Senator ditches bill tied to 'superstate'

[ms]

 




 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
Senator ditches bill tied to 'superstate'
Makes decision after WND points out link to 'North American Union'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 25, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com


Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas
Responding to information from WorldNetDaily, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, has taken steps to ensure the Senate will not act on a bill that would further a plan to create a European Union-style alliance in North America.

Cornyn made the decision after WND pointed out Friday the legislation – the North American Investment Fund Act – would constitute an attempt to pass a key piece of American University Professor Robert Pastor's plan to create a "North American Union."

Yesterday, Cornyn's office notified WND the senator had been assured by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that no action will be taken on Senate bill 3622 in the 109th Congress. If the Senate Foreign Relations Committee does not act, the bill will expire at the end of the term in January.



"Senator Cornyn has no intention of filing the bill again until after we have conducted an internal review and inquiry," a spokesman for Cornyn told WND.

The spokesman clarified Cornyn "is adamantly opposed to any 'North American Union' being formed like the EU has been formed in Europe."

Cornyn's office had no explanation, however, for why the legislation was introduced, except to note the senator "continues to believe that if Mexico would adopt free market principles, it would be in the best interest of the United States."

The spokesman further added that Cornyn will continue "to look for ways to encourage the forces of reform within Mexico."

WND showed Cornyn's office Friday that a content analysis of the bill demonstrated its similarity to some of Pastor's writings. The correlation was so strong, WND told the senator's staff, a conclusion could be reliably drawn that the person drafting and proposing the legislation drew from Pastor's writings and intended to advance his political agenda to create a "North American Union."

Pastor's extensive writings repeatedly have called for the creation of a North American Investment Fund, to develop Mexico, as a key step on a road map to a new regional government.

In his 2001 book "Toward a North American Community," Pastor argued a North American Development Fund would advance the "North American integration" needed to produce the union as a regional super-government along the model of the European Union.

Pastor was vice chairman of a May 2005 task force report by the Council on Foreign Relations entitled "Building a North American Community." Creating a North American Investment Fund was a key recommendation of the CFR task force report.

On March 14, 2005, Pastor published a 57 page paper entitled "The Paramount Challenge for North America: Closing the Development Gap."

The paper is Pastor's most comprehensive statement explaining why a North American Investment Fund is central to his plan to integrate North America as a first step in the creation of a continental union.

Pastor presented his recommendation that a North American Development Bank should be created in an address to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade of the House of Commons in Ottawa, Canada, Feb. 7, 2002.


The three leaders [of Canada, Mexico, and the U.S.] should establish a North American Development fund, whose priority would be to connect the U.S.-Mexican border region to central and southern Mexico. If roads were built, investors would come, immigration would decline, and income disparities would narrow. If Mexico's growth rate leaped to twice that of its neighbors, the psychology of the relationship would be changed.
The language is similar to Senate bill 3622, which in Section 4, "Projects Funded," states as the first purpose of the fund "to construct roads in Mexico to facilitate trade between Mexico and Canada, and Mexico and the United States."

Section 4, part (b)(2) of the bill further specifies: "PRIORITY – in selecting grantees to carry out projects in subsection (a)(1), priority should be given to projects in the interior and southern regions of Mexico that connect to more developed markets in the United States and Canada."

When Pastor's proposal surfaced in the May 2005 CFR task force report, the name had evolved to the "North American Investment Fund," identical to the title of Senate bill 3622. On page 14, the CFR report says:


The United States and Canada should establish a North American Investment Fund to encourage private capital flow into Mexico. The fund would focus on increasing and improving physical infrastructure linking the less developed parts of Mexico to markets in the north, improving primary and secondary education, and technical training in states and municipalities committed to transparency and institutional development.
The Senate bill in Section 4(a)(2) says a secondary purpose of the fund proposed by Cornyn would be "to encourage the development and improve the quality of primary, secondary, and post-secondary education throughout Mexico," a purpose consistent with the intent and language of the CFR task force report.

Cornyn's decision, however, effectively kills the bill or any effort this year by his office to introduce or sponsor legislation to form a North American Investment Fund to develop Mexico.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related offer:
 

[Sasquatch56]

Yup.

It's notable too that the use of executive order to accomplish that which the people are not willing to do through the legislative process is losing its prominence in this, at least for now. GW is a lame duck and the Republicans don't want to be a lame duck party so the considerations are away from the table - for now.

One would do well to not forget the parsing of words that by-passed the treaty process spelled out in our constitution when NAFTA and GATT were passed. The decision was made to simply call treaties agreements and not allow any discussion of the realities. We saw, recently a failed effort to push through the DPW deal that got an awful lot of citizens awfully angry at an awfully inoportune time for the president, the Republican Party and an awful lot of Democrats too. We saw it again when the Senate and the president tried to game a guest worker program out of universal disregard for federal immigration laws. Again, a lot of people got throat holds on a lot of senators.

The system works as long as people remain engaged.

I think the thing that annoys me most about this idea is that the United States is somehow supposed to be responsible for rectifying the cess pool of Mexican government and their non-economy. We're having enough troubles here, we really don't need to attempt to take on Canada's or Mexico's problems. Including their interests in our policy making and legislative processes is a dereliction. Our government is responsible to our people and no one else.

The biggest problem with continental governments and the one world government notion is that the efficacy of government declines as the diversity in the constituency rises. Politics is a matter of building consensus. When the constituency becomes diverse, the nature of the consensus generated on any isse becomes unacceptable to more and more people until it's of no legitimcay to anyone. Then you have to have a lot of guns to make the consensus stick. Sorry, ain't interested. That's the fundamental reason the U.N. equates to a government of useless nations. The devotee nations have abdicated the interests of their own peoples to a seriously flawed and corrupt organization that has no interest in the existence of their constituencies.

Uhhh, dang. I got back up on my soap box. I hate it when that happens.