posted 11-25-2003 11:08 AM            

By Keith Allison, D.Dn.
Nov 24, 2003, 04:00

While perusing the various news sources I read daily, I ran across an article in News With Views by Joan Veon titled "A Done Deal: Free Trade Areas of The Americas." Ms. Veon's article was, to say the least, mind boggling; and if it is as accurate as I believe it is, then it helps explain, in part, why government entities at all levels have refused to do anything about our porous borders with Canada and Mexico.

In her article, Joan mentions that in 1994, she read an obscure article in The Washington Times about how "Jack Kemp wanted a common currency for all of the countries of the Western Hemisphere." She also stated, "The article vaguely referenced the historic summit in Miami called the Free Trade Areas of the Americas which called for the integration of all of the countries of this hemisphere." After further research, Joan concluded, "The Clinton Administration was putting together a regional free trade zone that would not only expand NAFTA, but would basically look like the European Union and that it was to be completed by the year 2005." Joan mentioned that President Bush is doing nothing to discourage this plan. During her research, she found "Not one word about it by the mainstream press."...

The apparent results of the negotiations between the various presidents and prime ministers of the Nations of The America's, is a "Hemispheric Constitution" that will replace our U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence.

(PAN AMERICAN UNION)

Those who have followed the international machinations of our leaders and the bureaucracy are already aware of how we are losing jobs to foreign nations such as China, Pakistan and India. As a result, you should also be aware of how many of our international/regional trade agreements place American manufacturers, farmers and ranchers at a disadvantage with their foreign counterparts. American businesses are required to abide by a plethora of restrictions, rules, and/or environmental laws that make it all but impossible for them to compete in the international/regional marketplace.

One example I can cite as a fact is the growing and marketing of asparagus in and around Yakima, Washington. The company that packs asparagus in this vicinity has informed the local growers, "We will no longer be purchasing or packing any locally grown asparagus. We can buy it from Peru and have it shipped to Yakima for less than it costs to buy the local grown product."

Unfortunately, even though these products may be obtained from foreign markets at a lower initial cost, those costs do not translate into lower prices in the American market place. In case you haven't noticed, the cost of fruits, vegetables and meat have continued to rise at your local supermarket.

For decades, Washington State apples have dominated the international apple market. But for some time now, American apple farmers have been unable to complete with low cost fruit from New Zealand, China and other countries. Because of the low prices for fruit and the so-called Growth Management Act, many of the orchards in the state are being ripped out and the ground left fallow. Canadian farmers are allowed to ship their grain and other crops into the U.S. almost at will, but American farmers find it next to impossible to export many of their crops to Canada.

As shown by the recent outbreak of Hepatitis A on the east coast, an outbreak purportedly caused by the importation of green onions from Mexico, this does not bode well for the health of American citizens. That is but one of a multitude of consequences we will be forced to deal with if American farmers are put out of business.

Another thing Joan pointed out is how our money must be devalued if there is to be parity between the dollar and other countries currencies. This, of course, means that our standard of living must drop and we will be required to put out significantly more money for our food, clothing and oil based products. So what do we get in exchange for having to pay out more and more of our hard earned money for these needed commodities? The answer is simple my friends, increased drug trafficking between the U.S. and Central and South America, and the loss of our God given rights as free Americans.

Although the president has no constitutional authority to control trade, Congress has given him "trade promotion authority." This purportedly gives the president authority to "make any trade agreement that would benefit the U.S. economy without additional Congressional input." What additional authority does the Congress intend to bestow on the president. Or, shall we soon be obliged to refer to him as "King George?"