The essential importance of U.S. sovereignty
Of 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
For 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
In 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 rights
In 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."

It 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
NAFTA 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.

Canadians, 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 Government signed) Ethyl 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.

In 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.

Although 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.

By 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. Of 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
I 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.

About 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.

One 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. Despite 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.

In 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.

I 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. There is no one who 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 its citizens.

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.