straightUp Loc: California

I the spirit of Thanksgiving (and since this is a political site, hence the challenge, LOL)...

I am THANKFUL for President-elect Donald Trump's declared opposition to the Trans-Pacfic Trade Agreement.

This has always been one of the thorns in my side regarding the Obama Administration. Actually, I have always opposed the neo-liberal use of these so-called "free-trade" agreements that overrule the power of individual democracies to react and defend themselves from exploitation. This wasn't obvious to me when Reagan started to conceive NAFTA as an answer the Treaty of Rome, (the fetus that became the European Union). Although, I was already starting to second-guess my vote for Reagan, I was still under the impression that a North American "common market" would be a good idea. But I had a lot to learn about politics. I started to get suspicious when Reagan signed Trade and Tariff Act in 1984 which defied the Constitution by taking the responsibility for trade negotiation away from Congress (representatives of the people) and giving to the Executive Branch (elected dictatorship) under the "fast-track" excuse that I only became too familiar with in later years. With that out of the way, the POTUS was now empowered, in a way the founding fathers never intended, to negotiate trade without our consent. (because the PEOPLE take too long to make decisions) When I started looking into this I found the attack on the Constitution's Commerce Clause actually started in 1974 under Gerald Ford.

1789 - U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 (Powers of Congress), Clause #3 (Commerce Clause)
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

1947 - General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)
Multilateral agreement regulating international trade. Basically, this was the foundation of "free-trade". It's purpose was to break down tariffs and other trade barriers erected by governments trying to protect their people and their resources such as the tariffs Trump is promising. It was signed following the failure of countries negotiating under the UN to create the International Trade Organization (ITO). GATT essentially became the first step in providing an alternative global authority to the human rights minded UN for global "free-trade".

1974 - Trade Act of 1974
Created "fast-track" authority for the President to negotiate trade agreements that Congress can approve or disapprove but cannot amend or filibuster. This was signed by President Ford in time to provide him with more power to negotiate agreements during the Tokyo Round under the GATT agreement. This was the first law to strike a blow to the Commerce Clause of the U.S.Constitution.

1984 - Trade and Tariff Act of 1984
Increased the power granted to the President by the Trade Act of 1974 to include cases previously deemed "unfair" under Section 301 of the 1974 Act. The bill was sponsored by Democrat Sam Gibbons and signed into law by President Reagan and was a second blow to the Commerce Clause of the U.S.Constitution. This act also cleared the way for fast-track negotiations with Canada that provided groundwork for NAFTA. That year, Reagan campaigned on a promise for a North American common market that would also include Mexico.

1992 - NAFTA as a draft plan was officially signed by Bush, Salinas and Mulroney.

1993 - NAFTA, following legislative processing and ratification in all three countries was signed into law by Clinton.

1995 - The Marrakesh Agreement created the World Trade Organization (WTO) to replace the GATT agreement with a functioning government that embodies it's principles and creates the foundation for "free-trade" which has since grown in power to such proportions that it has become the closest contemporary approximation to a one world government.

The WTO and it's neo-liberal agenda has become the #1 target of both western protests and Islamic terrorists. It should not be a surprise that the main target of the 9/11 attacks was the World Trade Center. The WTO continues to pursue "free-trade" policies that benefit global investors while exploiting the resources and the people in "member" nations. It has gained the alliance of sovereign executives that have pulled power away from their respective democracies to comply with the agreements against the better interests of their people. It has established international courts in which private investors can sue sovereign governments for any attempt to protect their workers or their resources when such protections violate the agreements which people have less and less control over. And... unlike the UN, the WTO has no policy or concern for human rights.

As Americans we should understand that this is a force far greater than the partisan battle we spend so much time toiling over. Both Republicans and Democrats have been marching to the beat of neo-liberal "free-trade". Ford, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and even Obama fell in line once he got to the White House. I think people are finally shaking themselves from the slumber of outdated cold-war propaganda and are realizing there's a new threat that has materialized while we were sleeping. Hillary and Trump both tapped into this, both of them stating their opposition to the TPP, the latest of the GATT-based, WTO-sponsored, pro-money, anti-people agreements. But I was half expecting Hillary to stop talking about it as soon as she won the election. Maybe Trump will be different. I hear him talking about imposing tariffs... garlic to the vampires of the WTO.

I don't know if he has the strength and the capacity to pull through, but he certainly has no lack of audacity and if nothing else he might bring the true enemy of people all around the world to a sharper light and for that at least, I am thankful.

America Only Loc: From the right hand of God

Here I thought a thankful day would be here, to know you choked on some chicken and the ambulance did not make it on time.....drats!

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

Thanks for the info , I am not informed enough to judge this info but it seems all pryer free trade agreements are not FAIR trade agreements and our negotiators tend to GIVE away the farm then agree to BUY it back so to speak .. Any way thanks ..

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Thanks for all the info. Very enlightening. Fair trade sounds good but it seems we have been swapping jobs for cheaper goods. I for one would pay more if it kept jobs in the hands of American Families.

straightUp Loc: California

I think many of us feel the same way, but it seems less apparent these days what products are actually made by American workers. When making a decision between cell phones for instance, you wouldn't think the Asian company Samsung uses more American workers to make their S-series phones than the American company Apple does to make their iPhones which are almost entirely made in Asia.

straightUp Loc: California

Yes, I believe you are essentially correct in suggesting that our negotiators have been giving away the farm and agreeing to buy it back. Such unfair deals have long been the practice of colonialism (in fact it was the primary cause for the American Revolution) but the players of the game have changed in the last half of the 20th century. Empires have lost their colonies and it seems the powers that once controlled them are now themselves controlled by a new master, the global capitalist under which we are ALL being exploited, multilaterally, by these unfair trade deals.

vernon

the most american made u s car is toyota.