negotiations by January 2005." January 13, 2004
SOURCE: WHITE HOUSE FACT SHEET
(Excerpt) Read more at ftaa-alca.org ...
Amongst incumbents, a few Representatives maybe.
Name me a Senator and it'll make my day.
The Summit of Americas is completely separate and has nothing to do with the FTAA.
Stop alarming people, by deliberately muddying the water.
The FTAA is just want it says, a TRADE agreement.
The Summit of Americas is where everyone goes to release some hot air to make themselves feel good, but nothing comes of it. There is nothing binding about what is said. It's like another useless UN-like thing, just for "the
Americas".
And it has absolutely nothing to do with the FTAA.
All the "scary stuff" you were quoting is from the Summit of Americas, NONE of it is from the FTAA, for the simple reason, that the FTAA doesn't have anything to do with any of it.
"The Bush Administration is committed to concluding FTAA negotiations by January 2005 and to implement the agreement no later than December 2005."
In other words we haven't agreed to anything yet, we are still NEGOTIATING.
Just Damn
BingoTTT
I've noticed that a lot of the people that piss and moan about the NAFTA and FTAA or CAFTA or whatever really just don't know crap about these agreements. They don't understand how they work, they don't understand what they cover, and they don't understand the process of implementation.
What I really couldn't believe is that someone on here was complaining about the US ending farm subsidies. Is this still a conservative board?
The FTAA (economic intregration) is just one working group under the Summit process.
http://www.summit-americas.org/
http://www.alca-ftaa.org/Summits_e.asp
Summit of the Americas - Trade
Read here: http://www.summit-americas.org/Quebec-Trade/trade-eng.htm
This section of the Quebec City Plan of Action addresses trade and investment in the hemisphere, its economic and financial stability, and corporate social responsibility. Each of these initiatives, which involves the FTAA negotiations, cooperation among the Hemisphere’s finance ministers and the promotion of corporate social responsibility, contributes to meeting the leaders’ commitment to hemispheric integration and national and collective responsibility for improving economic well-being throughout the region.
Key documents in the area of Trade, Investment and Financial Stability:
Antecedents of the FTAA Process
http://www.alca-ftaa.org/View_e.asp
The effort to unite the economies of the Americas into a single free trade area began at the Summit of the Americas, which was held in December 1994 in Miami, U.S.A. The Heads of State and Government of the 34 democracies in the region agreed to construct a Free Trade Area of the Americas, or FTAA, in which barriers to trade and investment will be progressively eliminated. They agreed to complete negotiations towards this agreement by the year 2005 and to achieve substantial progress toward building the FTAA by 2000. The Heads of State and Government further directed their ministers responsible for trade to take a series of concrete initial steps to achieve the Free Trade Area of the Americas. Their decisions regarding these steps are contained in the Miami Summit's Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action.
...
Double BTTT
Well I don't know everything there is to know about the NAFTA agreement, but I do know 32,000 pages is a lot of government legalease.
We can carry out trade with any nation we desire right now at this very moment. Please gift us with your deep well of knowledge, as to why we should sign another binding agreement like NAFTA, when it isn't necessary for the conduct of trade.
That's a pretty good synopsis. The trouble is, that it left out some not so good aspects of NAFTA. When we sign these binding agreements, they hobble us. We make deals that sound oh so good in advance, but then when reality strikes, we can't adjust internal matters because it violates an agreement. In essence it takes our decision making capabilities away. That can only be described as a loss of self-determination. It's a loss of sovereignty. We capitulate a bit of sovereignty every time we sign these.
Those who oversee those agreements, the WTO or whatever other organization that pops up, becomes the ruler of our sovereign decision making process. We no longer control it.
When U.S. companies were being taxed on profits in Europe, the United States forgave their U.S. tax obligation. It considered a U.S. tax obligation to amount to double taxation. Well Europe disagreed. They appealed to the WTO and the WTO agreed. Europe didn't want to compete with the U.S. on a fair footing, so they manipulated the system.
U.S. companies would have to submit to double taxation before they could compete in Europe. Is that right? Should we be happy about relinquishing our sovereign decision making on this topic. Hell no.
You mention that NAFTA has leveled the playing field. No it hasn't. Mexican food production industries don't have to match U.S. regulations when it comes to producing food.
