Weekly News via Email
   Set as homepage | Add to favorites | Customer Service | Subscribe Now | Place an Ad | Contact Us | Sitemap Friday, 10.24.2014
Classifieds
News Archive
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
 1  2  3  4  5
 6  7  8  9  10  11  12
 13  14  15  16  17  18  19
 20  21  22  23  24  25  26
 27  28  29  30  31
Online Extras
Site Services
Around Bend
Outdoor Fun
Travel Info
Shop Local




Members Of



Poll: Today's Live Poll
Email to a friend | Print this | PDF version | Comments (2 posted) 
  Blogger |   del.icio.us |   digg |   newsvine

Jan 04,2008
World Trade Organization is no friend to U.S.
by Phyllis Schlafly

"WTO" now stands for "World Trade Outrage" rather than its original name, World Trade Organization. The World Trade Organization just ruled that the Caribbean nation of Antigua and Barbuda can freely violate American copyrights and trademarks in order to punish the United States for laws prohibiting Internet gambling.

Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act in 2006 after finding that "Internet gambling is a growing cause of debt collection problems for insured depository institutions and the consumer credit industry." The social and financial costs of gambling would be greatly increased if the United States permits Internet gambling.

The World Trade Organization ordered this punishment because it says U.S. laws interfere with free trade in "recreational services." The foreign tribunal ranks free trade as more important than the intellectual property rights Americans have enjoyed since the U.S. Constitution was written.

The World Trade Organization's 88-page decision issued in December contained the panel's remarkable admission that "we feel we are on shaky grounds." But that didn't stop the Geneva tribunal from issuing its ruling anyway.

The United States has every right as a nation to protect its people against the corruption and loss of wealth that result from gambling on the Internet. It is shocking for an unelected foreign tribunal to tell the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate and the president of the United States that they lack the power to protect U.S. citizens.

Even American supremacist judges would not have the nerve to authorize stealing copyrights and trademarks as a remedy for one side in an unrelated dispute. But the World Trade Organization granted what has been called a "piracy permit" that allows a small Caribbean nation to "pirate," or steal, U.S. property rights.

The response in Washington was to announce an attempt to revise the conditions under which the United States joined the World Trade Organization in 1994. That's a non-starter because these changes in the World Trade Organization treaty would require the approval of all 151 members, most of whom don't like the U.S. anyway.

The World Trade Organization has ruled against the United States in 40 out of 47 major cases, and against the U.S. in 30 out of 33 trade remedies cases. After the World Trade Organization ruled that the U.S. cannot divert tariff revenue to U.S. companies that are injured by foreign subsidies to their competitors, Vice President Dick Cheney provided the tie-breaking vote in the Senate on Dec. 21, 2005, to kowtow to the World Trade Organization.

For many years, opponents of the World Trade Organization have predicted that this foreign bureaucracy would massively interfere with U.S. sovereignty. This new ruling is crazy, unjust and impertinent, but without a lot of public protest, it looks unlikely that our "free trade" president or Congress will do anything to protect U.S. citizens from the World Trade Organization.

How is a foreign tribunal in Geneva able to put the United States in such a box? It's because the internationalist free-trade lobby cooked up a sleazy deal to force the World Trade Organization on Americans in 1994 during the week after Thanksgiving, when Americans were preoccupied with Christmas shopping and festivities.

The deal to lock the United States into World Trade Organization consisted of three parts. First, the 14-page World Trade Organization agreement was surreptitiously added, without debate or publicity, to the 22,000-page revision of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, implementing legislation, and was voted on under "fast track" rules that allowed no amendments or changes, severely limited debate, and forbade any filibuster.

Second, the Treaty Clause in the U.S. Constitution for ratification of treaties was ignored, and World Trade Organization was declared passed by Congress as a non-treaty. Third, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization agreement was passed in the December lame-duck session with the votes of dozens of Congressmen who were looking for lucrative jobs representing foreign interests because they had already been defeated in the Republican landslide of November 1994.

