I was thrilled when I saw the headlines. NAFTA has been an unmitigated disaster for American manufacturing jobs. After reading the articles and press releases I wasn’t as thrilled because I became concerned over the approach President Trump is using to set aside and replace the deeply flawed treaty.
Here is how President Donald Trump announced the scrapping of NAFTA in this official statement.
It’s a big day for trade, a big day for our country. A lot of people thought we’d never get here because we all negotiate tough. We do, and so does Mexico. And this is a tremendous thing.
This has to do — they used to call it NAFTA. We’re going to call it the United States-Mexico Trade Agreement and we’ll get rid of the name NAFTA. It has a bad connotation because the United States was hurt very badly by NAFTA for many years. And now it’s a really good deal for both countries, and we look very much forward to it.
According to this quote it appears to be a done deal. President Pena Nieto of Mexico, as quoted in the same statement, alludes to the fact that this is only the first step in a lengthy process, which should only conclude with ratification by the senate, if the Constitution is followed.
I finally recognize this, especially because of the point of understanding we are now reaching on this deal. And I really hope and I desire — I wish — that the part with Canada will be materializing in a very concrete fashion; that we can have an agreement the way we proposed it from the initiation of this renegotiating process, a tripartite.
But today I celebrate the (inaudible) between the United States and Mexico because we’re reaching a final point of understanding. And I hope that in the following days we can materialize (inaudible) in the formalization of the agreement.
During the official statement President Trump states that Canada is not part of the new treaty yet.
As far Canada is concerned, we haven’t started with Canada yet. We wanted to do Mexico and see if that was possible to do. And it wasn’t — I think, it wasn’t from any standpoint something that most people thought was even doable when we started.
President Trump goes on to say this about Canada being a part of the treaty:
But I think we’ll give them a chance to probably have a separate deal. We can have a separate deal or we can put it into this deal. I like to call this deal the United States-Mexico Trade Agreement. I think it’s an elegant name. I think NAFTA has a lot of bad connotations for the United States because it was a rip-off. It was a deal that was a horrible deal for our country, and I think it’s got a lot of bad connotations to a lot of people. And so we will probably — you and I will agree to the name.
Further proof that the Trump Administration believes that including Canada is not necessary for repealing NAFTA can be found in this Washington Examiner article.
A White House official said Monday that Canada’s consent was not needed to approve the trade deal that President Trump announced with Mexico earlier in the day, even though the administration argued that the deal would “supplant” the North American Free Trade Agreement between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.
Since Canada was originally part of NAFTA isn’t it essential that Canada be in the replacement treaty for the treaty to be legally above board? According to this article several republicans believe Canada must be included.
Ambassador Lighthizer had this to say in the official statement about the timetable for passage and the process for passing the replacement treaty:
Well, it will likely be signed at the end of November because there’s a 90-day layover period because of our statute. But we expect to submit our letter to Congress, beginning that process on Friday…And then 90 days later, it will be signed.
I was confused about the language used by the ambassador and the origin of the 90 day layover period in the previous quote. This Weekly Standard article shed light on this and the Trump administration’s justification.
In order to negotiate trade pacts quickly in accordance with Trade Promotion Authority, the White House has to notify Congress of its intentions in writing. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer did that in the spring of 2017
In order to accomplish the rapid replacement of NAFTA the Trump Administration is relying on Trade Promotion Authority. which is also known as Fast Track. Here is a description if TPA:
Since 1974, Congress has enacted TPA legislation that defines U.S. negotiating objectives and priorities for trade agreements and establishes consultation and notification requirements for the President to follow throughout the negotiation process. At the end of the negotiation and consultation process, Congress gives the agreement an up or down vote, without amendment. TPA reaffirms Congress’s overall constitutional role in the development and oversight of U.S. trade policy.
Is it acceptable to use TPA to replace NAFTA? I do not believe so because NAFTA was ratified by the Senate on November 20, 1993. In order to replace a ratified treaty I believe it must be done by another ratified treaty, which includes all participants. I also believe the Trade Promotion Authority is unconstitutional because it violates the clause requiring two-thirds of all senators approve any treaty. Every presidential administration that has used TPA to pass trade agreements has violated the Constitution. I firmly believe President Trump is right to repeal NAFTA; however the Constitution must always be followed. All that is required is for him to submit the new three party treaty to the Senate for ratification.
Note: Due to an error the original of this post was corrupted so it is being reposed at this time
Hear, O children, a father’s instruction, be attentive, that you may gain understanding! Yes, excellent advice I give you; my teaching do not forsake.
When I was my father’s child, frail, yet the darling of my mother, He taught me, and said to me: “Let your heart hold fast my words: keep my commands, that you may live! “Get wisdom, get understanding! Do not forget or turn aside from the words I utter.
Bring it On
One of the advantages of age is that you have memories of what has worked in the past and what has not and one of the advantages of having blogged for nearly a decade and shot hundreds if not thousands of video interviews is that you have a large amount of work to fall back on for references.
That’s why when I hear supposedly smart people defend communism and/or socialism and insist that it is better for society It’s important to go back to the source material, as Stacy McCain did four years ago when discussing Jesse Myerson, former media coordinator for Occupy Wall Streets whitewashing of communism:
“[T]here is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society and the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terror.” — Karl Marx, 1848
…A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is … And the victorious party must maintain its rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionaries.”
— Friedrich Engels, 1872
Mind you these aren’t the quotes of a Lenin or a Trotsky (which Stacy supplies as well) nor the quotes of a Stalin or a Mao who outdid both of them in mass slaughter. These are the words from the founders of the idea of communism themselves who can not be presumed to be false representatives of the philosophy they founded.
In other words bloodshed is part of the fabric of communism and socialism as the founders of these philosophies explicitly and undeniably state.
