Congress

There are several US Congressmen speaking out about the NAFTA Superhighway, trans-texas corridor and a North American Union. One way to find this information is to go to http://www.house.gov/ and look up keyword relatiing to these issues. But, I will provide some links to make it easier.

A very interesting thing is that though the US federal government denies any involvement with these projects or a proposed plan for a North American Union, there has recently been a bill passed that specifically discusses the NAFTA Superphighway and a North American Union.

My point here is that if the government denies any such considerations and/or involvement, why pass a bill about it? Also, why would so many congressmen be so concerned?

Here is a list of some congressmen who are speaking about the issues, direct quotes friom their personal blogs, as well as links for you to read them yourself.


This one by Congressman Ron Paul, Texas comes directly from his personal blog is the one to pay close attention to:


The NAFTA Superhighway
October 30, 2006
By now many Texans have heard about the proposed “NAFTA Superhighway,” which is also referred to as the trans-Texas corridor. What you may not know is the extent to which plans for such a superhighway are moving forward without congressional oversight or media attention.


This superhighway would connect Mexico, the United States, and Canada, cutting a wide swath through the middle of Texas and up through Kansas City. Offshoots would connect the main artery to the west coast, Florida, and northeast. Proponents envision a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside.

This will require coordinated federal and state eminent domain actions on an unprecedented scale, as literally millions of people and businesses could be displaced. The loss of whole communities is almost certain, as planners cannot wind the highway around every quaint town, historic building, or senior citizen apartment for thousands of miles.

Governor Perry is a supporter of the superhighway project, and Congress has provided small amounts of money to study the proposal. Since this money was just one item in an enormous transportation appropriations bill, however, most members of Congress were not aware of it.

The proposed highway is part of a broader plan advanced by a quasi-government organization called the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” or SPP.

The SPP was first launched in 2005 by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco.

The SPP was not created by a treaty between the nations involved, nor was Congress involved in any way. Instead, the SPP is an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments. One principal player is a Spanish construction company, which plans to build the highway and operate it as a toll road. But don’t be fooled: the superhighway proposal is not the result of free market demand, but rather an extension of government-managed trade schemes like NAFTA that benefit politically-connected interests.

The real issue is national sovereignty. Once again, decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our Constitution-- which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade.

The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union--complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether.

A new resolution, introduced by Representative Virgil Goode of Virginia, expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a NAFTA superhighway, or enter into any agreement that advances the concept of a North American Union. I wholeheartedly support this legislation, and predict that the superhighway will become a sleeper issue in the 2008 election. Any movement toward a North American Union diminishes the ability of average Americans to influence the laws under which they must live. The SPP agreement, including the plan for a major transnational superhighway through Texas, is moving forward without congressional oversight-- and that is an outrage. The administration needs a strong message from Congress that the American people will not tolerate backroom deals that threaten our sovereignty.



Zach Wamp 3rd Tennessee


Wamp votes to block NAFTA "Superhighway"

May 24, 2007
The Department of Transportation has announced plans for a year long pilot program to begin implementing the NAFTA "Superhighway." This program will allow Mexican trucking companies to make international deliveries to the United States beyond the 20-25 mile commercial zones currently in place along the Southwest border.


This is a bad idea that I continue to fight. I am co-sponsoring H.CON. RES. 40 which will prevent the construction of a NAFTA Superhighway System or a North American Union with Mexico and Canada. I also supported the Safe Roads Act of 2007, H.R. 1773, which would limit the length and scope of the pilot program and block its implementation until U.S. truckers have similar access in Mexico. The bill would also put in place strict safety regulations for the Department of Transportation to follow in setting up the pilot program. This bill passed the House with my full support by a vote of 411-3.


Wamp Opposed to Department of Transportation pilot program allowing trucks from Mexico into US

March 16, 2007
The Department of Transportation has announced plans for a year long pilot program, in connection with the NAFTA "Superhighway." This program will allow Mexican trucking companies to make international deliveries to the United States beyond the 20-25 mile commercial zones currently in place along the Southwest border.