Mexican strawberries could be irrigated with water contaminated with human waste in Mexico. That wouldn't stand a snow-ball's chance in hell of happening in the U.S. Labor laws, manufacturing workplace laws, a whole host of unfair advantages saw Mexico the big winner there.
NAFTA was sold as a way to stop illegal immigration. Did it? No. In fact many of the factories that went to Mexico were closed so we could send those jobs to China. NAFTA failed miserably for Mexico.
Mexican truck were allowed to enter the United States under NAFTA, but NAFTA forgot to demand that those trucks adhere to U.S. traffic regulations. That issue still hasn't been resolved to our satisfaction nearly a decade later. Now the WTO has ruled that the U.S. has no other choice but to adhere to it's NAFTA agreements, allowing sub-par equipment into the United States, free to roam where-ever they please.
Now, is that going to creat fair competition with U.S. truckers? How could it. Salaries won't be comparable. Mexican trucks dead-heading back to Mexico are going to put a lot of U.S. truckers out of work. Is that a benefit?
Man, these agreements screw us in ways we never imagined up front. I say, "To hell with them." The United States conducted productive positive trade with nations all over the world before these hairbrained agreements came along.
I do not support them. I fight them where ever possible, and I will continue to do so.
This isn't a socialist vs a republican arguement. It's a sovereignty over a relinquishing sovereignty arguement.
All I can say is WTF!, more AHs!
FREE TRADE AREA OF THE AMERICAS
EIGHTH MINISTERIAL MEETING
MIAMI, USA
November 20, 2003
MINISTERIAL DECLARATION
INTRODUCTION
1. We, the Ministers Responsible for Trade in the Hemisphere, representing the 34 countries participating in the negotiations of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) held our Eighth Ministerial Meeting in Miami, United States of America, on November 20-21, 2003, in order to provide guidance for the final phase of the FTAA negotiations.
2. We recognize the significant contribution that economic integration, including the FTAA, will make to the attainment of the objectives established in the Summit of the Americas process: strengthening democracy, creating prosperity and realizing human potential. We reiterate that the negotiation of the FTAA will continue to take into account the broad social and economic agenda contained in the Miami, Santiago and Quebec City Declarations and Plans of Action with a view to contributing to raising living standards, increasing employment, improving the working conditions of all people in the Americas, strengthening social dialogue and social protection, improving the levels of health and education and better protecting the environment. We reaffirm the need to respect and value cultural diversity as set forth in the 2001 Summit of the Americas Declaration and Plan of Action.
...
http://www.ftaa-alca.org/Ministerials/Miami/Miami_e.asp
|
|
||
click
FTAA= More illegal drugs and illegal aliens with the USA making pacts and agreements with socialist Central and South American Countries.
The elemenation of the American way of life.
I'm not asking or expecting anyone to take my opinions as fact. Everyone needs to make themselves aware of this issue. Do not expect either major political party to openly discuss the FTAA. Look to leaders they trust. Contact truly conservative organizations they trust. Do a search on the Internet with just the terms FTAA +editorial and browse the thousands of editorials for an organization that merits your trust, and read their opinion.
Representative Tom Tancredo (R-CO) has clearly and correctly warned:
"There are people in the [Bush] administration, and in Mexico, and in Congress, who believe that we should do away with borders entirely. Their ultimate goal is to create this hemispheric ‘free trade’ area consolidating all of North and South America into some kind of ‘United States of the Americas.’"
"National borders will become like state borders. There will no longer be an immigration problem, because there will be no more immigration – only migration of populations at will."
These two quotes are from the "Stop the FTAA" website.
There are barely two months to go until the general elections. If the opponents (myself included) of the FTAA are correct, this will be the last elections as a truly sovereign nation. It may also help to glimpse our own constitution once again and see there is no provision that forbids the government from subjecting our nation to an regional or international body.
If we stay the course, national borders will become like state borders, and not exclusively on trade. A driver's license issued in any of the 34 member states will be honored in all member states. Immigration will cease and be replaced by migration at will.
I saw that remark too, but from an entirely different perspective. I don't agree with government subsidies, but I strongly support the sovereign right of each nation to establish policy within their own borders. In the referenced post, the WTO, not our government exercised policy making decisions.
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.