The World Trade Organization is not "free trade" at all, but is a supra-national body in Geneva that sets, manages and enforces World Trade Organization-made rules to govern global trade. The World Trade Organization includes a one country-one vote legislature of 151 nations (the United States has the same one vote as Cuba), an unelected multinational bureaucracy, and a Dispute Settlement Board that deliberates and votes in secret and whose decisions cannot be appealed or vetoed.

The World Trade Organization is a direct attack on U.S. sovereignty because it claims it can force any nation to change its laws to comply with World Trade Organization rulings. Article XVI, paragraph 4, states: "Each Member shall ensure the conformity of its laws, regulations, and administrative procedures with its obligations." The World Trade Organization has the final say about whether U.S. laws meet World Trade Organization requirements.

In this presidential season, the World Trade Organization should make easy target practice for any candidate to speak up and defend U.S. sovereignty against globalists who, under the mantra of "free trade," willingly allow the World Trade Organization to say which laws the U.S. may or may not adopt.

Phyllis Schlafly is a lawyer, conservative political analyst and the author of the newly revised and expanded "Supremacists." She can be contacted by e-mail.

© Copley News Service

3701 times read

Related news
Clinton: Enforce U.S. trade laws by UPI posted on Apr 14,2008

Easy to see why US jobs move overseas by Phyllis_Schlafly posted on Apr 27,2007

Fair trade for U.S. business the aim of House bill by Phyllis_Schlafly posted on Jun 29,2007

Let's protect U.S. jobs by Phyllis_Schlafly posted on Nov 02,2007

Pentagon creating jobs in Europe, not the U.S. by Phyllis_Schlafly posted on Mar 28,2008

Did you enjoy this article? Rating: 4.64Rating: 4.64Rating: 4.64Rating: 4.64Rating: 4.64 (total 66 votes)

  • Your story says nothing about how the UIGEA was passed by attaching it to an unrelated port security bill with exemptions for lotteries, horse racing, and fantasy sports games. The main author Bob Goodlatte has tried to hide his donations from the horse racing industry by setting up a pac to conceal his receipt of thousands of dollars. Meanwhile U.S. citizens are denied the right to do as they wish online with their own money. I don't want to be "protected" from internet gambling and neither do over 800,000 people who have joined the poker players alliance to protest this idiotic law. Follow the money and you will find why this law was passed. The best thing we could do was practice what we preach. Repeal this stupid law and regulate online gaming like they do in Canada and The U.K. . We say we are for free trade but we didn't like losing U.S. dollars to foreigners. This is not the American Way and I hope that if nothing else this ruling by the WTO will bring this issue out into the open and allow for discussion. Prohibition of Internet Gambling will not work. If the U.S. government is really for "protecting" American consumers they will license and regulate online casinos and poker rooms just like they do casinos and poker rooms all over the United States (including foreign owned). The technology is already available to prevent minors and problem gamblers from playing but it isn't being used because we are banning instead of regulating the online gaming industry. This has allowed unregulated casinos to fill the void left when publicly traded companies left the U.S. Market from fear of prosecution under this law. By the way, U.S. corporations like Yahoo! already have online poker rooms in the U.K. where they are licensed and regulated and the dollars are returning to the good ol USA. What is really being protected? I don't want the U.S. copyrights violated but maybe we should have thought about it before we passed the UIGEA instead of crying about it when we were called on it by the world community. Our UIGEA law devestated Antigua and hit the U.K. stockmarket hard when we tried to "protect" not U.S. consumers, but U.S. corporations Like Harrahs, MGM and others. I hope that the U.S. Congress will come to their senses before Antigua acts on their right to retaliate but if not it won't bother me one bit! Signed, Todd Coffman
  • (Posted on January 6, 2008, 3:26 am Todd Coffman)

