The North American Union – parts 1 & 2

August 9, 2012 Archive 2450 Views

2001,

By Mike Scruggs-

Buried deep in the 300-plus pages of the latest Senate Amnesty-Guestworker bill, S.1639, was a proposal to expedite the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). The SPP is the forerunner of a North American Economic Community with no internal borders dividing the United States, Mexico, and Canada. It in turn foreshadows a North American Union (NAU) which would have many sovereign administrative and judicial powers over its three major administrative regions.

The SPP is already being implemented in small incremental steps outside of public view and Congressional oversight. Fortunately, the SPP’s activities and goals are now receiving some public and Congressional notice. Its birth, growth, and methods of implementation are remarkably similar to those of the European Union (EU).

As of 2007, there are 27 European nations in the European Union. Its first predecessor   was the European Steel and Coal Community established in 1951 by France, West Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Italy. It later became the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957 and initially sought only to enhance common economic prosperity by establishing common trade, customs, and monetary policies. In 1992, the European Union replaced the EEC and at the same time expanded its objectives from trade and commerce to more overtly political, social, cultural, and foreign policy functions. In the future, the EU hopes to implement common police and security functions within its membership nations. This expansion of functions and objectives is especially worrisome in light of the governmental structure of the EU. The executive arm and real power of the EU is the European Commission, whose members are appointed by their national governments and are not directly subject to the consent of European voters. Furthermore, EU administrative policies tend to emerge from “dialog groups” with little public visibility or accountability. The EU and its governmental bodies are largely dominated by France, Belgium, and Germany.

Many regard Jean Monnet (French bureaucrat and visionary, 1888-1979) as the “Father of the European Union.”  He envisioned a European superstate (dominated by the French, of course) with a free flow of labor, capital, and goods within a continent with essentially no internal borders. He further envisioned a European identity replacing the old national and ethnic identities. He knew, however, that most Europeans would not accept the loss of their national identities and cultures. Monnet’s plan was to reach the goal of a European superstate by small incremental steps implemented by dialog groups and Eurocrats well beneath public visibility. This plan was working very well until increased public awareness and resistance caused the Dutch and French to reject the European Union Constitution in 2006. But EU superstate ambitions still live in the plans of many European political and bureaucratic leaders.

Like Monnet, the SPP has its own visionary leader in the person of American University professor, Robert Pastor. Pastor is a gifted left-wing thinker and organizer who first gained political notice during the Carter Administration. He has the usual leftist distaste for American nationalism and was Carter’s point man for the 1978 treaty, narrowly approved by the U.S. Senate, which gave away the Panama Canal in 1999. Pastor’s vision is for a North American Union similar to the European Union. His methods shadow the thinking of EU’s Jean Monnet. Plans for a North American Union should be accomplished in small administrative steps as far out of public sight and Congressional scrutiny as possible.

The SPP is evolving into an internally borderless North American Community reflecting the globalist dreams of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Wall Street Journal, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a cadre of revolutionary academics, and an assortment of the largest international corporations expected to benefit from its implementation. Next would come a North American Union and the effective loss of U.S. sovereignty. The two most prominent political leaders associated with advancing globalist economics and the plans for a North America without internal borders are George W. Bush and former Mexican President, Vincente Fox.

The transportation plans for the North American Economic Community are impressive, but their principal function will be to transport cheap-labor foreign goods into the world’s greatest consumer markets, the U.S.A. With most of the labor coming from outside the U.S., however, one might sensibly ask how long the late U.S. middle class will have enough spendable income to afford the cheaper merchandise, especially since their jobs are being shipped overseas or displaced by less expensive guest-workers.

These huge transportation projects will be financed by Public-Private Partnerships (PPP’s). Foreign investment in the private segment is being enthusiastically embraced. Hence you may soon be paying tolls to a French, Mexican, or Saudi Arabian company to use the new colossal transportation system.

