THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
From the InterNet....
---------------------------------fwd----------------------------------
THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION:
A THREAT TO AMERICAN (AND CONGRESSIONAL) INDEPENDENCE
by Rep. Duncan Hunter
To understand the proposed World Trade Organization (WTO) buried
in the new General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Americans
need not pour over the 22,000 page text regarding the treatment of
various U.S. industries. Instead, we need only focus on four central
provisions of the deal. Each, if accepted, would give away a piece of
America's power and independence.
The first of these "Big 4" provisions is in Article IX. It
states that decisions by the World Trade Organization "shall be taken
by a majority...each member of WTO shall have one vote." Folks, this
gives Fidel Castro in Cuba the same vote as the United States. It is
just like the General Assembly of the United Nations, with one vital
difference. There is no Security Council in the WTO to give the U.S.
a veto as in the UN. Eighty-three countries that will be members of
the WTO have already shown their attitude by voting more than half
the time against the U.S. in the UN General Assembly.
U.S. Trade Representative Mickey Kantor, who negotiated this
deal on behalf of President Bill Clinton, has tried to argue that the
WTO would not be another UN because "economic realities differ from
the political motivations that affect voting in the UN." But you have
to be hopelessly naive to think that politics and economics are not
intertwined. They certainly have been at the UN where Third World
voting blocs constantly push schemes for global income
redistribution.
But the Third World is not the only threat. The European Union
has 12 votes now and this total will increases as East European
states join. The EU has been a strong backer of the WTO idea.
The second of the "Big 4" provisions is also in Article IX. It
gives the WTO the "exclusive authority" to interpret the GATT and
thus the reach of its own power. As the American Founding Fathers
knew, the power to interpret the rules is tantamount to writing the
rules. Thus the U.S. Constitution divided power into Executive,
Legislative and Judicial branches. There is no such division in the
WTO. Thus the same Third World super-majority that changes a
provisions under Article X, section 4 can then interpret that
provision under Article IX, section 13. America's one little vote
won't even slow the process down.
The third of the "Big 4" provisions in the GATT-WTO is in
Article XVI, section 5. It states "No reservations may be made in
respect to provisions of this Agreement." This means that Congress
cannot "fix" the agreement. All the plans various members of Congress
have drawn up to protect American interests via enabling legislation
are prohibited by the WTO. The WTO does not have to accept any limit
a national government wishes to place on it.
Thus the next time your business or your job is threatened by
cheap Third World labor, don't bother calling your Congressman to
complain. The first vote Congress casts in favor of the WTO will also
be the last meaningful vote it will ever cast on trade policy. From
then on, the power to oversee the nation's trade will rest in Geneva,
not Washington.
The last of the "Big 4" provisions is in Article XVI, section 4.
"Each nation will ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations and
administrative procedures with its obligations as provided in the
[GATT-WTO] agreements." So folks, if you're looking for Congress' new
role in trade policy here it is. Our job will be to change American
laws to conform to the supreme law of the World Trade Organization.
Though the U.S. Constitution grants to Congress the right to regulate
foreign commerce, woe be it to any Congress that attempts to insert a
little "American interest" into American law!
Peter Sutherland, the current Director-General of GATT, has
lashed out at the notion that national governments had the right to
reject WTO rulings. In a London speech June 16, he said "What this
amounts to is a country choosing to be above the law whenever it is
convenient." Above WTO law that is. Don't put Mr. Sutherland down as
undecided on America's right to reject decisions made by Cuba, Rwanda
or Bangladesh. The U.S. is locked in even as the American people are
locked out.
What about America's arch-trade rival Japan? Tokyo has already
shown a willingness to buy votes in international bodies. Japan has
long tied the bulk of its foreign aid to specific economic gains.
Like the wily French police chief in Casablanca, observers are
constantly "shocked, shocked" that such deals are being cut. The U.S.
is unwilling to "dirty its hands" by using such methods. Thus Japan
will win in the WTO while the U.S. loses.
America's main source of legitimate strength is its large,
affluent domestic market. But we are surrendering our right to use
this strength on our own accord whether to protect the American
public or as leverage to open foreign markets. Worse, we are granting
to the WTO the right to determine the economic future of our children
in an agreement already signed by the president and now only awaiting
a solemn pledge of obedience from the Congress.
-------------
Duncan Hunter is a Republican Member of Congress from California.
