From The New American in 2013 and relevant today.

Wednesday, 28 August 2013
The “Free Trade” Agenda Threatens Our Rights
Written by Larry Greenley

It was not so very long ago when a 33-year-old attorney spent much of his time during two seasonably hot weeks in his second-floor apartment in an Eastern city drafting an important document on a portable writing desk of his own design. Finally, a clean copy of his draft was submitted to an assembly of delegates, of which he was a member.

Next, he spent an excruciating two and a half days while this assembly, sitting as a committee of the whole, edited every line of his draft. Finally, on July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress approved what we now know as “The Declaration of Independence” by Thomas Jefferson.

Our most precious heritage as Americans is contained in the Declaration:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Although the Articles of Confederation provided legitimacy for the new nation during the War for Independence, it took the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to provide a government that would adequately secure our rights. And it has for over 220 years.

Among other things, the above passage from the Declaration of Independence established our nation as unique in asserting that our rights come from God and that governments are instituted to secure these rights. Although we all remember the Declaration as listing our rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we don’t as easily remember that it says that these three rights are only “among” our other God-given rights. Many of these other rights were spelled out in the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the new Constitution that were proposed by Congress on March 4, 1789, and ratified by the states as of December 15, 1791.

Many of our rights are at the heart of the big news stories of the present day. For example, our right “to keep and bear arms” (Amendment II) is being threatened by the UN Arms Trade Treaty, gun control bills in Congress, and Obama administration initiatives in response to the Newtown school shooting and the Zimmerman verdict. Furthermore, our right “to be secure in [our] persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” (Amendment IV) is being infringed by massive government surveillance of our personal phone calls, e-mails, and other online activities. And in a last example, our right not to be “deprived of … property, without due process of law” (Amendment V) is being violated by the implementation of the UN’s Agenda 21 by local, county, and state planning bodies.

So you’re probably thinking, yes, I know about our rights and how they are secured by our government, but what’s this got to do with the free trade agenda?

Fake Free Trade

In brief, the connection is that the rights that we prize as Americans are secured by the independent republic that was established by the Constitution in 1787 that we know as the United States of America. However, contrary to the meaning conjured up in our minds by the innocent-sounding term “free trade agreement,” such agreements generally create partnerships that affect many other areas beyond trade, set up supranational tribunals and governing bodies, and, in general, greatly diminish the independence of the parties to the agreement. To the extent that our nation loses its independence, to that same extent it loses its ability to secure our rights.

In this special issue of The New American we are not arguing against “free trade” policies that have led to lower tariffs and lower export subsidies over the past couple centuries. However, we are taking issue with what we are referring to as the “free trade agenda” that has emerged in recent decades and that has led to numerous so-called free trade agreements since the 1990s and the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995.

The hundreds of free trade agreements between two or more nations since the 1990s are considered “regional trade agreements” by the WTO, and all of them are duly registered with the WTO as agreements under its jurisdiction. However, even the WTO does not claim to be consistently a proponent of free trade. For example, in the “Who We Are” page on its website (www.wto.org), the WTO states:

But the WTO is not just about opening markets, and in some circumstances its rules support maintaining trade barriers.... Trade relations often involve conflicting interests. Agreements, including those painstakingly negotiated in the WTO system, often need interpreting. The most harmonious way to settle these differences is through some neutral procedure based on an agreed legal foundation. That is the purpose behind the dispute settlement process written into the WTO agreements.

In short, the WTO considers itself to be a supranational last resort for settling trade disputes between nations.

Our congressmen were warned about the significance of placing the United States under the jurisdiction of the WTO by none other than Newt Gingrich during his testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee in June 1994:

....................................................

...... our Constitution gives Congress the exclusive power of regulating our nation’s trade with foreign nations. This is an essential component of our national independence. Eventually, we need to restore our Constitution and national independence by withdrawing from the WTO and all of its regional trade agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and so on.

..............................................................

By approving our nation’s membership in the WTO and approving the numerous “free trade” agreements that have followed, Congress has seriously undermined our national independence by unilaterally surrendering its constitutional power to regulate foreign trade to supranational tribunals and organizations.

............................................................


More:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...tens-our-rights

This article is part of a report about "Free Trade" or what Trump refers to as 'stupid' trade agreements. If you read through it and other articles in the report you see part of why Trump is met with such vitriol.

Hopefully you will also see why I am so against 'Free Trade' and TPA (Fast Track Authority).



How the Free Trade Agenda Is Knocking Down America
-- The New American (PDF) Special Report
http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/TNA2917.pdf

The Special Report includes the following articles:

- The "Free Trade" Agenda Threatens Our Rights
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...tens-our-rights

- Global Merger: Piece by Piece
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...-piece-by-piece

- The EU: Regionalization Trumps Sovereignty
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...mps-sovereignty

- Trade Promises... and Trade Reality
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...d-trade-reality

- North American Union: From NAFTA to the NAU
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...afta-to-the-nau

- Fast-track: Enabler of the "Free Trade" Agenda
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/for...ee-trade-agenda

- Regional Scheme for the Pacific Rim
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...the-pacific-rim

- EU/U.S. -- Transatlantic Convergence
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news...tic-convergence

LInks to track progress of House BIll 2146 which is defined as:

Zitat

---

Defending Public Safety Employees' Retirement Act

(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code, with respect to the exemption from the 10% penalty tax on early distributions from a government retirement plan for qualified public safety employees who have reached age 50, to expand the exemption to include specified federal law enforcement officers, customs and border protection officers, federal firefighters, and air traffic controllers who similarly have reached age 50.

The bill also eliminates the restriction that only distributions from governmental plans that are defined benefit plans qualify for the exemption, thus allowing an exemption of distributions from defined contribution plans and other types of governmental plans. Additionally, early distributions are not treated as a modification of substantially equal payments for purposes of determining an increase in the penalty tax.

The amendments made by this bill apply to distributions made after December 31, 2015.

---

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2146


As introduced to congress 4.30.2015
https://www.congress.gov/114/bills/hr214...114hr2146ih.pdf


Public Law No: 114-26 (06/29/2015)
https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ26/PLAW-114publ26.pdf