The People’s Republic of China, with its 25 cents an hour wage rates, will probably be the main national beneficiary of this transportation system. The Trans-Texas corridor will be the first completed. Huge ships with 20-foot-long containers will move goods from China to Mexican ports. The containers will then be shipped by rail or truck to the U.S. heartland. But don’t worry about security. These containers will be checked by sophisticated new electronic gear developed and owned by largely foreign enterprises including several dominated by the Chinese government. I sure hope the Chinese never get cross with us. I have a feeling we won’t be able to help Taiwan and other Asian allies much with Chinese technocrats supervising our internal transportation security.  If you were also worrying about the proverbial corruption of Mexican businesses and government officials, you probably don’t understand that globalism and cheap labor trump national security.

All this resembles President Bush’s recent attempt to turn our largest ports over to a Dubai state ports company. Never mind that Dubai is predominantly Muslim and vulnerable to one of those Islamic awakenings. Just remember that George Bush told you that Islam is “a religion of peace and tolerance.”  Just look at Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon, and the Sudan and take comfort. Or if you are into Jihad, maybe you could read the Koran and the teachings of Muhammad for comfort.

Basically, The North American Union is a project of the same economic thinking that brought us NAFTA and CAFTA. According to Jerome Corsi, author of the newly published book, The Late Great U.S.A: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada, the U.S. is in quite an economic jam because of trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA. Almost every country in the world is taking advantage of the U.S. by subsidizing their own exports and imposing Value Added Taxes (VAT) on American goods. We are doing free trade, and they are doing export subsidies and VAT tariff barriers. All this is causing trade deficits to balloon. One result is that China owns more than a Trillion dollars in U.S. Treasury securities.

As for the plans of the SPP and emerging NAU, get ready to exchange your dollars for “Ameros” as early as 2010. Also get ready to discard your American identity. It won’t be politically correct anymore. Start thinking of your North American identity.

And don’t worry about getting the government of the North American Union organized in such a short time. Committees, “dialog groups” (shades of the EU), and study groups are already laying out the plans for you. According to information on SPP meetings retrieved through the Freedom of Information Act, the top SPP lieutenants in the U.S., reporting to the “leaders,” will be Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, and Secretary of State Condi Rice. Gutierrez and Chertoff have already been instrumental in promoting Bush’s open borders immigration policies and the infamous Senate bill, S.1639.

Corsi believes the misguided trade, cheap labor, and cheap money policies of the last three presidents, but particularly George W. Bush, are bringing the nation to the brink of a monetary crisis which risks the collapse of the dollar. Meanwhile the political and commercial architects of our misguided big business-big government globalist policies are getting rich, while the living standards and future opportunities of most Americans are slowly declining. Greed is always blinded by short-term profits, and more often than not, suddenly overcome by the disaster of short-term thinking.

Fortunately, some people are waking up. Former globalist-free trade enthusiast, Princeton economist Alan Binder has reversed his position. In a March 2007 Wall Street Journal article, Binder warned that the outsourcing practices he once advocated could place as many as 40 million U.S. jobs at risk of being shipped out of the country in the next two decades. Thanks to globalist economics, there are now only 20 million manufacturing jobs left in the U.S. Many high-tech service jobs will also be leaving unless the trend is reversed very soon.

In January of this year, Congressman Virgil Goode (R-VA) introduced House Concurrent Resolution 40 (HCR 40) to express the sense of Congress that the U.S. should not construct a super corridor system or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada. Two Republican House members from North Carolina are co-sponsors of HCR 40: Virginia Foxx and Walter B. Jones.

Goode also introduced HCR 18 expressing disapproval of the proposed “totalization” agreement between the U.S. and Mexico, which would provide social security retirement benefits to currently illegal immigrant workers from Mexico. Also with North Carolina Representative Walter B. Jones, he has introduced HCR 22, calling on the President to withdraw from NAFTA.

