In Memory of Jim Callis — A Brilliant Man

 NAFTA
Overview:

• The NADBank:
  Promise vs. Reality

• Our Failed
  Trade Policy

• The Impact of U.S. Trade Policies on Immigration

• The Environmental Impact of NAFTA

• The Impact of NAFTA on Drug Smuggling

  
  

 Global Trade
Nutshell:

• The Mythology
  of Free Trade

• Freedonia &
  Burdenland

• Most-Favored-Nation
  (MFN) Status for China

  
  

Commentary by Valli Sharpe-Geisler

For centuries trade has been about importing and exporting goods. Now under the rubric of international trade agreements, matters that were the undisputed province of local and state governments are being challenged by unelected international tribunals that now may saddle the U.S. taxpayer with huge fines.

In California, Methanex Corp is demanding the taxpayer pay $970 million in potential perceived profits lost just to have the privilege to phase-out Methanex's MTBE (see below for story). Massachusetts is being told it cannot maintain an anti-Apartheid divestment type law by a corporate coalition. In Mississippi, the major funeral conglomerate, Loewen, is seeking to use NAFTA to force U.S. taxpayers to pay for its legal missteps and unfavorable verdict.

What do funeral homes and self-determination have to do with trade? The answer: NOTHING. Isn't it regressing to replace democratic process with mandates from extra-national bureaucracies that have no accountability? It's time to revamp our trade policy. That's my opinion, what's yours?

RP Trade Team Selects CP

The RPUSA Trade Team will be asking the National Convention delegates to approve this additional Constitutional Principle's (CP): "The Reform Party believes in a Balanced Tailored Trade program that promotes the economic interests and welfare of all our citizens while safeguarding domestic production." This will round out the party's constitution in the principles section by including a CP on trade. A fair and balanced trade policy has always been a core issue for the Reform Party, so this CP is a natural extension of that position. California overwhelmingly approved a resolution at last months State Convention endorsing the CP.

What Does MTBE, Funeral Homes, Child Labor and Sovereignty Have To Do With Trade & NAFTA?

Funerals, Frivolous Lawsuits & NAFTA

Loewen is seeking to use NAFTA to force U.S. taxpayers to pay for its legal missteps and failed courtroom strategy. If Loewen is successful, this sends a signal to any Canadian- or Mexican-based corporation that loses a case in a U.S. court that it can use NAFTA to force taxpayers to subsidize unfavorable verdicts. (continued page 3, "Funerals...")

In 1995, Canadian-based Loewen Group, a major funeral conglomerate, was the defendant in a Mississippi lawsuit involving allegations of fraudulent and malicious business practices. After a trial which exposed how the conglomerate had set out to ruin a local small business, the jury found Loewen liable and awarded huge damages to the plaintiff, a local funeral home and insurance operator. Loewen ultimately settled the case for $150 million.

The increasing monopolization of the U.S. funeral markets by a handful of conglomerates has drawn public attention to subsequent consumer abuses and anti-competitive business practices in the industry. In February 1998, "60 Minutes" reported on consumer price gouging that resulted from the monopolization by conglomerates of local funeral markets in Florida. Indeed, in a recent Philadelphia case, Loewen paid $30 million to settle a breach of contract suit similar to that pressed by MS. Now, Loewen is claiming that the MS state court award constituted a violation of the investor rights and protections newly provided to Loewen under NAFTA. Loewen is seeking hundreds of millions of U.S.

NAFTA's Chapter 11 provides an expansive "regulatory takings" mechanism that allows private companies to demand compensation for government actions which undermine a corporation's profits. Loewen's attempt to use NAFTA to escape the Mississippi jury's verdict (and subsequent settlement) threatens the very core of our nation's civil justice system. If this NAFTA challenge to a state civil jury verdict is successful, it would create a legal precedent that other corporations will try to exploit to escape liability for their wrongful acts. The potential implications are tremendous. This challenge must not stand. For more information visit this web site: www.citizen.org/pctrade/nafta/naftapg.html

RP MA Supports un-GATT-itutional Law

The Massachusetts law, which prohibits the state from doing business with corporations that do business with Burma, is being challenged in U.S. District Court by the National Foreign Trade Council Inc., a corporate coalition which claims that such state sanctions laws are unconstitutional. The Reform Party of Massachusetts supports every state in the Union's ability to set and keep divestment type laws such as those passed against South Africa during Apartheid.

Reform Party of MA Supports Burma Law: The Massachusetts law, part of an international human rights campaign against the brutal dictatorship in Burma, is virtually identical to the state and local sanctions laws against South

The Ad-hoc Coalition for the Defense of the Massachusetts Burma Law sent letters to every state attorney general urging them to file amicus briefs in defense of the Massachusetts law. The letters note the April 9, 1986 opinion of the Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, which concludes state sanctions laws like that of Massachusetts "survive constitutional scrutiny."

The Reform Party of Massachusetts is asking states and organizations to sign on to a resolution supporting this type of law.

Californians vs MTBE

For two years Californians from left to right held rallies, engaged in letter writing campaigns and petitioned their elected officials to ban MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether) from their gasoline. In late March 1999, Governor Davis issued an order calling for a phase-out of MTBE in CA by the year 2002. The governor's order has been approved by the CA Senate and is under consideration by the Assembly. Methanex, a Canadian manufacturer of MTBE, claims that California's phase-out of th

The phase-out decision was based on a series of state and federal studies citing the problems with MTBE. MTBE is an oxygenating additive that is supposed to reduce CO emissions in gasoline engines. It is also a carcinogen. Since its introduction, studies have shown it to be much less effective than anticipated and it is now showing up in California's water supply all across the state.

Inasmuch as it was California legislation that authorized the use of MTBE in the first place, then it only stands to reason that the California legislature has the authority to remove it or phase it out now that more has been learned about it. Do the citizens of California acting through their elected representatives have the right to protect themselves? Yes! That is why a broad coalition of citizen activist, environmental and sovereignty groups came together to pen the following resolution in support of our elected representatives action on this issue.

(Draft) JOINT RESOLUTION CALIFORNIA SENATE AND ASSEMBLY

WHEREAS, the State of California has the sovereign right and solemn duty to protect the health, safety and welfare of all Californians,

WHEREAS, the Governor of California has acted under state law to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of California by ordering a phase-out of MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether), a carcinogenic gasoline additive that has been found in the surface and ground water throughout the state,

WHEREAS, a Canadian manufacturer of MTBE claims that California's phase-out of the chemical violates the manufacturer's rights under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and has initiated legal proceedings in NAFTA's Free Trade Commission demanding $970 million from the United States government for loss of expected profits as a result of California's ban,

WHEREAS, when the United States Congress approved NAFTA in 1993 the states were not advised that their sovereign authority to protect their residents from harm could be undermined by claims for monetary damages in trade tribunals that are beyond the reach of the state and federal judiciaries,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE AND ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE LEGISLATURE:

1. Demands that the United States Congress and the President of the United States uphold California's right and legal obligation to defend the health, safety and welfare of all Californians and oppose any future attempts to surrender the sovereignty of the states to international trade bodies beyond the purview of state and federal courts.

2. Urges the Governor of the State of California to take all action necessary to vigorously oppose these intrusions upon California's sovereignty in general and the challenge to the phase-out of MTBE in particular.