North American Free Trade Act

[Q]

North American Free Trade Act
Sponsor: Sen. MasterJedi

1. No tariffs, customs, or restrictions on movement of goods, except those that have been outlawed by the destination or interim nation, shall exist between the Republic of Atlasia, Canada, and Mexico.
2. The President and other officers of the Atlasian Government shall take such actions as may be necessary to implement the provisions of this bill.

[Yates]

For the protection of our industries and our workers, I stand in firm opposition to this act.

[Bono]

I suggest a clause to be added to this:
3. The North American Free Trade Agreement and acessory legislation are hereby repealed.

Otherwise, I fully support this.

[Ebowed]

For the protection of our industries and our workers, I stand in firm opposition to this act.

We already have NAFTA; this bill will simply remove all of the sovereignty-infringing regulations from the agreement and allow for a simpler, comprehensible law relating to our free trade laws with Canada and Mexico.

I fully support this bill.

[Democratic Hawk]

For the protection of our industries and our workers, I stand in firm opposition to this act.

We already have NAFTA; this bill will simply remove all of the sovereignty-infringing regulations from the agreement and allow for a simpler, comprehensible law relating to our free trade laws with Canada and Mexico.

I fully support this bill.

Might I ask who's sovereignty is being infringed as NAFTA stands? Because if this Bill, if inacted, diminishes our sovereignty, while being advantageous to Canada and/or Mexico, I'll be opposing it

'Hawk'

How on earth does this diminish OUR sovereignty?!!

It frees us from all of the regulations and jargon in the original agreement that we're bound by.

Editing original post, but hit delete . Anyway I've another question:

If this Bill is enacted would it permit the President or any other official of the Atlasian Government to impose tariffs, as they deem appropriate, to safeguard our national and socio-economic interests. If so, I'll support it

'Hawk'

[MasterJedi]

Ugh, I knew you were going to introduce these bills. I should have PM'd you since there isn't enough time to properly debate them they shouldn't have been introduced.

[Emsworth]

If this Bill is enacted would it permit the President or any other official of the Atlasian Government to impose tariffs

No. It would be unconstitutional for the President to impose tariffs or any other kinds of taxes.

[Yates]

For the protection of our industries and our workers, I stand in firm opposition to this act.

We already have NAFTA; this bill will simply remove all of the sovereignty-infringing regulations from the agreement and allow for a simpler, comprehensible law relating to our free trade laws with Canada and Mexico.

I fully support this bill.

My goodness, how silly of me!

I was assuming that this was a forum version of the actual bill, and reality had been altered in some way. 

[Keystone Phil]

We already have NAFTA; this bill will simply remove all of the sovereignty-infringing regulations from the agreement and allow for a simpler, comprehensible law relating to our free trade laws with Canada and Mexico.

And I don't see how anyone could say no to that. This bill has my full support. Our government should not have to worry about such obstacles concerning trade agreements.

[Bacon King]

I rise in support of this bill.

[Gabu]

Has this been made in consultation with authorities from the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico?  If not, exactly what assurance do we have that they will also ditch NAFTA and pick something like this up?

It seems to me that free trade is the last thing that should be done unilaterially, if only for practical concerns.

[Bono]

Has this been made in consultation with authorities from the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico?  If not, exactly what assurance do we have that they will also ditch NAFTA and pick something like this up?

It seems to me that free trade is the last thing that should be done unilaterially, if only for practical concerns.

Why?
Would you wait for other people to stop hitting themselves with a hammer to stop it yourself?

[Democratic Hawk]

Correct me if I'm wrong but basically, as the agreement stands all goods can move freely between the Republic of Atlasia, Canada and Mexico and not be subject to tariffs, customs or restrictions by the Republic of Atlasia

Therefore, am I to understand that this Bill would:

1. Permit the President and other officers of the Atlasian government to outlaw certain goods as and when they deem appropriate; so, in a nutshell, this Bill gives Atlasia the sovereign power to restrict the movement of such goods across our sovereign territory

2. Allow the Senate to levy tariffs and customs on certain goods, as and when it deems appropriate, as would be its sovereign right to do so

If both premises 1) and 2) are indeed the case, I will support this Bill

'Hawk'

[Emsworth]

1. Permit the President and other officers of the Atlasian government to outlaw certain goods as and when they deem appropriate; so, in a nutshell, this Bill gives Atlasia the sovereign power to restrict the movement of such goods across our sovereign territory

2. Allow the Senate to levy tariffs and customs on certain goods, as and when it deems appropriate, as would be its sovereign right to do so

If both premises 1) and 2) are indeed the case, I will support this Bill

Premise 2 is true: the Senate will retain the power to impose tariffs as it sees fit. Premise 1 is not true: the executive branch cannot make new laws; it can only execute existing laws.

Has this been made in consultation with authorities from the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico?  If not, exactly what assurance do we have that they will also ditch NAFTA and pick something like this up?

It is quite unlikely that Canada and Mexico would abandon NAFTA. This bill does not in any way harm those countries; it not only helps Atlasia, it also helps them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think that I would agree, since free trade always benefits the country trading freely.

[Yates]

If premise 2 is true as Emsworth states, I rise in support of this bill, putting aside my misunderstanding earlier.

[Democratic Hawk]

1. Permit the President and other officers of the Atlasian government to outlaw certain goods as and when they deem appropriate; so, in a nutshell, this Bill gives Atlasia the sovereign power to restrict the movement of such goods across our sovereign territory

2. Allow the Senate to levy tariffs and customs on certain goods, as and when it deems appropriate, as would be its sovereign right to do so

If both premises 1) and 2) are indeed the case, I will support this Bill

Premise 2 is true: the Senate will retain the power to impose tariffs as it sees fit. Premise 1 is not true: the executive branch cannot make new laws; it can only execute existing laws.

Thanks.

I, hereby, raise my support for this Bill now that I know its effects

'Hawk'

[MasterJedi]

This is re-introduced.

[ilikeverin]

For the protection of our industries and our workers, I stand in firm opposition to this act.

We already have NAFTA; this bill will simply remove all of the sovereignty-infringing regulations from the agreement and allow for a simpler, comprehensible law relating to our free trade laws with Canada and Mexico.

I fully support this bill.

What *are* said 'sovereignty-infringing regulations'?

[Ebowed]

Please consider this amendment:
3. The North American Free Trade Agreement and accessory legislation are hereby repealed.

What *are* said 'sovereignty-infringing regulations'?

Under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, Canadians tried to violate California's sovereignty by trying to remove its ban of Methanex. ( http://www.methanex.com/newsroom/mtbe.html , http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/NAFTA_FTAA/NAFTA_FTAA_InvestorsRights.html )

[ilikeverin]

What *are* said 'sovereignty-infringing regulations'?

Under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, Canadians tried to violate California's sovereignty by trying to remove its ban of Methanex. ( http://www.methanex.com/newsroom/mtbe.html , http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/NAFTA_FTAA/NAFTA_FTAA_InvestorsRights.html )

Hmm, okay

[Bacon King]

I propose the following amendment:

3. The North American Free Trade Agreement and accessory legislation are hereby repealed.

[MasterJedi]

I hereby open up the vote on this amendment. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

3. The North American Free Trade Agreement and accessory legislation are hereby repealed.

[MasterJedi]

Aye

[Gabu]

Aye.

[ilikeverin]

Yup