Post by unlawflcombatnt on Apr 23, 2007 14:22:07 GMT -6
Below are excerpts from a March 22nd article in the Billings Gazette (Montana) written by Alan Merrill & David Sirota. The title is Fast-track trade authority hurts Montana farmers, workers. The article describes how Presidential Fast-Track Authority is exacerbating our trade deficit and costing Americans jobs and depressing wages. The article is specific to Montana. However, the same general problems are occurring throughout the U.S. as a result of Fast-Track Authority. It's the opinion of the authors that Fast-Track is probably the worst of the Corporate-favoring, wage-suppressing, & job-killing trade legislation on the books.
"Fast-track trade authority hurts Montana farmers, workers
By ALAN MERRILL
and DAVID SIROTA
As "fast track" trade promotion authority comes up for congressional reauthorization, we felt it important to clear up a few misconceptions about this rather convoluted issue. Proponents of "fast track" would have you believe the debate is about supporting trade versus opposing trade. In fact, the issue at stake is creating trade policy that works for all Americans, not just huge multinational corporations. But to examine the issue, one must first understand what "fast track" is.
The "fast track" trade promotion authority, masterminded by Richard Nixon, gives the executive branch virtual free reign to negotiate international trade agreements, giving Congress only a simple yes/no vote and limiting debate to 20 hours. If this all seems a bit complex, perhaps we should turn to the Constitution, which may shed some light on the matter of who should regulate international trade:
"The Congress shall have the Power To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations" (Article I, Section 8)"
The article goes on to further describe the effects of Fast-Track on the local economy (Montana).
"Fast track is not helping Montana's farmers. Since 1994, when fast track paved the way for NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), over 225,000 family farms have gone belly up. Likewise, the net farm income of small family farms has dropped 200 percent. Most chilling, however, is the most recent USDA report, which found that since last August the United States has become a net food importer....
Fast track creates jobs in China and India. In the wake of fast track, the U.S. has lost a sixth of all manufacturing jobs, and the numbers grow as high-tech jobs are outsourced.
U.S. workers can expect little in terms of reward. Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics show that the net average increase in Americans' pay over the last 34 years, adjusted for inflation, was 5 cents.
Fast track is causing our trade deficit. Prior to the implementation of fast track, the US maintained trade balances or small surpluses since WWII. Since "fast track", the United States has maintained a trade deficit in all but one of the last 30 years. The past 13 years of aggressive fast track use have seen deficits explode from $130 billion in 1994 to $800 billion in 2006...."
Sirota goes on to point out that Fast Track negotiations are done behind closed doors, and are not open to the public.
"Fast track is not democratic or constitutional. International trade is the purview of Congress, not the president. Trade agreements negotiated using fast track are done behind closed doors, with corporate interests. Moreover, ratified agreements automatically change thousands of non-trade laws passed by Congress. Because the agreements are federal law, they trump state and local laws. Corporations can then sue states and municipalities whose statutes stand in the way of their profits. This amounts to de facto international governance of local areas...."
In other words, state laws can be overruled by an non-American international organization. If a local or state law interferes with Corporate profits, application of that law can be appealed to a still "higher" authority: an International court. In other words, the rulings of the International bodies supersede all American law, and potentially even the U.S. Constitution.
Sirota sums it up by stating:
"As the Constitution states, Congress - not the president - should be negotiating trade deals. Any deals must be fair to both industry and agriculture, here and abroad. They need to address the unsustainable trade deficit fast track has left us with. Finally, they should include democratic input, and respect states' rights to govern themselves.
We must change direction and begin to forge trade policy that works for all Montanans."
Yes, and trade policy that works for ALL Americans as well.
The full article can be found at:
www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2007/03/22/opinion/guest/50-montana.txt
"Fast-track trade authority hurts Montana farmers, workers
By ALAN MERRILL
and DAVID SIROTA
As "fast track" trade promotion authority comes up for congressional reauthorization, we felt it important to clear up a few misconceptions about this rather convoluted issue. Proponents of "fast track" would have you believe the debate is about supporting trade versus opposing trade. In fact, the issue at stake is creating trade policy that works for all Americans, not just huge multinational corporations. But to examine the issue, one must first understand what "fast track" is.
The "fast track" trade promotion authority, masterminded by Richard Nixon, gives the executive branch virtual free reign to negotiate international trade agreements, giving Congress only a simple yes/no vote and limiting debate to 20 hours. If this all seems a bit complex, perhaps we should turn to the Constitution, which may shed some light on the matter of who should regulate international trade:
"The Congress shall have the Power To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations" (Article I, Section 8)"
The article goes on to further describe the effects of Fast-Track on the local economy (Montana).
"Fast track is not helping Montana's farmers. Since 1994, when fast track paved the way for NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), over 225,000 family farms have gone belly up. Likewise, the net farm income of small family farms has dropped 200 percent. Most chilling, however, is the most recent USDA report, which found that since last August the United States has become a net food importer....
Fast track creates jobs in China and India. In the wake of fast track, the U.S. has lost a sixth of all manufacturing jobs, and the numbers grow as high-tech jobs are outsourced.
U.S. workers can expect little in terms of reward. Bureau of Economic Analysis and Bureau of Labor Statistics show that the net average increase in Americans' pay over the last 34 years, adjusted for inflation, was 5 cents.
Fast track is causing our trade deficit. Prior to the implementation of fast track, the US maintained trade balances or small surpluses since WWII. Since "fast track", the United States has maintained a trade deficit in all but one of the last 30 years. The past 13 years of aggressive fast track use have seen deficits explode from $130 billion in 1994 to $800 billion in 2006...."
Sirota goes on to point out that Fast Track negotiations are done behind closed doors, and are not open to the public.
"Fast track is not democratic or constitutional. International trade is the purview of Congress, not the president. Trade agreements negotiated using fast track are done behind closed doors, with corporate interests. Moreover, ratified agreements automatically change thousands of non-trade laws passed by Congress. Because the agreements are federal law, they trump state and local laws. Corporations can then sue states and municipalities whose statutes stand in the way of their profits. This amounts to de facto international governance of local areas...."
In other words, state laws can be overruled by an non-American international organization. If a local or state law interferes with Corporate profits, application of that law can be appealed to a still "higher" authority: an International court. In other words, the rulings of the International bodies supersede all American law, and potentially even the U.S. Constitution.
Sirota sums it up by stating:
"As the Constitution states, Congress - not the president - should be negotiating trade deals. Any deals must be fair to both industry and agriculture, here and abroad. They need to address the unsustainable trade deficit fast track has left us with. Finally, they should include democratic input, and respect states' rights to govern themselves.
We must change direction and begin to forge trade policy that works for all Montanans."
Yes, and trade policy that works for ALL Americans as well.
The full article can be found at:
www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2007/03/22/opinion/guest/50-montana.txt