 |
|
|
 Editorials | Opinions | October 2007 
'Does SPP + TTC + NAFTA = NAU ?'
 William D. Bailey - American Daily
go to original
 |  | The current direction is for all of this to happen without any Congressional approval. . . just regulations and directives. |  | |
In 1799, in a communication to Elbridge Gerry, Thomas Jefferson said the following: “I am for free commerce with all nations, political connection with none, and little or no diplomatic establishment.” This statement by Jefferson has a profound bearing on the title of this article.
Obviously, in order to understand the “equation”, you have to have knowledge of what each of the components stand for. As this develops, I believe you will see the serious significance involved and how it relates to the further reduction and diminishing of the sovereignty of the United States of America.
In March, 2005, the President of the United States, the President of Mexico and the Prime Minister of Canada met in Texas for the creation of the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). This new agreement was never submitted to the Congress for debate, discussion and/or decision. It was, rather, given to the Department of Commerce where a new division was created (under the same title) to implement working groups in the following areas: manufactured goods, movement of goods, energy, environment, e-commerce, financial services, business facilitation, food and agriculture, transportation and health. All aimed at formulating a working agenda that would result in the advancement of a North American Union (NAU).
To document that this was not some minor action, it must be understood that SPP is headed by three top cabinet officers of each country. Representing the United States are Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, Security of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The representatives from Canada and Mexico are, likewise, heads of top departments in the respective governments.
This is not a theoretical exercise being undertaken by any of the “think tanks”. Instead, SPP is at work producing an action agreement that, as presently planned, will be implemented directly by regulations/directives without any envisioned direct Congressional input, oversight, or approval. At this point in time, no new laws are contemplated for submission to Congress. This means that the plan is aimed at creating the NAU through agency regulation/directives.
If implementation of this plan is allowed to continue, there will be no area of immigration policy, trade rules, environmental regulations, capital flows, public health, plus dozens of other key policy areas that the U.S. government will be able to decide alone, or without first consulting some appropriate NAU regulatory body.
It appears that the current direction is following the “road-map” laid out in the May, 2005 report from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) titled, “Building a North American Community”.
The end result of all of this on the sovereignty of the U.S. should be obvious. The model is the European Union. While we would, supposedly, remain as a country many of our prerogatives would be superceded by a North American court and parliamentary body and the dollar would become the “Amero”.
Again, the current direction is for all of this to happen without any Congressional approval. . . just regulations and directives.
On to the next component in the equation.
The Trans Texas Corridor (TTC) is a product of one of the other components of the equation, the North America Free Trade Alliance (NAFTA). NAFTA envisioned a super corridor straight through Texas.
Some of the best information available on the TTC is available from an organization called “Corridor Watch” and can be found at their website: www.corridorwatch.org. Here is just an overview.
As presently envisioned, the TTC will be a quarter of a mile wide, straight up the center of Texas taking an estimated 580 million acres of private land (much of it prime Texas farmland) by Eminent Domain. This would displace more than one million Texans.
The full plan for the TTC by the Texas Transportation Commission (TxDOT) outlines 4,000 miles of corridors that crisscross the state. The corridor is so wide that it will literally divide the state in two. Since the plan provides for very few overpasses, the TxDOT has basically told local communities that if they want overpasses they will have to provide them. The estimated cost for an overpass is about $2.5 million each. Without overpasses, fire, police and ambulances will be unable to serve their communities.
Car lanes will be in the center of the corridor with few opportunities to get on and off the TTC. Communities that now depend on traffic from existing highways for services such as gas and restaurants will lose that business.
A Spanish company, Cintra has a 50-year lease to build and operate the TTC. Under the lease, Cintra will establish facilities down the center of the corridor and control that business.
Under the lease, the state has signed a comprehensive lease agreement that gives Cintra absolute guarantees of a specific rate of return on its investment. TxDOT is turning over assets paid for by the taxpayers of Texas and guaranteeing that no highway will compete in any way with the TTC. To achieve these revenue guarantees, there is no way for the Texas government to control what Cintra charges for tolls and there will be no alternative route for drivers to take if the tolls are too high.
According to Corridor Watch, the TTC is being built for only one reason---massive profits for corporations who want the highway to run goods as cheaply as possible. Once built, there will be no chance for anyone or any community in its path to obtain justice for property taken or the reduction of toll rates. Local courts will have no say in the matter. All disputes will be handled by an International court system either through NAFTA or the SPP.
Revelation of the previous facts has caused an uproar in the grassroots and in the Texas Legislature.
One state north of Texas, and the next planned stop on the TTC is Oklahoma. To say the least, it is not receiving a favorable response from Oklahomans. According to an article by Tom DeWeese (10/16/07 at www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese, “Anti-NAU Warriors Beginning to Move the Rock Uphill”) Oklahoma State Senator Randy Brogdon has said, “The NAFTA superhighway stops here." Brogdon was instrumental in stopping a bill brought before the Oklahoma Legislature (HB1917) that would have pre-authorized the TTC north into Oklahoma. Brogdon is now leading efforts to withdraw Oklahoma’s membership in North America’s SuperCorridor Coalition, Inc. (NASCO) saving the state a $25,000 annual membership fee. For Oklahoma to drop its NASCO membership would send shock waves throughout the nation and would certainly lead other states to follow leaving huge holes in NASCO’s influence.
Added to the opposition forming in Texas and Oklahoma, is the opposition of the million-member strong International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Union President James Hoffa has said that he believes the plan goes deeper than just stopping competitive trucks. “I am convinced that the plan to create a North American Union is what is going on,” Hoffa stated.
Now . . . add to all of this the recent book published by former Mexican President Vincente Fox, “Revolution of Hope”. At page 101, Fox writes, “I proposed a NAFTA Plus plan to President Bush and Canada’s Prime Minister Chretien to move us toward a single continental union, modeled on the European example”. On the next page, Fox notes that the White House was reluctant for this theme to be discussed openly. (Note the word, “openly”).
I believe enough was written and spoken about NAFTA back in the 1990’s when it was approved that space doesn’t need to be taken here.
In sum, the old adage, “where there’s smoke, there must be fire” has an application to this equation. When you add SPP to TTC to NAFTA, you (almost) inevitably come to the conclusion that there is a real plan pointing us toward a North American Union.
While I don’t have anthing in particular against Mexico or Canada, I am a proud American and while I don’t have a lot of them, I prefer the dollar to the “Amero”.
I believe that we should do all in our power to let it be known that Americans will not support nor tolerate this undertaking. |
| |
|
Vallarta Weddings
Tell a Friend
Site Map
Print this Page
Email Us