Posted on 06/13/2005 9:43:45 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
International trade agreements, meant to open new markets and expand existing ones, may have exposed state law to the unexpected meddling of foreign governments.
Attorneys general from 29 states, including Utah, have signed a letter requesting more involvement in ongoing negotiations conducted by the U.S. trade representative. The letter, released Tuesday but sent May 31, is in response to a recent appellate ruling that could allow foreign companies to circumvent Internet gambling bans.
"That an international body could somehow deny us state rights, that is just outrageous," said Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, who drafted the letter with Vermont's top lawyer, William Sorrell.
The letter criticizes the April ruling on U.S. Internet gambling laws by the World Trade Organization's appellate court. Antigua challenged the U.S. ban on online gaming, which has become a large part of the island nation's economy. While the ruling was mixed, the appellate body decided gambling does fall under the General Agreement on Trade in Services, commonly referred to as GATS.
Utah and Hawaii are the only two states that ban gambling in all forms.
The ruling didn't lead to any direct change to Utah's gambling prohibition, but it did open the state to future challenges by international companies wanting to offer betting on horse races.
In response, the 29 attorneys general want the United States to withdraw from the gambling provision in GATS. Federal officials have the ability to do so, but could face trade penalties. The state attorneys say sovereignty is more important than the monetary consequences.
"States should continue to have the flexibility and sovereign authority to determine whether and under what conditions gambling occurs within our borders, without such decisions being subject to second-guessing by WTO tribunals," the letter reads.
The concerned attorneys say Internet gambling is just the beginning of an onslaught of foreign challenges to U.S. laws.
The April ruling prohibited a "quota of zero," meaning any ban on a service violates GATS.
This could result in challenges on restrictions for new billboards, anti- laws and bans on dumping of toxic waste, the letter states. Another concern is the regulation of utilities, which are essentially government-sponsored monopolies.
The office of the U.S. Trade Representative produced two "fact sheets" after the Antigua decision meant to calm fears that trade courts could strike down state laws.
"The bottom line is that nothing the United States is offering in these negotiations would require the state to make any changes in their laws," the sheet says.
"That's their spin," retorts Shurtleff. "We clearly believe that [GATS] opens the door for future challenges to state sovereignty."
The attorneys general want to OK any future agreements and they ask federal negotiators to "not dismiss out of hand legitimate concerns about restrictions that today's trade agreements place on domestic policy-making."
Bountiful Republican Rep. Sheryl Allen said attorneys general should participate in trade negotiations. "If more eyes are looking at these things, this will be a really good oversight for the protection of state rights," she said.
Allen is a member of the Intergovernmental Policy Advisory Committee, a select group of representatives who review trade proposals and make recommendations to federal trade representatives.
She said most of the advisory committee share her concern for state rights.
"We are not trying to turn the clock back on trade, we just want to make sure we are doing the job right," Allen said.
Besides having attorneys general review the agreements, Allen said Utah could coordinate better with the state's designated "point of contact." Federal trade representatives are required to inform one person in each state government, in Utah's case, a member of the governor's office.
Allen said such information never makes it to legislators. She wants the Legislature to become involved either by creating a committee or assuming some sort of oversight over that "point of contact" person.
"States absolutely need more involvement," Allen said.
FYI
Internet gambling is here, unless they are going to go the way of the RIA and start suing/arresting grannies they are going to find a way to live with it.
Sorry Utah and Hawaii.
Interesting that Hawaii bans gambling, can any wise Freeper explain that?
Not just internet gambling. Technology is fast making it impossible for the State to keep apart willing buyers and willing sellers. Which in my view is an excellent development.
"That an international body could somehow deny us state rights, that is just outrageous,"
And yet, why am I not surprised that we allow an International law to trump our own...
Some people will buy into anything Hedge, as long as it's wrapped in a pretty box with a bow on top.
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.