Do we want the
USMCA – a treaty/agreement
between the United
States, Mexico and
Canada?
I have no doubt
but that President Trump
has America's best interests
at heart. To his credit,
he signed off to take us
out of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP), a trade
agreement that is detrimental
to America's best
interests. Also, he campaigned
on getting us out
of NAFTA for the same
reason.
Thus, we could
question why has he now
come up with USMCA,
which is to replace
NAFTA, but which also
has many of the bad
aspects of NAFTA, plus
more. It could be because
he has trusted Robert E
Lighthizer, his trade negotiator.
Lighthouser is a
twenty-three year veteran
of the globalist Council on
Foreign Relations (CFR).
Also, Wilber Ross, his
Secretary of Commerce,
has said that TPP should
be the foundation on
which NAFTA should be
renegotiated.
The CFR has a
history of promoting programs
which would
destroy American independence
and advance
global organizations and
governing bodies with the
ultimate goal of having a
one-world government.
Thus, depending on advisors
who have that mind
set will inevitably result in
outcomes that are beneficial
to globalist's goals.
No doubt there
are some good features in
USMCA, mainly those
affecting trade. But, we
must consider that trade
is only a part of the document.
There are many
issues that are definitely
otherwise.
There is a section
on Labor that has dictates
for businesses requiring
them to address "the
opportunities of a diverse
workforce, including: ...
promotion of equality and
elimination of employment
discrimination in
the areas of age, disability,
race, ethnicity, religion,
sexual orientation, gender
identity ... and protection
of migrant workers." All
of these are unquestionably
unconstitutional and
far removed from the free
enterprise system our
country has enjoyed and
to the prosperity which
has been the result.
Another subject
covered is migration,
which is more accurately
called an invasion.
USMCA could serve as
the mechanism for an
invasion similar to what
has happened in the
European Union. To
quote USMCA, "No party
shall adopt or maintain ...
a measure that ... imposes
a limitation on ... the total
number of natural persons
that may be
employed in a particular
financial service sector or
that a financial institution
or cross-border service
supplier may employ ... in
the form of numerical
quotas or the requirement
of an economic needs
test." And it requires us to
"ensure that migrant
workers are protected
under its labor laws,
whether they are nationals
or non-nationals, of the
country they are residing
in." This clearly undermines
control over our
border security measures.
The USMCA sets
up a Free Trade
Commission to oversee
the committees on:
Agricultural Trade, Rules
of Origin and Origin
Procedures, Textile and
Apparel Trade Matters,
Customs and Trade
Facilitation, Technical
Barriers to Trade, Government Procurement, Transportation Services,
Financial Services,
Telecommunications, Intellectual Property
Rights, State-Owned
Enterprises and
Designated Monopolies,
the Environment, Small
and Medium-Sized
Enterprises Issues, North American Competitiveness, Good
Regulatory Practices and
Private Commercial
Disputes. That pretty
much covers every aspect
of life.
USMCA sets up
international dispute
Settlement Bodies that
have the inherent power
to override our laws and
courts. "The Parties shall
establish by the date of
entry into force of this
Agreement and maintain
a roster of up to 30 individuals
who are willing to
serve as panelists. The
roster shall be appointed
by consensus...Each...panelist
shall: (a) have expertise
or experience in international
law, international
trade". If you think it is
difficult fighting city hall
– how would it be taking
on the unelected thirty
bureaucrat "panelists"
who will rule on what we
are allowed to do according
to international law.
And, ultimately,
the most egregious of all
is that USMCA would be
a step in the process of
establishing the North
American Union (NAU)
which is the merging of
America, Mexico and
Canada into one governing
body. America would
be defined only by a line
on a map. There would be
no constitutional protections
of our God-given
rights, no borders or
immigration restrictions,
no preservation of our
culture. We would be citizens
of the NAU.
This would
evolve, just as it has been
done in what was once the
continent of Europe, filled
with independent sovereign
nations, but is now
the European Union (EU).
Being sold on "good trade
agreements", the various
countries relinquished
their sovereignty bit by bit
until now they have none
left. Once sovereignty is
compromised a country is
on the path to the loss of
that country.
We are a resilient
country. We can and have
survived many challenges
with determination and
honor. But, if we lose our
sovereignty, we lose
America and all the greatness
it has been. |