CAFTA Violates the US Constitution, Plain and Simple

First of all, I would like to dispel the notion that you have to be a socialist to oppose CAFTA. Anyone arguing that is employing at least two logical fallacies and can therefore be safely ignored.

Everyone likes free trade. I have a question, though, why is a treaty that violates American sovereignty said to promote 'free' trade? And, to paraphrase Representative Ron Paul, why do we need a treaty to promote free trade? As I've been saying (about the FairTax), and as Ron Paul now says, all we have to do to promote free trade is to relax our own restrictions and all the trade we can handle will come to us.

I don't have the time to go into this, and to do so would be repetitive because Ron Paul has already written quite eloquently on the topic:
"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.

We don't need government agreements to have free trade. We merely need to lower or eliminate taxes on the American people, without regard to what other nations do. Remember, tariffs are simply taxes on consumers. Americans have always bought goods from abroad; the only question is how much our government taxes us for doing so. As economist Henry Hazlitt explained, tariffs simply protect politically-favored special interests at the expense of consumers, while lowering wages across the economy as a whole. Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and countless other economists have demolished every fallacy concerning tariffs, proving conclusively that unilateral elimination of tariffs benefits the American people. We don't need CAFTA or any other international agreement to reap the economic benefits promised by CAFTA supporters, we only need to change our own harmful economic and tax policies. Let the rest of the world hurt their citizens with tariffs; if we simply reduce tariffs and taxes at home, we will attract capital and see our economy flourish."

So, to sum up, CAFTA (Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement -- HR 3045) is flat unconstitutional. The Congress of these United States cannot delegate authority granted to them specifically by the Constitution to a foreign power. I believe that to do so is treason against the We the People. Does anyone care? These people take an oath to uphold the Constitution. I know only one Congress-person who takes that oath seriously -- Ron Paul of Texas.

You should write your people in Congress and remind them of their oaths and of the Constitution itself.

* * *

By the way, do you take vitamins? Nutritional supplements? I do. I have my whole life. I have been reading reports that CAFTA will eventually make the European Codex law in the United States -- this would virtually give drug companies control over vitamin supplements (which are their major competitors). People who follow the Codex claim that it will basically make most vitamins we take illegal. This is not cool, and another reason to write your Congress-critter and tell it to say no to CAFTA.

posted by The Sovereign Editor | 12:59 AM

_____________________________________________