The essential importance of U.S. sovereignty
critical importance to all patriotic Americans is the Constitution of
the United States of America. The purpose of our government is to preserve
and protect for each citizen the rights of life, liberty, and property.
Threats to Constitutional rights due to forces outside America might be
viewed in terms of a loss of Sovereignty.
Pacified into thinking there is no problem
a great many years I had not given much thought that a loss of U.S. Sovereignty
was much of a danger. On the surface I recognized the fact that America
had in the past been involved in great wars. The threats from fascist
and totalitarian governments were overcome as Americans patriotically
rose to the defense of home, country, and freedom. Like most Americans,
I had thought that the greatest danger to American Sovereignty would always
come from this type of external hostility.
A subtle and hidden danger
recent years I have become alert to a different, more subtle and sinister
way in which Americans can lose their Sovereignty and Constitutional rights.
If the United States enters into a treaty with another country, group
of countries or international organizations, then the citizens of the
United States are subject to the terms of such treaties. If the terms
of international treaties are contrary in any way to the fundamental Constitutional
Rights, America's Sovereignty is compromised. Americans are then in jeopardy
of losing their most cherished freedoms.
The greatest external threats to U.S. sovereignty and constitutional
the first of the "Federalist Papers" Alexander Hamilton said
that:"...a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious
mask of zeal for the rights of the people" and "that of those
men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number
have begun their career by paying obsequious court to the people, commencing
demagogues and ending tyrants."
would seem that the heated emotional pleas for rights carry the greatest
danger for America's loss of Soveriegnty. Today we are faced with a number
of such emotional issues which involve attempts to get the United States
to sign treaties. Some of these issues are as follows:
International treaties on the rights of children
International treaties on the rights of women
International free trade agreements
International treaties on the environment
Specific examples of loss of sovereignty
or the North American Free Trade Agreement, appeals to the altruistic
feelings of fairness in many Americans. However, the terms of this agreement
supersede federal, state, and local laws on health standards of produce
and other food products. By the terms of NAFTA, the United States is compelled
to accept substandard foods. This places the health of Americans at risk.
In effect, Americans have lost in this matter their rights of self determination
normally associated with sovereignty.
like Americans, worked hard to remove lead from gasoline. In Canada, tetraethyl
lead in gasoline was replaced a number of years ago by a manganese compound.
The particular manganese compound used in Canadian gasoline is made in
the US by a multi-national company called Ethyl Corporation. Accumulating
evidence of health hazards associated with the use of the manganese compound
recently prompted the Canadian Government to ban the use of the manganese
compound in Canada. Under an 'obscure' clause of NAFTA (which the Canadian
Corporation sued the Canadian Government and forced them to reintroduce
the manganese compound into Canadian gasoline. In addition the Ethyl Corporation
is claiming 200 million in damages from the Canadian people due to their
breech of obligations under NAFTA. Very clearly by signing NAFTA, the
government of Canada lost a measure of sovereignty for Canadians. Whether
the health threats of manganese additives in gasoline are real or imagined,
the Canadian people ought to have the right of self determination to decide
for themselves. Yet, sadly, that right was taken away in the stroke of
a pen when Canada signed NAFTA.
recent years the United Nations has assembled 'peace keeping forces' from
among participating nations. The US has participated heavily in these
activities. In a number of instances, US troops have been instructed to
put on UN insignias and serve under the command of foreign commanders.
In some cases, individual servicemen have refused to serve under foreign
commanders and have been summarily subject to court martial and dishonorable
discharge. The legal arguments of these soldiers have been that upon joining
the US Military they made a commitment to defend the Constitution of the
US and that service under foreign commanders in an international army
was not part of the agreement.
the US Senate has refused to ratify the UN's Biodiversity Treaty, President
Clinton has directed the US State Dept. to put terms of this treaty into
effect. This involves an agreement to manage 'biosphere reserves' according
to international dictates and objectives. The intention is to progressively
limit and finally cut off human access to these areas. Starting with Yellowstone
National Park in 1979, UNESCO has designated 47 biosphere reserves in
the US covering 50 million acres. At Yellowstone, UN delegates who surveyed
the area last year called for a 'buffer zone' around the park.
placing US lands under the direction and control of foreign entities,
the US has agreed to limit our sovereign power to manage our own lands.
