Posted on 09/13/2016 6:23:36 AM PDT by VitacoreVision
Citing wasted tax dollars and attacks on the constitutionally guaranteed liberties of the American people, Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.; shown) introduced a bill to restore U.S. sovereignty and withdraw from the United Nations. The effort to de-fund and exit the UN comes amid growing scrutiny of the global organization, often ridiculed as the “dictators club,” and myriad mega-scandals swirling around it. However, despite ever-growing support in Congress for restoring U.S. sovereignty by withdrawing from the UN over the years, the legislation still faces an uphill battle.
In a statement last week announcing the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2015 (H.R. 1205), Rep. Rogers noted that many of his constituents in East Alabama would likely agree with his position that U.S. government participation in the UN should end immediately. “The U.N. continues to prove it’s an inefficient bureaucracy and a complete waste of American tax dollars,” the congressman said, echoing widespread concerns about the international outfit expressed across America and worldwide.
“Why should the American taxpayer bankroll an international organization that works against America’s interests around the world?” asked Rep. Rogers. “The time is now to restore and protect American sovereignty and get out of the United Nations.” He cited attacks on U.S. liberties as a key motivation for the legislation.
Several other liberty-minded congressmen have also sponsored the legislation including constitutionalist Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Rep. John Duncan (R-Tenn.), Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.), and Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.). A previous bill to withdraw from the UN introduced in the last Congress by then-Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) garnered nine co-sponsors. With the regime ruling Communist China increasingly taking a leading role at the UN, among numerous other concerns, opposition to the global body is expected to continue growing.
If approved, the legislation would repeal the UN Participation Act of 1945 and shutter the U.S. government’s mission to the outfit. It would also “terminate all membership by the United States in the United Nations, and in any organ, specialized agency, commission, or other formally affiliated body of the United Nations.” That specifically includes UNESCO, which President Ronald Reagan withdrew from, along with the World Health Organization, the UN Environment Program (UNEP), and more. It would end all U.S. involvement in all UN conventions and agreements, too.
The proposed law, introduced in numerous legislative session of Congress in recent decades, would also end all funding to the UN and all of its agencies — with the estimated savings to taxpayers reaching into the billions per year, and potentially even more. The legislation also aims to end all U.S. military involvement in UN military “peacekeeping” schemes and ban U.S. troops from serving under UN command. Finally, the bill would seek to evict the UN and its dictator-infested headquarters from U.S. soil. It would also ban any use of American government facilities by the global outfit, while stripping UN bureaucrats and dignitaries of diplomatic immunity.
Rep. Rogers pointed to a wide range of reasons why the U.S. should dump the UN. “Although the United States makes up almost a quarter of the U.N.’s annual budget, the U.N. has attempted a number of actions that attack our rights as U.S. citizens,” he explained. “To name a few, these initiatives include actions like the Law of the Sea Treaty, which would subject our country to internationally-based environmental mandates, costing American businesses more money, or the U.N.’s work to re-establish an international regulation regime on global warming which would heavily target our fossil fuels.”
Indeed, especially in recent years, the UN has become increasingly brazen in attacking the rights of Americans, and even the U.S. Constitution that enshrines those unalienable rights. From attacks on free speech and gun rights to assaults on America’s federalist system of government and states’ rights, the UN and its member regimes have become increasingly aggressive. Now, the UN is working on a series of major schemes that would undermine even the principles upon which the United States was founded, much of it under the guise of promoting pseudo-human rights and pseudo-environmentalism.
Rep. Rogers took special aim at a UN gun treaty that has become a lightning rod for bipartisan opposition across America. “The U.N. has also offered a potential Arms Trade Treaty which would threaten our Second Amendment rights and impose regulations on our gun manufacturers, who are already facing regulations and pressure from the Obama Administration,” Rogers explained. That treaty, ATT for short, would purport to require gun registration and eventually strict controls, with the ultimate aim of disarming civilians.
The UN’s perceived anti-Israel bias, which some critics have even dubbed systemic anti-Semitism, also attracted criticism from Rep. Rogers. “Lastly, the U.N. does not support Israel and voted to grant the Palestinian Authority ‘non-member state’ permanent observer status,” he argued. “Anyone who is not a friend to our ally Israel, is not a friend to the United States.” Even some globalist neo-con senators such as Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have threatened the UN over its apparent hostility to Israel, and the outrage continues to grow.
For the reasons cited above, “among others,” Rep. Rogers said, he introduced the American Sovereignty Restoration Act. By introducing the bill in this session, the congressman from Alabama continues the long and valiant effort by lawmakers to get the U.S. government out of the UN. Former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), a GOP presidential candidate last election and a hero of many liberty-minded and constitutionalist Americans, first introduced the bill in 1997, when it garnered 54 supporters. The next time it was voted on, support had drastically increased.
While anti-UN sentiment is fierce and growing across much of America, in Alabama, where the legislation’s lead sponsor comes from, that animosity is especially pronounced. In 2012, for example, both houses of the state legislature voted unanimously to ban the deeply controversial UN “sustainable development” program known as Agenda 21 in what was hailed as a major victory for property rights and sovereignty. Since then, UN meddling in American affairs has accelerated dramatically, sparking even more outrage about the global organization across Alabama and beyond.
