Thread: Montana Just Says NO! to THE SECURITY AND PROSPERITY PARTNER

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2007/billhtml/HJ0025.htm


Montana Just Says NO! to THE SECURITY AND PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP

In a land slide vote of 94 to 5 a RESOLUTION opposing

THE SECURITY AND PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP

has passed the House in the State of Montana.

Momentum can now begin to build.

The Bill has now been transmitted to the Senate.

The full text follows:

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2007/billhtml/HJ0025.htm



2007 Montana Legislature HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 25 INTRODUCED BY D. RICE A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF MONTANA OPPOSING ANY EFFORT TO IMPLEMENT A TRINATIONAL POLITICAL, GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY AMONG THE UNITED STATES, CANADA, AND MEXICO; OPPOSING THE SECURITY AND PROSPERITY PARTNERSHIP OF NORTH AMERICA AND INITIATIVES PURSUED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PARTNERSHIP THAT THREATEN THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE UNITED STATES; OPPOSING A NORTH AMERICAN UNION; AND OPPOSING THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT SUPERHIGHWAY SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort among the United States, Canada, and Mexico to share information and streamline traffic across shared borders; and WHEREAS, in meeting Security and Prosperity Partnership initiatives, the security and prosperity ministers are examining opportunities to open

the borders between the United States, Canada, and Mexico; and WHEREAS, the gradual creation of such a North American Union from a merger of the United States, Mexico, and Canada would be a direct threat to the Constitution and national independence of the United States and imply an eventual end to national borders within North America; and WHEREAS, according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly widened since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); and WHEREAS, the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA; and WHEREAS, a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union and the broader plan to advance the Security and Prosperity

Partnership; and WHEREAS, it would be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies that employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would increase the insurance rates for American drivers; and WHEREAS, future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities; and WHEREAS, a NAFTA Superhighway System would be funded by foreign consortiums and controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States; and WHEREAS, the Security and Prosperity Partnership aims to integrate United States laws with Mexico and Canada on a broad range of issues such as e-commerce, transportation, environment, health, agriculture, financial services, and

national security, which may lead to negative changes in United States administrative laws; and WHEREAS, state and local governments throughout the United States would be negatively impacted by the Security and Prosperity Partnership or a North American Union process, such as an open borders vision, eminent domain takings of private property along potential superhighways, and increased law enforcement problems along such superhighways; and WHEREAS, this trilateral partnership to develop a North American Union has never been presented to Congress as an agreement or treaty and has had virtually no congressional oversight; and WHEREAS, initiatives advancing the Security and Prosperity Partnership will lead to the erosion of United States sovereignty and could lead to integrated continental court systems and currency; and WHEREAS, United States policy, not foreign consortiums, should be used to control our national borders and to ensure that

national security is not compromised. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF MONTANA: That the Montana Legislature urge the President and the Congress of the United States to withdraw the United States from any further participation in the Security and Prosperity Partnership, any efforts to implement a trinational political, governmental entity among the United States, Canada, and Mexico, or any other efforts used to accomplish any form of a North American Union. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Montana Legislature urge the President and the Congress of the United States not to engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement Superhighway System. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be sent by the Secretary of State to the Honorable George W. Bush, President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States, the United States Secretary of

Commerce, and each member of the United States Congress. - END -


Passed the House by a vote of 94 to 5 !

Transmitted to the Senate.

I wonder what Bush and his Spp is thinking now. Good for Montana!

If Bush keeps up lets see if Montana votes to secede from the union.

Gotta love Montana!

God bless them, that is the sound of CFR getting shot out of the sky.

This is amazing!! This is a miracle!! Thank you, Montana!!!

This is wonderful!

I hate always being the serious one {guess every group has to have one of us party poopers} but realize that this is just a 'resolution' and doesn't hold any weight in the scheme of things.

Make no mistake, it's a great start and helping to get the NAU/SPP publicized. This is only the BEGINNING.........we need to build momentum so that all Americans learn about the SELLING OF AMERICA!!!

We need this in the papers and across the web. It needs to be loud and constant now.

my 2 cents

I am going to send this to my State Reps and see why Okla cannot do the same thing!

Does this make 12 states against it now?

Originally Posted by nittygritty

I am going to send this to my State Reps and see why Okla cannot do the same thing!

Good idea Nitty, let us know if you get a reply.
I would be very interested.

Hey Sis,


Have you every gotten a response from Sen. Menendez, Sen. Lautenberg or any other Representatives from the House in NJ. I've sent several letter and faxes and get nothing in response to SPP or NAU.


Have you been stonewalled too? Just wondering. Any other fellow Jerserites can chime in too and let me know as well if they have received anything.