SPP: The beginning of a North American Union

By Tom DeWeese, American Policy Center

Is our government working quietly to create the equivalent of a North American Union -- much on the lines of the European Union?

Some charge that such a Union will eventually override our Constitutional government, our judicial system, our economic system and even our currency, which, some speculate, will be replaced by something called the Amero. Can it be possible?

Others say such charges are just another trumped up conspiracy theory of a lunatic fringe.

I can't possibly address every issue and describe the complete history of the situation in our short time together, but I can go over the highlights and give you an idea as to why many of us are greatly concerned and in fact believe we are entering the fight of our lives.

Here's a quick run down.

On March 23, 2005 President Bush met with Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in what was officially described as a "Summit." The three leaders then announced the signing of an agreement to create common policies concerning various economic and security issues among the three nations.

The initiative is called the Security and Prosperity Partnership or the SPP.

It's purpose?

According to a joint statement from the three leaders, the SPP is to "establish a common approach to security to protect North America from external threats, prevent and respond to threats within North America, and further streamline the security and efficient movement of legitimate low-risk traffic across our shared borders."

Desirable or not, such an undertaking represents a radical change in how the three nations interact and cooperate with each other. It is a matter of changed foreign policy, monetary policy, and military policy.

Yet there has been no Congressional oversight or authorization for the undertaking. No funds appropriated.

Meanwhile, since that Summit in 2005, at least 20 working groups have been organized under the SPP to produce memorandums of understanding and trilateral declarations of agreement covering nearly every issue affecting our daily lives.

Whether or not you accept the idea that a North American Union is being established, clearly it must be acknowledged that a new layer of tri-national government bureaucracy is being created.

As you know, the major debate in the US today is over border security. Our nation is being flooded with hordes of illegal aliens. They are over-burdening our schools, hospitals and social services.

In many parts of the nation, hospitals and services are being forced to shut down, damaging the quality of life of American citizens.

On top of the illegal alien situation, we face danger from the threat of terrorists as Americans are forced to surrender liberty in the name of fighting this threat.

And there is the flood of illegal drugs pouring over the border, straight into our kid's schools.

More than 80% of the American people have demanded something be done to secure the borders.

Yet, the Administration has fought efforts to close the border. Why? It appears obvious in light of agreements made in the creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership.

The SPP calls for "harmonizing" our borders into one seamless entity called North America.

So, under what authority are more than 16 government agencies being organized to create the SPP?

As reported by Congressman Ron Paul:

According to Administration officials, "...The SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather it is a "dialogue" launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States... What is a dialogue? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has no role at all in this 'dialogue.' According to the SPP, this 'dialogue' will create new supra-national organizations to 'coordinate' border security, health policy, economic trade policy, and energy policy between the governments of Mexico, Canada and the United States. As such it is but an extension of NAFTA-and CAFTA-like agreements that have far less to do with the free movement of goods and services than they do with government coordination and management of international trade."

Congressman Paul went on to say the SPP is "an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments."

It is important to note that administrators of NAFTA and CAFTA are major participants in SPP working groups. Thus the connection to these trade agreements is obvious and substantial.

According to Article 5.11, under the NAFTA agreement, participating nations must reform their laws to NAFTA regulations.

The United States Supreme Court has held that the US government cannot hide behind a claim of federalism to avoid its "international obligations."

NAFTA, then, appears to be the governing entity for the SPP. That means NAFTA regulations (and ultimately SPP regulations) will supersede U.S. laws. NAFTA courts (and ultimately SPP courts) will overrule U.S. courts. And NAFTA policy (and ultimately SPP policy) will override U.S. labor, energy, environmental, health and economic policy.

The Security and Prosperity Partnership is basically NAFTA on steroids.

But how will the Administration move forward to fully implement the SPP without Congressional oversight?

Answer: Fast Track.

Renewed again in 2002, President Bush has been given by Congress the power to freely negotiate treaties and trade agreements with foreign nations.

According to the lobbying group, Public Citizen, the bottom line of Fast Track is that "the White House signs and enters into trade deals before Congress ever votes on them. Fast Track also sets the parameters for congressional debate on any trade measure the President submits, requiring a vote within a certain time with no amendments and only 20 hours of debate."

Mexican economist Miguel Picard wrote in an article published in the foreign press detailing the "deep integration" planned for North America. He said there will be no single treaty and nothing will be submitted to legislatures of the three countries. Instead, he says, the plan for a "merged future" will be implemented through the signing of regulations not subject to citizen review.