This explains two specific things we have seen lately. The increased violence by the left and their attempts to disarm us
It is open season on Trump supporters, and the media is only fomenting, encouraging, excusing, and hoping for more… The media are now openly calling Trump supporters “Nazis” and are blaming Trump for a mass murder he had nothing to do with. This, of course, is a form of harassment because it incites and justifies mob violence.
Here is the list, so far, and remember that if any one of these things happened to a Democrat, the media would use the story to blot out the sun for weeks. Remember how crazy the media went over a nobody rodeo clown who wore an Obama mask, a GOP stafferwho criticized Obama’s daughters? And yet, hundreds of Trump supporters are harassed and brutalized and the media only dutifully report them, if at all. That is because the media are desperate to normalize and justify violence and harassment against Trump and his supporters.
And while the media openly encourage this violence against us, the media also campaign to disarm us, to take away our Second Amendment right to defend ourselves.
That’s the real problem for the left. They have lost the argument in the public square and the media’s cons have been exposed by Donald Trump and the economy is booming all over the place:
🇺🇸 💵 📈
Republicans promised jobs, tax reform, and a booming economy.
Unfortunately for the left the United States populace is the best armed in the world so one doesn’t have to flee the rise of socialistic terror, we can fight and when it comes down to it college age socialists don’t like getting shot.
This isn’t China, this isn’t Cuba, Americans have the power to stay and fight.
Clara didn’t have to flee Florida as she did China and then Cuba and because she was in a country that enabled her to fight back, instead of fleeing a 3rd time she was able to turn out and fight and nine years later her point of view is in power.
This is why it was so important for the left to take over the university and school system, because unless they silence the voices of history and wisdom they would have no prayer at all.
Closing thought, how ironic is it that even in far left colleges are being partially bailed out by the Trump economy:
President Carmen Ambar and other senior administrators have launched an 11-day presentation campaign in which all College and Conservatory faculty, administrative and professional staff, Student Senate, student media, and other constituencies will see the largest overview of Oberlin’s financial situation to date, along with Ambar’s proposed plan to rectify Oberlin’s ever-worsening deficit.
The College managed to reduce its deficit from $5 million to $3 million this year, largely due to a last-minute admissions push that secured an additional 27 students at the beginning of the academic year. Unexpectedly high investment returns after a market uptick also contributed to the decrease.
Where would these socialists be without capitalism?
Tuesday’s primary results in Florida was a bit of a surprise on both sides of the aisle but also give the people in Florida one of the clearest choices in the nation in terms of the direction they want to go.
On the GOP side an establishment republican Adam Pullman with an acceptable record on the state level was blown away by Congressman Ron DeSantos who topped 56% in a six man field but outperformed the polling in the state by 15 to 24 points depending on the poll.
DeSantos went all in for both President Trump and the wall in what is considered a swing state and apparently that was the difference between a plurality and a clear overwhelming majority
On the Democrat side the surprise was even greater as a daughter of a former Governor and Senator who was not shown behind in any poll was defeated not by her closest rival but by the mayor of Tallahassee Andrew Gillum who is as far left as they come having been endorsed by both Bernie Sanders and Tom Steyer
The real interesting thing here is in the five candidate field both Gwen Graham and her chief rival Philip Levine outperformed their polling average Graham by 5.5 pts and Levine by 1.5 pts but Gillum blew away the polling. His polling average was 12% going into election night and he finished with 34% of the vote.
Or to put it another way according to the polls 26% of the GOP electorate and 23% of the Democrat electorate was undecided and unless the polls were spectacularly wrong just about every undecided republican went for DeSantos, Trump Man and every single undecided Democrat went with Gillum the Bernie Bro.
This is horrible news for the establishment in both parties but in my opinion it’s great news for the country as a whole. Jazz Shaw puts it well:
The state parties had their own preferences, but for Florida’s voters, it seems to have wound up being a battle between President Trump and the combined forces of Bernie Sanders and billionaire donor Tom Steyer. (There’s an odd combination for you, eh? A socialist and a guy who rode capitalism to the halls of financial power.) While everything can (and likely will) change over the course of two years, this race can almost be seen as a microcosm of 2020.
To be sure there are some twists, you have two ethnic candidates where the whole black vs Hispanic thing could get interesting and there are some corruption issues in Gillum’s city that might sway a vote or two but the big thing is Gillum’s platform based on his advertising is as left as you can get: Jazz Shaw again
BEAT THE NRA HEALTHCARE FOR ALL $1 BILLION FOR EDUCATION BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS $15 MINIMUM WAGE ABOLISH AND REPLACE ICE END STAND YOUR GROUND LEGALIZE MARIJUANA IMPEACH TRUMP
Not exactly a moderate platform, eh? We’ll see how that plays on the Redneck Riviera.
Now here in Massachusetts you might not be able to tell if that was the platform of the Republican or Democrat candidate for governor (if you don’t believe me remember our republican Governor just signed a $15 minimum wage bill and pot stores are opening up all over the state) but in normal and sane parts of the country this is as loony left as it comes.
Which means that barring a sudden turn to the left by DeSantos or to the right by Gillum, which I suspect neither sides base would forgive Florida has been given the rare privilege of a clear distinct choice between two paths for their state. Trump & Capitalism, or Bernie and Socialism, or as Rush puts it does Florida want to be America or does Florida want to be Venezuela.
Barring some unforeseen revelation that torpedoes one candidate or the other this is what it’s going to come down to.
I think it’s very healthy for voters to have such a clear choice and to choose their fate. For the sake of their state I hope they make the right choice but either way Florida voters will get the government they deserve.
My pay for this comes from the voluntary contributions of readers. If you think this work is worth your while and wish to support it and my writers please subscribe to the site below.