Americans who live in areas adjacent to biosphere reserves are being deprived
of their rights of property. The Clinton administration's designation
of Yellowstone Park as a World Heritage Site 'in danger' has already been
used to shut down a gold mine near (not even in) Yellowstone. Currently
the park service is choking off the local economy by refusing to maintain
certain highways and by buying up any property available.
course, there will be plenty available as more and more owners are denied
use of their own private property which causes businesses to shut down
and the economy to slow. The UN/UNESCO representatives have made no secret
of their goals. Their next step is their Wildlands Project, a plan to
designate one half of the US as protected areas or areas where special
measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity. Inside Yellowstone,
the Park Service is shutting down campgrounds as the park is being prepared
to become the core of a huge biosphere reserve, as part of the UN's global
plan. Once established, no human activity will be permitted in the area.
The real driving force behind international free trade agreements
continue to marvel in light of European history how the many European
countries are now coming together in a 'European Economic Community'.
I ask how the many differences and traditions of mistrust have been disguised,
obscured, or overcome in such a few short years.
a year ago, I participated in a business and technical meeting involving
international representatives of my own company as well as international
officials of another very large, multi-national company which supplies
our business with certain chemicals. An official of our trading partner
spoke about the worldwide presence of his company's operations. He spoke
of his company having corporate representatives or 'corporate ambassadors'
whose mission is to 'break down barriers' by working with world governments.
The barriers of which he speaks include: trade barriers, labor barriers,
environmental barriers, etc. These are barriers which make it difficult
for the multinational company to do business.
particular labor barrier which he mentioned involved workers in the asia
pacific area. In that region, it is difficult to find workers which are
trained to do the work of this company. After making an investment of
time and money to train workers, this multinational company often experienced
the disappointment of the workers leaving the company for better offers.
He then said that his company had found a way to keep workers with the
company hold the mortgage on their home.
the fact that such workers might have the best living accommodations they
had ever enjoyed, I had a cold feeling come over me regarding the method
used to control peoples lives. It reminded me of the old 'company stores'
which were a part of America's early history.
reflecting upon my business experiences in light of current events, I
have come to a number of conclusions. The large multi-national companies
have little concern for culture, religious morals, or specific national
ethics. Their primary objective is to get gain and do business without
restriction. In doing so they attempt to break down barriers or obstacles
to doing business between countries.
believe that the primary driving forces behind establishment of the European
Economic Community and other international trading agreements like NAFTA
are the multi-national companies. The financial power behind these huge
organizations is tremendous, both to influence government officials as
well as to shape public opinion through the media.
Actions to be taken
1. America's elected officials must stop accepting political
campaign contributions and PAC money from multinational companies so
that they can act without bias in the interest of Americans and Constitutional
Rights. Since election laws have traditionally been considered a state
right, and since each state has a different set of election laws, it
would be easy to approach the issue of campaign funds in state legislatures.
2. States should vigorously defend and maintain local control
of wilderness areas and historical sites. No one loves Utah more than
Utahn's. Putting Utah's public lands in control of external entities
places such lands at risk to the whims of those who have private agendas.
3. Utah's legislators should be alert to issues containing emotional
traps (like childrens rights, womens rights, environment etc) which
can subtly erode genuine Constitutional Rights. The US does not need
to sign treaties to do what is morally and Constitutionally right for
4. The best and most noble role of the UN is to be a forum and
catalyst for peace among nations, a place where disagreements can be
resolved before war and hostilities erupt. The UN should not intrude
upon the sovereign rights of peoples and governments to manage their
own affairs. There is a danger in giving the UN a standing army. There
is a danger in making nations subject and liable to mandated controls
by the UN .