Thread: CAFTA Signed!

Damit i wish it didnt go though, so close too. It bothers me becuase it would seem that thier are some constitutional violations in the ratification of this treaty. This treaty was approved first in the Senate, though fiancial treatys that effect the people have to orginate in the house. Am i right?

Pro

Pro--you are exactly right. Nothing about CAFTA was done properly. It originated in the wrong house. It was passed there by traitors. It went to the House to be defeated but was cheated into a 217 215 vote by unacceptable actions of El Presidente including his prowing the hallowed halls of our Representatives during the Vote. No President should sell his "visions" door to door in our Capitol Building. That is undue influence on Congressman and an abuse of power by this El Presidente.

An abuse of power??? By G. Bush?? You're joking!!

RR

Since 1974, Presidents have used "fast-track authority" to negotiate foreign trade agreements. President Bill Clinton was granted "fast track authority" by Congress to pass NAFTA and GATT. These international treaties requiring a 2/3 Senate approval were presented to both houses of Congress for a "simple majority" vote.


I think the internet is the only reason we know about all of these things now --

Mamie,
Do you think that Congress had the authority to do that?

I am not for or against CAFTA in anyways but on the radio, I've been hearing that CAFTA is somewhat a good thing because it will expand more trade competition besides trading with china all the time.

Originally Posted by HandGrip

I am not for or against CAFTA in anyways but on the radio, I've been hearing that CAFTA is somewhat a good thing because it will expand more trade competition besides trading with china all the time.

My understanding is that American companys will buy up evreything in south america and thier will also be the exporting of jobs at the expense of exploitation of workers for less pay, moreless poverty.

Pro

Originally Posted by jp_48504

Mamie,
Do you think that Congress had the authority to do that?

nope, I sure don't -- Congress can't give what wasn't theirs to give

Originally Posted by HandGrip

I am not for or against CAFTA in anyways but on the radio, I've been hearing that CAFTA is somewhat a good thing because it will expand more trade competition besides trading with china all the time.

well I guess it depends on what they mean by good --- national security and sovereignty is more precious than goods that can be bought and sold ...

I thought this was cute "But what does a Constitution mean to a few Free Traitors..."

I think American companies that outsource jobs to foreign countries should not be eligible for "free trade" under a foreign agreement -- either they're subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or not. . .