Picard concluded by saying the schedule calls for beginning with a customs union, then a common market, then a monetary and economic union, and finally the adoption of a single currency.

Who benefits from the creation of such a union? Multinational corporations.

They are the driving force behind its creation. They seek one currency, one set of rules, one controlling entity -- to enable them to move goods and services effortlessly across the border.

Above all, they do not want the public involved in the process.

At a September meeting in Banff, Canada, top officials from all three nations met to outline policies within topics such as "A Vision for North America," and "Demographic and Social Dimensions of North American Integration."

Top US officials, including former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and U.S. Trade Representative Carla Hills were in attendance. No media was present. No details of these top level discussions were released.

However, the Toronto Star, on September 20th, reported, "The public has been kept in the dark while business elite have played a lead role in designing the blueprint for this more integrated North America."

One participant at the Banff meeting didn't like what he was witnessing. Mel Hurtig, a noted Canadian author said, "We're talking about such an important thing, we're talking about the integration of Canada into the United States. For them to hold this meeting in secret and to make every effort to avoid anybody learning about it, right away you've got to be hugely concerned."

The SPP is not about free trade. Its use of public/private partnerships creates an elite of certain, chosen global corporations which basically become part of government at the expense of their competition and our national independence.

One more major example of how this works is the planned NAFTA Super Highway or, as it is officially called, the Trans Texas Corridor.

This massive highway would be ten lanes wide, with rail lines, utility corridors for natural gas and oil and power lines running down the middle.

It is designed for containers loaded in foreign lands, such as Asia, to arrive in Mexican ports, there to be loaded in trucks and shipped up the NAFTA corridor through the U.S. and into Canada.

As global corporations are now reaping the benefits of using cheap labor in foreign lands such as China, South Korea and Indonesia, now they want to use the NAFTA Super Corridor to reduce the transportation costs as well.

These corporations certainly care little about national sovereignty or security.

The borders would be little more than speed bumps. Truck would not be stopped and inspected. Instead, they would be simply scanned by high-tech gamma ray screening in drive-by inspections.

Nor do they care about private property ownership in their drive for cost cutting.

In Texas alone, some 584,000 acres of private land is scheduled to be taken by eminent domain for the highway. Texas Department of Transportation has the authority to use the "Quick Take" provision, which will allow them to give notice to property owners that they must leave their land in just 90 days.

Even if the landowner disagrees on the compensation -- and appeals the decision, they still must be off the land in 91 days.

As part of the Corridor's public/private partnership, the Texas state government is keeping up its end of the deal by stonewalling every effort to obtain information as to whose property is affected. They have operated virtually in secret.

When news has leaked out about the NAFTA Highway, Texas officials deny it and simply say it is just improving its state highway system.

The Trans Texas NAFTA Corridor is not, however, an improvement project for I-35, as the state claims.

The NAFTA corridor will be a completely separate highway -- a toll road run by a foreign corporation. The state of Texas has signed a 50 year lease with a Spanish company named Cintra. The company will build the highway, run it and collect the tolls.

That lease contains a "no compete" clause meaning that I-35 can not be expanded nor can any other non-tolled competitive highway be improved.

Above all, as goods are shipped into Mexican ports, use of American ports on our East and West coasts will be drastically reduced, costing Longshoreman jobs.

These facts are causing great concern among U.S. labor unions. The corridor will allow free access to the U.S. for Mexican trucks, which means the containers can be moved through the U.S. by Mexican nationals. In addition, the flood of Mexican trucks will not be required to meet U.S. standards for safety.

These are just a very few of the details concerning the SPP. We believe it is the beginning of the creation of a North American Union much on the lines of the European Union.

The game plan is very much the same. The excuse for the EU was trade. But today, according to the former president of Germany, 84% of that nation's laws now come from the European Union.

It begins in secrecy and slowly builds incrementally. But step by step a structure is put into place run by communitarian law and regional governing councils of appointed, well connected, yet unknown and unreachable officials hiding behind public/private partnerships, not answerable or responsive to citizens.

This is why we fear the creation of a North American Union.

The United States is the most unique nation on earth. We are the only nation which was created to protect our natural rights.

The greatness of the American system arises from the fundamental principle that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That means that public policy must be enacted only by elected representatives of the people. This principle ensures that the people can remove and replace policy makers who make policy with which the people disagree.

To harmonize this land with nations which do not share our values and governing principles can only result in a lessoning of our liberty and our quality of life.

To do it in secret, refusing to allow us to engage in debate before such massive changes take place is nothing short of treason.