Thread: The "unConstitutional" Transfer of Power and the

The "unConstitutional" Transfer of Power
and the Nullification Party
an American Patriot
July 30, 2005

On July 28, 2005 in "A "Treaty" by any other name is still a "TREATY," I questioned the constitutionality of the President entering an "agreement" without the 2/3rds vote of the Senate under Article II or the power of the President to introduce legislation to "regulate commerce" to Congress under Article I which vests that power to Congress.

I have since learned that CAFTA "legislation" was introduced under the Presidents "fast track authority." Since 1974, Presidents have used "fast-track authority" to negotiate foreign trade agreements. President Bill Clinton was granted "fast tract 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.

Under "fast-track authority" the President negotiates, signs and enters into "trade" agreements with foreign nations before Congress ever votes on them. "Fast track authority" is a violation of the separation of powers because the President has then become the legislator and the executioner of all foreign trade agreements without the 2/3rds vote of the Senate.

As a result of this violation of the "separation of powers," the President and Congress have entered agreements "binding on the states" through the Tokyo Round of the GATT in 1979, the U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement in 1985, the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement in 1988, the NAFTA in 1993, and the Uruguay Round Agreements in 1994 that replaced the GATT with the WTO.

The "fast track authority" of the President expired in 1994 and had not been renewed until The Trade Promotion Authority, legislation by Congress giving President Bush the "legislative authority" to negotiate trade agreements without congressional amendment. This legislation cleared the House of Representatives by three votes in 2002 and the Senate bill passed 66 for and 30 against. The Senate added the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) -- a multibillion dollar expansion of aid to workers who lose jobs as a result of a trade agreement and foreign competition. TAA also provided for a tax credit for 70% of the cost of health insurance purchased – this aid was probably because in the prior year U.S. workers lost 1.2 million manufacturing jobs. U.S. workers have lost jobs and wages in Mexico have fallen as a result of NAFTA in the past ten years, but nonetheless, Congress entered another agreement that would cause even more Americans to lose their jobs.



In 2003, US Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick lobbied the governors of the states for support for the U.S.-Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA, only 22 governors pledged to agree to his negotiations for their state. The States Legislatures of 1/3 of those states have since withdrawn their support. CAFTA clearly did not have the support of the states as required for any foreign agreement or treaty.

Under CAFTA, the American people could lose the right to purchase vitamins and minerals over-the-counter and all sales would have to be in accordance with the "German Model" of health care, not the FDA. Do the American people really want to get a doctors prescription to purchase vitamins and supplements in accordance with the "German Model" of health care at prescription prices? Under CAFTA, will the international tribunal rule the FDA a violation of foreigners rights to export inferior goods?


On July 27, 2005, the House of Representatives, against the majority of the states and the will of the people, passed CAFTA by a "simple majority" vote of 217-215. CAFTA had already passed the Senate in June 2005 also by a "simple majority" vote of 54 to 45 vote. However, because the U.S. Constitution requires bills affecting government revenues – tariff taxes – to begin in the House of Representatives the Senate had to vote again, CAFTA passed the Senate a second time by the "simple majority" vote of 55 to 45 gaining the support of 1 Senator.

CAFTA removes tariffs and trade restrictions that protects American jobs and grants "protection" to corporations that operate outside of the United States by "exporting" manufacturing facilities and jobs to foreign nations. These corporations are then "free" of medicare and social security liability, "free" of taxes and "free" of employee benefit plans -- corporate America gets a "free ride" and then they "laundry" their goods and peddle their wares back to the good ‘ole United States through a ‘foreign nation' while giving the Citizens and the States get the "SHAFTA." This is not a "fair trade" because the citizens of the States trade a paycheck for an unemployment check, they lose insurance benefits, security and many lose their homes. The citizens are burdened with generating tax revenue for the government so it can then provide healthcare and other benefits to foreign nationals and ‘illegal aliens.'

On March 7, 2005, Business Week reported in "States' Rights vs. Free Trade" that a Utah law banning gambling in the state was struck down by the World Trade Organization. "in a case brought by the government of Antigua and Barbuda that gambling regulations in Utah and most other states conflict with America's obligation not to discriminate against foreigners providing "recreational services" and "Glamis Gold Ltd. is also suing for $50 million over California's attempt to protect Indian burial sites in the Imperial Valley from Glamis' open-pit mining practice." Business Week reported that the states have awakened from their slumber and are realizing "A growing number of international trade agreements are usurping state powers. Suddenly alarmed that Washington is bargaining away their authority over everything from regulating utilities to controlling land use, states are all but ready to join the chorus of anti-globalization critics." Well, all I can say is, it's about time and that ain't just whislin' Dixie!!!