“There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations”—James Madison

 

_____________________________________________________________ Part 2 of a Series, TOWARD A NORTH AMERICAN UNION- For The Tribune Papers. By Mike Scruggs-

According to ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis, the number of illegal immigrants arrested in conjunction with violations of U.S. immigration laws forbidding the employment of illegal aliens dropped from 17,554 in 1997 to 159 in 2004.  The number of employer fines for hiring illegal aliens dropped from 865 to only 3 during the same period. Such data gives the distinct impression that the Clinton and Bush Administrations made a deliberate decision not to enforce U.S. immigration laws. Not surprisingly, Homeland Security has ceased publishing such embarrassing statistics.  Except for a few public relations flurries, the Bush Administration has ignored its duty to enforce immigration laws at employer worksites.

After serving on a County Commission committee to investigate the impact of illegal immigration in Henderson County, North Carolina, I and others concluded that the federal government has deliberately made it difficult for employers, law enforcement agencies, news agencies, and ordinary citizens to determine the legal status of immigrants or the number of illegal immigrants in a community. The Bush Administration, a sizeable number of U.S. Congressmen—especially in the Senate—and many of the most powerful corporations in America do not want our immigration laws enforced.

When Bush took office in 2001, he immediately tried to get Congress to approve an amnesty for 3 million illegal Mexican immigrants. Only the rude awakening of 911 stopped its passage.  In addition, the U.S. Border has been a virtual sieve since Bush took office. Contrary to popular opinion, however, the border is only half the problem. Almost half of all illegal immigrants come to the U.S. on legal visas and then disappear. Visa regulations, like employer sanctions, are seldom enforced. Since Bush’s inauguration in early 2001, the number of illegal immigrants in the country has grown from 7 million to over 12 million, and a Bear Stearns study recently estimated the number to be over 20 million.

The sharp drop in enforcement of immigration laws during the last two years of the Clinton Administration may have been at least partially associated with Democratic politics and Al Gore’s anticipated Presidential campaign. The Clinton Administration was eager to speed up the citizenship process and create as many new Democratic voters as possible.  By far the largest share of recent legal and illegal immigrants to the U.S. is from Latin America.  A 2001 Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) survey confirmed what most people already knew—most Latino voter groups favor the Democratic Party over the Republican Party by margins exceeding 20 percent.  Two demographic exceptions within the Latino or Hispanic voter groupings are Cubans and Evangelical Protestants. Both of these favor Republicans by only a slight majority. Three studies cited in the CIS report indicated that Latinos prefer the Democratic Party because they favor expanded healthcare and social security programs. The study also showed that those Latino immigrants who were not yet citizens favored the Democratic Party by even larger margins.  The study concluded that:

“Current immigration policy is slowly but steadily shifting the nation’s electorate toward the Democratic Party.”

We must ask ourselves why a Republican Administration would continue such an immigration policy. One reason is that the Republican Party has held out a hope that an appeal to social and religious conservatism would attract Latino voters to Republican candidates. The underlying assumption of Latino social conservatism is, however, about two generations out of date. The same socially destructive secular influences that have affected the U.S., Canada, and Europe, have also affected Mexico and Latin America. Most recent surveys indicate that the latest wave of Latino immigration is much less socially conservative than the U.S. population in general. In addition, the social-welfare issues appear to have the greatest weight in the voting booth. The CIS Study concluded that the Republican Party would need to move much further to the left on social-welfare issues to capture a majority of Latino votes. Even families with more than $100,000 annual income favored Democratic policies over Republican policies by a 10 percent margin.

Our current immigration policies have also substantially reduced the living standards of American workers and their families. The studies of Harvard economist George Borjas indicated that as of 2000, the wages of American workers had been suppressed $1,700 per year per worker because of competition from foreign workers here either illegally or on work visas. Adjusting this number for the impact of additional illegal immigration since 2000 reveals a median wage loss of over $2,900 per year for American workers. Recent reports from the Economic Policy Institute and Northwestern University indicated that the median income of American workers had actually declined by over $1,000 in inflation-adjusted dollars from 2000 to 2006.  This is a primary cause of the recession that now threatens the U.S. economy. U.S. taxpayers are also burdened with at least $60 billion in additional state and local taxes resulting from illegal immigration. So what is going on here?