  • I understand from your opinion piece that you are an attorney. As such, it would benefit you greatly if you were to understand the facts of the case that brought about the ruling by the WTO Arbitration panel, and how they did everything within the scope of their authority to minimize the penalty on the U.S. First, let me remind you that the U.S. is the single largest complainer at the WTO when they feel other countries may be violating previously agreed to trade deals. We have taken more countries to the WTO to complain and seek sanctions or other remedies to get what we wanted than any other. The case you cite is not one that began after Congress enacted the UIGEA, it pre-dates that law, and for years, Antigua & Barbuda have been trying to negotiate in good faith with the U.S. to come to a resolution that would be agreeable to both parties. During this period of time, the U.S. has outright refused to discuss this issue. After a long, drawn out trial at the WTO, which the U.S. lost, as well as all of its appeals, the U.S. took the unusual step of withdrawing its commitment in this trade in service which has been a longstanding treaty, saying it never intended to offer gaming. This position by the U.S. is most difficult to believe as there was much time and effort spent by our most educated and talented diplomats involved in the process. Further, making such a statement seems like fantasy when the fact that many smaller, less educated, less represented countries did in fact restrict trade in this area in 1994. The U.S. could have at that time also. The decision you so angrily write about was not one that came with little thought and is not a precedent setting decision. Ecuador was awarded a similar sanction over a banana dispute with a European country. After finding guilt by the U.S., a mandate was given to the Arbitration Panel to decide on the level of sanctions, as well as the method of those sanctions. The mandate was simple; it found the U.S. out of compliance with its treaty obligations and demanded it conform. During the past several months, the Arbitration Panel was to decide between the $3.44 billion annually that Antigua was claiming, and the $500,000 the U.S. wanted to pay. In that there is no balance of trade between the two countries, an alternate means of collecting this judgment was needed. Antigua & Barbuda suggested the relaxing of its commitments regarding U.S. Intellectual Property rights was a way to accomplish this, never intending to actually do so, rather, hoping to have the U.S. finally come to the table for discussion. The WTO panel was to decide on an amount that would be equitable and a means for that to be paid, until and unless the U.S. comes into compliance. Instead, it decided to reduce the scope of the mandate to include only monetary losses that may have come from Internet gambling on Horse-racing, which is currently legal in the U.S. This amount came to a mere $21 million annually. Easily this is a number that will not force the U.S. to come into compliance. That bad part of this decision is that the penalty will harm business' that are not involved in this type of trade. The U.S. can avoid any 'piracy issues' simply by living up to its treaties with the rest of the world, and stop being protectionist to those that donate to the politicians pockets. If you care to discuss this issue further, please feel free to write back. I am very well versed on the issue since its inception and am aware of all the problems it has caused, and I am sure if Antigua decides to follow through on this award, that it will be much more costly to the U.S. in terms of jobs, domestic business, loss of tax revenue, unemployment, and possibly a recession, and an out of control free-for-all on not only IP Copyrights and Trademarks, but also on other industries
  • (Posted on January 4, 2008, 6:56 pm Craig)

Market Information
Breaking News
Most Popular
Most Commented
Featured Columnist
Horoscope Guide
Aquarius Aquarius Libra Libra
Aries Aries Pisces Pisces
Cancer Cancer Sagittarius Sagittarius
Capricorn Capricorn Scorpio Scorpio
Gemini Gemini Taurus Taurus
Leo Leo Virgo Virgo
Local Attractions
Bend Visitors & Convention Bureau
Bend Visitors & Convention Bureau

Mt. Bachelor Resort
Mt. Bachelor Resort

Les Schwab Ampitheater
Les Schwab Ampitheater

Deschutes County Fairgrounds
Deschutes County
Fairgrounds

Tower Theatre
Tower Theatre

The High Desert Museum

Advertisements



Deschutes County

Google  
  Web    BendWeekly.com
© 2006 Bend Weekly News
A .Com Endeavors, Inc. Company.
All Rights Reserved. Terms under
which this service is provided to you.
Please read our Privacy Policy. Contact us.
Bend Weekly News & Event Guide Online
   Save the Net
Advertisement
External sites open in new window,
not endorsed by BendWeekly.com
Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Add to Google Add to MSN Add to My AOL
What are RSS headlines?