House and senate roadblock Mexican trucks

September 19, 2007
The Department of Transportation has announced plans for a year long pilot program to begin implementing the NAFTA “Superhighway.” This program will allow Mexican trucking companies to make international deliveries to the United States beyond the 20-25 mile commercial zones currently in place along the Southwest border.
Fortunately, the House and Senate have blocked the funding needed to implem ent the program. It is highly unlikely that Mexican truckers will be granted access beyond our commercial zones this year. I will continue fighting this bad idea. I am co-sponsoring H.CON. RES 40, which will prevent the construction of the NAFTA Superhighway all together and prevent a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.


Ron Paul 14th Distric Texas

Regulation, Free Trade and Mexican Trucks
Another NAFTA nail is about to be hammered into the coffin Washington is building for the US economy. Within the next few days our borders will be opened to the Mexican trucking industry in an unprecedented way. A "pilot" program is starting which will allow trucks from Mexico to haul goods beyond the 25 mile buffer zone to any point in the United States . Officials claim this is being done with utmost oversight, but Americans still have their legitimate concerns. Rather than securing our borders, we seem to be providing more pores for illegal aliens, drug dealers, and terrorists to permeate. . .

The fact that this is being done in the name of free trade is disturbing. Free trade is not complicated, yet NAFTA and CAFTA are comprised of thousands of pages of complicated legal jargon. All free trade really needs is two words: Low tariffs. Free trade does not require coordination with another government to benefit citizens here. . .

A North American United Nations?
August 28, 2006

Globalists and one-world promoters never seem to tire of coming up with ways to undermine the sovereignty of the United States. The most recent attempt comes in the form of the misnamed "Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America (SPP)." In reality, this new "partnership" will likely make us far less secure and certainly less prosperous.

According to the US government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather, it is a "dialogue" launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March, 2005.

What is a "dialogue"? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a "dialogue" that many see as a plan for a North American union.

According to the SPP website, this "dialogue" will create new supra-national organizations to "coordinate" border security, health policy, economic and trade policy, and energy policy between the governments of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. As such, it is but an extension of NAFTA- and CAFTA-like agreements that have far less to do with the free movement of goods and services than they do with government coordination and management of international trade.



CAFTA: More Bureaucracy, Less Free Trade
June 6, 2005 The Central America Free Trade Agreement, known as CAFTA, will be the source of intense political debate in Washington this summer. The House of Representatives will vote on CAFTA ratification in June, while the Senate likely will vote in July.

I oppose CAFTA for a very simple reason: it is unconstitutional. The Constitution clearly grants Congress alone the authority to regulate international trade. The plain text of Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 is incontrovertible. Neither Congress nor the President can give this authority away by treaty, any more than they can repeal the First Amendment by treaty. This fundamental point, based on the plain meaning of the Constitution, cannot be overstated. Every member of Congress who votes for CAFTA is voting to abdicate power to an international body in direct violation of the Constitution. . .

It is absurd to believe that CAFTA and other trade agreements do not diminish American sovereignty. When we grant quasi-governmental international bodies the power to make decisions about American trade rules, we lose sovereignty plain and simple. I can assure you first hand that Congress has changed American tax laws for the sole reason that the World Trade Organization decided our rules unfairly impacted the European Union. . .

The tax bill in question is just the tip of the iceberg. The quasi-judicial regime created under CAFTA will have the same power to coerce our cowardly legislature into changing American laws in the future. Labor and environmental rules are inherently associated with trade laws, and we can be sure that CAFTA will provide yet another avenue for globalists to impose the Kyoto Accord and similar agreements on the American people. CAFTA also imposes the International Labor Organization’s manifesto, which could have been written by Karl Marx, on American business. I encourage every conservative and libertarian who supports CAFTA to read the ILO declaration and consider whether they still believe the treaty will make America more free.