**********
---------------------------------fwd----------------------------------
THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION:
A THREAT TO AMERICAN (AND CONGRESSIONAL) INDEPENDENCE
by Rep. Duncan Hunter
To understand the proposed World Trade Organization (WTO) buried
in the new General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Americans
need not pour over the 22,000 page text regarding the treatment of
various U.S. industries. Instead, we need only focus on four central
provisions of the deal. Each, if accepted, would give away a piece of
America's power and independence.
The first of these "Big 4" provisions is in Article IX. It
states that decisions by the World Trade Organization "shall be taken
by a majority...each member of WTO shall have one vote." Folks, this
gives Fidel Castro in Cuba the same vote as the United States. It is
just like the General Assembly of the United Nations, with one vital
difference. There is no Security Council in the WTO to give the U.S.
a veto as in the UN. Eighty-three countries that will be members of
the WTO have already shown their attitude by voting more than half
the time against the U.S. in the UN General Assembly.
U.S. Trade Representative Mickey Kantor, who negotiated this
deal on behalf of President Bill Clinton, has tried to argue that the
WTO would not be another UN because "economic realities differ from
the political motivations that affect voting in the UN." But you have
to be hopelessly naive to think that politics and economics are not
intertwined. They certainly have been at the UN where Third World
voting blocs constantly push schemes for global income
redistribution.
But the Third World is not the only threat. The European Union
has 12 votes now and this total will increases as East European
states join. The EU has been a strong backer of the WTO idea.
The second of the "Big 4" provisions is also in Article IX. It
gives the WTO the "exclusive authority" to interpret the GATT and
thus the reach of its own power. As the American Founding Fathers
knew, the power to interpret the rules is tantamount to writing the
rules. Thus the U.S. Constitution divided power into Executive,
Legislative and Judicial branches. There is no such division in the
WTO. Thus the same Third World super-majority that changes a
provisions under Article X, section 4 can then interpret that
provision under Article IX, section 13. America's one little vote
won't even slow the process down.
The third of the "Big 4" provisions in the GATT-WTO is in
Article XVI, section 5. It states "No reservations may be made in
respect to provisions of this Agreement." This means that Congress
cannot "fix" the agreement. All the plans various members of Congress
have drawn up to protect American interests via enabling legislation
are prohibited by the WTO. The WTO does not have to accept any limit
a national government wishes to place on it.
Thus the next time your business or your job is threatened by
cheap Third World labor, don't bother calling your Congressman to
complain. The first vote Congress casts in favor of the WTO will also
be the last meaningful vote it will ever cast on trade policy. From
then on, the power to oversee the nation's trade will rest in Geneva,
not Washington.
The last of the "Big 4" provisions is in Article XVI, section 4.
"Each nation will ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations and
administrative procedures with its obligations as provided in the
[GATT-WTO] agreements." So folks, if you're looking for Congress' new
role in trade policy here it is. Our job will be to change American
laws to conform to the supreme law of the World Trade Organization.
Though the U.S. Constitution grants to Congress the right to regulate
foreign commerce, woe be it to any Congress that attempts to insert a
little "American interest" into American law!
Peter Sutherland, the current Director-General of GATT, has
lashed out at the notion that national governments had the right to
reject WTO rulings. In a London speech June 16, he said "What this
amounts to is a country choosing to be above the law whenever it is
convenient." Above WTO law that is. Don't put Mr. Sutherland down as
undecided on America's right to reject decisions made by Cuba, Rwanda
or Bangladesh. The U.S. is locked in even as the American people are
locked out.
What about America's arch-trade rival Japan? Tokyo has already
shown a willingness to buy votes in international bodies. Japan has
long tied the bulk of its foreign aid to specific economic gains.
Like the wily French police chief in Casablanca, observers are
constantly "shocked, shocked" that such deals are being cut. The U.S.
is unwilling to "dirty its hands" by using such methods. Thus Japan
will win in the WTO while the U.S. loses.
America's main source of legitimate strength is its large,
affluent domestic market. But we are surrendering our right to use
this strength on our own accord whether to protect the American
public or as leverage to open foreign markets. Worse, we are granting
to the WTO the right to determine the economic future of our children
in an agreement already signed by the president and now only awaiting
a solemn pledge of obedience from the Congress.
-------------
Duncan Hunter is a Republican Member of Congress from California.
**********
Comments
Post a Comment