There is no doubt that a substantial reason for our borders not being sealed and our immigration laws not being enforced is that both the Republican and Democratic Parties have been catering to the big businesses and employer associations that fund their campaigns and demand a continued stream of cheap foreign labor.

Two other reasons for our borders not being sealed and our laws not being enforced are that Democrats cater to Latino voting blocks and Republicans fear being seen as anti-Hispanic if they push for tough border and employment sanctions.

But there is something even bigger going on. On March 13, 2005, it began to come to the surface. U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez met with the Mexican Secretary of the Economy Fernando Canales and Canadian Privy Council Assistant Secretary Phil Ventura. Ten days later in Waco, Texas, they announced the formation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America. Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin said of this new development that:

“The world is not standing still; new economic power houses, such as China and India, are rising and we face new opportunities—but we also face new challenges. And this requires a new partnership, stronger, more dynamic, one that is focused on the future. We are determined to forge the next generation of our continent’s success. That’s our destination. The security and prosperity partnership that we are launching today is the road map to getting there.

What does this mean? Curiously, there is no law or declared “Sense of Congress” authorizing the creation or funding of the SPP. Even more ominous, no congressional committee has any oversight of its activities. It sounds remarkably like the road map that led to the formation of the European Union, whose growing power is now beginning to transcend the laws and political rights of the citizens of its member nations. The road to the European Union was stealth and deception. Just as the former Soviet Union deported thousands of native Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians from their Baltic homelands and settled thousands of ethnic Russians in their place following World War II, the European Union is using immigration—especially Muslim immigration from the Middle East and North Africa—to change the demography and political balance of power in its member nations in order to preclude any effective resistance on their part to its supra-national power.  It is transforming Europe into a multicultural state where past cultural and ethnic distinctives and social cohesion are being destroyed in order to subordinate its member nations to its own supra-governmental despotism. The European Union started with economics and has continued to add other areas of supra-national dominance including even matters of free speech on social issues. Hence free speech and the ability to resist government tyranny are beginning to disappear in Europe.

The SPP, like the early stages of the European Union, consists of various working groups and committees operating outside of public scrutiny. Its elite membership includes the chief executives of many of the largest corporations in the U. S., for example: New York Life, Ford, General Motors, Merck, General Electric, Wal-Mart, and Lockheed Martin. These working groups report to the “leaders.”  Some of the American “leaders” are Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, George Soros, Jimmy Carter, and the SPP’s intellectual founder, Dr. Robert Pastor of American University.

In 2005, the SPP sympathetic Council for Foreign Relations released a report vice-chaired by Robert Pastor that gave this summary of its recommendations:

“The Task Force proposes the creation  by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity…Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly, and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free secure, just and prosperous North America.”

In other words, there will be open borders. There will not be any more illegal immigration because no one in North America will be classified as an immigrant or illegal.  There will also be a common currency called the “Amero.” A NAFTA superhighway will run from southern Mexico to distribution centers in the U.S. and Canada.  The United States, Mexico, and Canada will all be in one big happy family, and that pesky U.S. Constitution can be discarded. It will be government by the corporate and government elite, of the corporate and government elite, and for the corporate and government elite—the consent of the governed be damned.

It is no wonder George Bush and John McCain are annoyed with all this talk of building fences and walls and enforcing laws against employers hiring “undocumented workers.”

Buried in the middle of the latest Kennedy-McCain stealth amnesty successor, deceptively and hypocritically titled “The Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007, was this statement:

“It is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity.”

Fortunately for the American people but to the frustration of its major sponsors—President Bush, Senators Ted  Kennedy,  Harry Reid,  John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Specter, Chuck Hagel, and Mel Martinez—this stealth amnesty bill and precursor to the end of the Constitutional Republic of 1789 and the birth of  a North American Union was stopped by loud public protest.  But North American Union fans should not worry. Its planning groups are still going full speed ahead; its political and corporate sponsors are thriving; and the American people are still asleep.

 

Share this story
Email

About author

Related articles