In the U.S. Senate, pro-sovereignty sentiment is also growing. Earlier this year, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a leading contender for the 2016 nomination, blasted the UN and suggested it should be dismantled. “I dislike paying for something that two-bit Third World countries with no freedom attack us and complain about the United States,” explained the senator, who is also Ron Paul’s son. “There’s a lot of reasons why I don’t like the UN, and I think I’d be happy to dissolve it.”
The American public generally shares those sentiments, with a 2014 Gallup poll showing that a staggering 57 percent of Americans believed the UN was doing a “bad job,” versus 37 percent who thought it was doing a “good job.” More than two thirds of Americans were upset with the UN, and independents were also overwhelmingly opposed. But even among Democrats, half thought the UN was doing a bad job. The Obama administration, meanwhile, apparently out of step with the American people, has called for drastically expanding and empowering the UN and its scandal-plagued military forces.
The legislation to withdraw U.S. participation in the UN is currently sitting in the House Foreign Affairs Committee chaired by Rep. Edward “Ed” Royce (R-Calif.), who will play a key role in deciding whether it moves on to the full House for a vote by the American people’s elected representatives. Americans who support U.S. sovereignty and the U.S. Constitution should urge their representatives to take action.
As efforts to fully restore U.S. sovereignty proceed, though, the Republican Congress should completely de-fund the UN in the meantime. Without action, the increasingly powerful and lawless UN will continue seeking to further empower itself at American expense — trampling on liberty and sovereignty in the process.
Related articles:
Sen. Rand Paul Would be “Happy to Dissolve” the UN
Get the US out of the UN: Concerned Citizen Persuades Congressman
United Nations Exploits Pseudo-“Human Rights” to Attack U.S.
Bulgarian Communist Is Now “Frontrunner” to Lead UN
Whistleblower Targeted for Exposing UN Troops Raping Children
UN Seeks to Criminalize Free Speech, Citing “Human Rights”
UN Unveils Plot to Reduce African Population
UN-backed Forces Slaughter Christians in Ivory Coast
Obama Budget Supersizes U.S. Funding for UN, Global Military
China: Staking Claim in the New World Order
Merry Christmas: UN Declares Arms Trade Treaty to Go Into Effect Dec. 24
The United Nations: On the Brink of Becoming a World Government
They’d be pretty powerless with a much reduced contribution from the US to the kitty each year...It’s a useless organization that needs to disband PERIOD. The countries left to do their mischief would still find a way to do it without the UN..then countries would have a decision to make, wouldn’t they? Nothing says individual countries can’t go after the ones causing trouble WITHOUT the added complication of UN policy!
YES! Them get the U.N. OUT of th U.S.
Do it!
Agreed, but the sequence of events needs to be: cut off funding first, and push the UN offshore to some other country. Let it shrivel into irrelevance, and THEN exit on the grounds that it no longer has any purpose. Retain our veto until the UN can no longer cause any significant harm. If we bail out first, the UN will still have a few years of influence before it collapses, and could wreak much havoc without the US participating.
Such an abrupt departure might also prompt some other major power to step in and try to keep it afloat, such as the EU apparatus in Brussels, or Russia, or even some of the Middle Eastern monarchies. Granted that they wouldn’t be able to keep it going for very long, but they might be able to run it long enough to really foul things up, especially for Israel.
The UN has long tried to assert jurisdiction over the non-territorial areas of the ocean. Imagine a UN treaty, agreed to by all remaining members minus the US (or at least the major members), granting Russia exclusive control of the Arctic ocean, and China full authority over the entire South China Sea (and then some). If all the rest of the world more or less agrees to it, how could we gainsay it short of military conflict?
These guys should arrange a meeting with Trump so that it gets on his “First 100 Days” hit list of things to do. ;-)
It won't go anywhere this time around, but it's still a good idea.
Is it 1985 again?
This has to happen if America is going to remain a sovereign nation like the Native American nations are.
Mike Rogers will forever have my full support for introducing this Bill.
Is it 1985 again?
_____________________
No, but IMHO if this had been done in 1985 America would now be immeasurably better off.
First step should be to kick the UN out of the US.
No more enjoying the use of prime New York real estate courtesy of the US taxpayers. Let them go have their meetings in some other country.
Be careful LP. You are making rational statements that are likely to get you tarred as a “globalist” around here.
Without US money the UN would quickly devolve to the condition of the EU.
Real power brokers, what?
And that's why we were yelling for it in 1985.
True, but the EU still wields considerable influence, and so would the UN at least for a time. The US must not relinquish its leverage in that body until it is so withered that it can no longer cause any real trouble. The best solution would be for the US to choke off funding to the point that other countries start bailing out first. Once the exodus becomes significant, it becomes much easier to walk away citing a general lack of participation.
Not to mention, if we stay in for a while after we cut down the influx of cash, it’s easier to deflect accusations of deliberate sabotage. After all, “we’re still participating, right? Surely the UN is about international relations, not money”?
YES!!! This is so so awesome.
This is going to cause a few UN pukes to have a pantload.
agenda 21 ping
Simply defund the UN criminal enterprise.
You make valid points, but I suspect that the UN would just collapse if the US left it. US money props it up, and if we shuttered the place all of these freeloaders would need to relocate from their plush offices in NYC to some other country.
They should go where they are needed. Syria sounds like a good fit.
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.