The Constitution ratified by the States giving birth to a new nation and establishing the federal government guaranteed under Article I Section 1 that "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives" – NOT the President. In Federalist No. 47 James Madison wrote that "The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny . . .The executive magistrate forms an integral part of the legislative authority. He alone has the prerogative of making treaties with foreign sovereigns, which, when made, have, under certain limitations, the force of legislative acts . . . The magistrate in whom the whole executive power resides cannot of himself make a law, though he can put a negative on every law."

The Constitution expressly guarantees that "the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America" and "he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed" -- i.e, immigration laws, but the President cannot be legislator and executor. Vesting the President "fast-track authority" to negotiate foreign trade agreements and introduce legislation in Congress is a violation of the separation of powers and an unconstitutional transfer of power -- a power not granted to Congress under the Constitution. There's not a state in the union that would transfer title through a party that is not the "legal" title owner and likewise, "fast track authority" was not a power of Congress to give away.

The unconstitutional "transfer of power" by Congress constituted an amendment of the Constitutional powers delegated to Congress and the President without the Constitutional guarantee that amendments to the Constitution be ratified by "the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof."

In his farewell address on September 17, 1796, President George Washington, an American Patriot, soldier and freedom fighter said

"The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the constitution which at any time exists till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government . . .One method of assault may be to effect in the forms of the Constitution alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what can not be directly overthrown.. . . Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian . . .It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those intrusted with its administration to confirm themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power and proneness to abuse it which predominates in the human heart is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. . . .If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates, but let there be no change by usurpation; for though this in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield. . . .Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. . . .The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. . . .It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world, so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. . . . Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest, but even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand, neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character."

Under CAFTA, and other "agreements" entered into under the authority of the "United States" against the will of the people and the states, the states "republican form of government" and the Constitutional protections guaranteed to the Citizens and States and many federal, state and local laws could be nullified or altered -- including laws on "illegal immigration." In other words, the Constitution FOR THE United States is not the "supreme law of the land" as guaranteed under the Constitution and CAFTA nullifies the Constitutional "guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government." The UNITED NATIONS, GATT, NAFTA, CAFTA, and any agreement AFTA, ARE TREATIES WITH FOREIGN NATIONS that violates the Constitution because they alter and transfer power over the states to a foreign entity. Alexander Hamilton, one of our founding fathers, stated that "A treaty cannot be made which alters the Constitution of the country, or which infringes any express exceptions to the power of the Constitution..."

The Constitution grants neither Congress nor the President the power to "transfer power" over any state in the union to any foreign power -- whether it be by "agreement" or treaty – such legislation assumes authority over the States that was never delegated to under the Constitution.

On July 4, 1776, the British colonies unanimously adopted the "Declaration of Independence" declaring that

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. . .That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, having its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness . . . But when a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient suffrance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. . . He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers [refusing to impeach federal judges that violate the Constitution and obstruct justice] . . . .He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; [the Supreme Court, CAFTA, NAFTA, GATT] giving his Assent to their acts of pretended legislation [amnesty and benefits for aliens] . . .For protecting them [illegal aliens, terrorists], by a mock Trial [aliens and foreign nationals are not entitled to the rights of citizens or Article III courts], from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States . . . For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally, the Forms of our Governments [Supreme court striking down state laws as ‘unconstitutional' without constitutional authority]. . .He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us [refusal to secure the borders and encouraging mass immigration]. . .He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people [the backyard of the border states and "alien crossings"] . . .He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions [illegal aliens, militant "street gangs"] . . .In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. . . .We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connection and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them [Congress], as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. "

The "Declaration of Independence" is as relevant today as it was in 1776 and could easily be a dissent against Congress's failure to "repel invasions" and secure our borders as is its duty under the Constitution. But instead of Congress doing it's "duty" they " have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity" and actually encourages mass immigration threatening national security while citizens of this country are fighting the war on terror. Then to add insult to injury, Congress provides benefits and proposes legislation to grant amnesty to ‘foreign nationals' that have "actually invaded" the states in violation of the law of nations.

Congress, against the will of the people and the states approved NAFTA, GATT and CAFTA, – ‘free trade' agreements that caused injury to the citizens and the states. Congress has "a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States" and it "has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws." As a result of these repeated injuries against the Citizens and the States, the time has come for the Citizens and the States to "provide new guards for their future security" because Congress is more interested in corporate America, special interest, foreign nationals and granting amnesty to illegal aliens than it is about securing our borders and the will of the people and the States.