CAFTA means more government! Like the UN, NAFTA, and the WTO, it represents another stone in the foundation of a global government system. Most Americans already understand they are governed by largely unaccountable forces in Washington, yet now they face having their domestic laws influenced by bureaucrats in Brussels, Zurich, or Mexico City. . .


Rep. Walter B. Jones 3rd Distric, North Carolina

JONES VOICES CONCERN OVER “PARTNERSHIP” WITH CANADA AND MEXICO, OPPOSES NORTH AMERICAN UNION

Washington, D.C. – Congressman Walter B. Jones (R-NC) today expressed concern over the implications of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) on border security, American jobs and our nation’s sovereignty as President Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon convene this week’s North American Leaders’ Summit in Montebello, Canada. 3

“My Eastern North Carolina constituents are troubled by our weakly defended borders, our exploding trade deficit and the erosion of our national sovereignty,” Congressman Jones said. “As a result, many of them have expressed their concerns about our nation’s leadership role in the SPP.”


The SPP is a trilateral partnership between the U.S., Mexico and Canada established in March 2005. According to a White House document posted on the SPP’s website (www.spp.gov), the Bush administration and that of former Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Harper formed the SPP to, among other things, “facilitate further the movement of … persons within North America” and to “maximize trade … across our borders by striving to ensure compatibility of regulations and standards and eliminating redundant testing and certification requirements.” The document also announces that a series of trilateral working groups are convening to harmonize many of America’s regulations with those of Mexico and Canada.

“My constituents and I are extremely concerned about this ‘partnership’ for many reasons,” Jones continued. “Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution explicitly states that Congress – not the executive branch – has the power to ‘regulate commerce with foreign nations.’ Also, many SPP working group meetings are held in secret, and the public, the press and members of Congress have no opportunity to participate or conduct oversight.”

“Since NAFTA was approved, the United States has lost 3.1 million manufacturing jobs. More than 10 thousand illegal aliens now stream across our southern border every week. The U.S. does not need its government equalizing standards and regulations that will result in more American jobs going to Mexico and more illegal aliens coming to America,” Jones said. “The SPP also appears to cast aside America’s sovereignty and takes another step towards combining the United States, Mexico and Canada into a single EU-style North American super state.”

“While the American people and Congress understand the importance of promoting good relations with our neighbors, these concerns will only intensify if pursuit of the SPP continues out of public view and without congressional oversight or approval,” Jones concluded.

Congressman Jones is an original cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 40, a resolution which states that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.

Rep.Gary Miller 12th Distric California

House Members Resist Further Steps Toward North American Union

In a letter to President Bush, Congressman Miller urged that the United States not take any further steps toward implementing the Security and Prosperity Partnership, an executive branch agreement to “harmonize” American laws with those of Canada and Mexico. This agreement has not been approved by Congress and Congressman Miller is concerned that it could potentially lead to a North American Union or the construction of a NAFTA superhighway linking the three countries. In fact, he supported an amendment last week that would bar any funds from being used for the construction of such a highway. Congressman Miller will continue to oppose any initiative that could have the effect of further weakening this country’s ability to secure its homeland and prevent illegal immigration.


Rep. Virgil Goode, 5th District, Virginia

FOR RELEASE: August 29, 2007
An amendment to the Transportation Appropriations bill virtually mirrors my bill, HCR 40, which would stop the development of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. The amendment was in introduced by Representatives Duncan Hunter of California and Marcy Kaptur of Ohio. This amendment passed 362-to-63. HCR 40 says that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada. The amendment prohibits the use of federal funds to participate in working groups pursuant to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), which was a partnership agreement signed by President Bush, the President of Mexico and the Canadian Prime Minister in 2005. The SPP is a precursor of the North American Union. This is the effort by the U. S., Canada and Mexico, which would create a union, similar to the European Union. Such a union would dilute the sovereignty of each nation and leave the U. S. even more vulnerable to the infusion of terrorists, illegal drugs and illegal aliens. I hope that this overwhelming vote in favor of this amendment echoed in Ottawa, Canada where the leaders of the United States, Canada and Mexico met last week.