CAFTA was entered into under the authority of the United States without the approval of any state -- "all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States." The legal definition of the "United States" under Title 28, 3002 Sec 15 does not include the 50 states -- the "United States" meansâ€â€

Mamie!! What an outstanding article....it explains what has happened to our US Senate. What used to be a wise and elderly group of thoughtful "Statesmen" has turned into the Globbie Gang of 100. Frankly, I don't think it matters which ones voted for this one or that one. I believe the entire body is owned by corporate interest working to end the United States. They vote this way and that way...calculating it all in advance IMHO to ensure Americans Lose.

The 17th Amendment needs to be repealed.

The Executive Branch needs to be prohitibited from entering our US Capitol Building except once a year to deliver the State of the Union Address.

This prowling around the Capitol flipping fingers and flinging money and threats and arm twisting is abuse of power and encroachment upon our Elected Representatives in place to keep an eye on the Executive Branch not kowtow to the intimidation tactics of Jorge the First.

Mamie, this article is one of the most significant and important articles I've ever read. I hope EVERYONE gets a chance to read it. It's long. It's worth every minute.

Mamie,
Outstanding work. Everyone, take a few minutes and read this and learn it.

thank goodness! I was afraid nobody would read it or wouldn't like it ....

I know I stay on my soapbox about going after Congress and specifically the Senate on the invasion of "illegal aliens" and foreign agreements, and contacting the state reps, but what can I say I'm 'southern'

so many people want to fight against Congress through the courts -- attorneys are expensive and President Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) said "The War between the States established . . . this principle, that the federal government is, through its courts, the final judge of its own powers" -- that's why it won't do any good to use the federal courts.

I'm sending this to my state rep this morning and other people, and I'm gonna call him on the phone -- pretty soon he's gonna change his number!!

talked to my state rep this morning, he asked if Alabama supported the amendment for the balance budget -- here's what I found

States that have not yet called for a constitutional convention to propose a federal balanced budget amendment:

Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

good news for Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Arizona -- your states have requested a convention!!

Mamie,

During the passage of CAFTA, I ask if there was a Constitutional lawyer out there and a Constitutional Scholar answered my questions.

So according to the Constitution, Fast Track is illegal, NAFTA is illegal and so is CAFTA. Now what can we do?

During the passage of NAFTA, Ralph Nador's group (which I am sure is loaded with lawyers) and more powerful than us, were fighting to defeat that TREATY.

In over 10 years nothing has been repealed or changed. Instead more and more provisions are being enacted each year. Which leads me to believe he probably tried everything he could to no avail.

Knowing something is illegal and not being able to do anything about it is very disheartening.

Originally Posted by Darlene

Mamie,

During the passage of CAFTA, I ask if there was a Constitutional lawyer out there and a Constitutional Scholar answered my questions.

So according to the Constitution, Fast Track is illegal, NAFTA is illegal and so is CAFTA. Now what can we do?

During the passage of NAFTA, Ralph Nador's group (which I am sure is loaded with lawyers) and more powerful than us, were fighting to defeat that TREATY.

In over 10 years nothing has been repealed or changed. Instead more and more provisions are being enacted each year. Which leads me to believe he probably tried everything he could to no avail.

Knowing something is illegal and not being able to do anything about it is very disheartening.

what did your Constitutional lawyer say? I'm sure Ralph Nador's group is more powerful than us --

the government derives its "just power" from the governed and the states and citizens have let them do what they want.

BUT neither the President nor Congress is more powerful than the 3/4ths of the Legislatures of the States or a Constitutional Convention ....

the sovereign states and the citizens can put a leash on Congress and the federal judges and teach them how to do new tricks --- why do you think they "ratified" the 17th Amendment? it was so the legislatures of the states could not control the federal government ....


WHAT YOU CAN DO: contact your State Representative and give him this article and ask him to initiate a petition to call for a Constitutional Convention

The very sound of a call for a "Constitutional Convention" by the States just sends thrills through me!!

I will do this Mamie and everyone should do this. A Constitutional Convention of the United States of America to take our country back.

What could be more GRAND than that!!

The very sound of it is HISTORY IN THE MAKING!!

The very sound of a call for a "Constitutional Convention" by the States just sends thrills through me!!
What could be more GRAND than that!!

The very sound of it is HISTORY IN THE MAKING!!

our battle for states rights -- can you imagine if this country starts flying rebel flags!!!