|
2005 Ron Paul Chapter 57
Not linked on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.
Congressional Record [.PDF]
United States Should Leave World Trade Organization
9 June 2005
2005 Ron Paul 57:1
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself
such time as I may consume.
2005 Ron Paul 57:2
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of our position to remove ourselves
from the WTO. My economic position is
somewhat different from some of my
allies, because I come at it from a free
trade position.
2005 Ron Paul 57:3
I happen to believe in minimum tariffs, if any, but I do not believe that
the process of the WTO and world government
is a good way to do it. I do not
think the WTO achieves its purpose,
and I do not think it is permissible
under the Constitution. Therefore, I
strongly argue the case that, through
the process, that we should defend the
position of the Congress which gives us
the responsibility of dealing with international
trade, with international foreign
commerce. That is our responsibility.
We cannot transfer that responsibility
to the President, and we cannot
transfer that responsibility to an
international government body.
2005 Ron Paul 57:4
Therefore, there are many of us who ally together to argue that case, although
we may have a disagreement on
how much tariffs we should have, because
the Congress should decide that.
We could have no tariffs; we could have
a uniform tariff, which the Founders
believed in and permitted; or we could
have protective tariffs, which some of
those individuals on our side defend,
and I am not that much interested in.
But the issue that unifies us is who
should determine it. For me, the determination
should be by the U.S. Congress
and not to defer to an international
government body.
2005 Ron Paul 57:5
Now this always bewilders me, when my conservative friends and those who
believe in limited government are so
anxious to deliver this to another giant
international body. For instance, the
WTO employs over 600 people. Free
trade, if you are interested in free
trade, all you have to do is write a sentence
or two, and you can have free
trade. You do not need 600 bureaucrats.
It costs $133 million to manage the
WTO every year. Of course, we pay the
biggest sum, over $25 million for this,
just to go and get permission or get our
instructions from the WTO.
2005 Ron Paul 57:6
We all know that we raised taxes not too long ago, not because the American
people rose up and called their Congressmen
and said we wanted you to repeal
this tax and change the taxes. It
was done in order to be an upstanding
member of the WTO. We responded and
took instructions from the WTO and
adapted our tax policy to what they desired.
2005 Ron Paul 57:7
One other issue that I think those who defend the WTO and call themselves
free traders ought to recognize is
that when we concede the fact that
there should be a trade-off, it means
they really do not believe in free trade.
If you believe in free trade and the people
have the right to spend their money
the way they want, it would be as simple
as that. It would benefit that country,
because you could get your goods
and services cheaper.
2005 Ron Paul 57:8
But this whole concession to the management of trade through the WTO
says, all right, we are going to do this
if you do this, and it acknowledges the
fact that free trade does not work unless
you get something for it. That
may be appealing to some, but a free
trader should not argue that way. Because
free trade, if it is a benefit, it is
simply a benefit.
2005 Ron Paul 57:9
In the 1990s when the WTO was originally passed, the former Speaker of the
House made a statement about this. I
want to quote from him. This is from
Newt Gingrich. He was talking about
the WTO: “I am just saying that we
need to be honest about the fact that
we are transferring from the United
States at a practical level significant
authority to a new organization. This
is a transformational moment. I would
feel better if the people who favor this
would be honest about the scale of
change. This is not just another trade
agreement. This is adopting something
which twice, once in the 1940s and once
in the 1950s, the U.S. Congress rejected.
I am not even saying that we should reject
it. I, in fact, lean toward it. But I
think we have to be very careful, because
it is a very big transfer of
power.”
2005 Ron Paul 57:10
I agree with Newt Gingrich on this. It was a huge transfer of power. I happen
to believe it was an unconstitutional
transfer of power; and, therefore, we
are now suffering the consequences because
we have lost prerogatives and
control of our own trade policy.
2005 Ron Paul 57:11
Now the President of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, a free market think
tank, from Auburn, Alabma said, “The
World Trade Organization is supposed
to be the great apparatus to push the
world to greater economic integration.
In reality, it was nothing but the resurrection
of the old central planning
fallacy that the world needs a central
authority to manage it. The WTO has
ended up politicizing trade by putting
the stamp of officialdom on some very
bad policy.”
2005 Ron Paul 57:12
So my message is to appeal to those who believe in limited government,
free markets, free trade and the Constitution.
I appeal to those who want
to use tariffs in a protective way because
they defend the process. But I am
really appealing to the conservatives
who claim they believe in free trade,
because I do not believe what we have
here is truly free trade.
2005 Ron Paul 57:13
The WTO has already been able to influence our tax laws. Not too long ago,
Utah repealed a ban on electronic gambling
for fear the WTO would come in
and find that violated free trade.
2005 Ron Paul 57:14
Another area of importance to so many of us, both on the left and the
right of the political spectrum, has to
do with the Codex Commission regulation
set up by the United Nations. How
much regulation are we going to have
on vitamins and nutrition products?
The UN already indicated the type of
regulation. Guess who may, most likely,
be the enforcer of these regulations?
It will be the WTO. The Europeans
have much stricter regulations. This
means that some day the WTO may
well come to us and regulate the distribution
of vitamins and nutritional
supplements in this country, something
that I do not think we should
even contemplate. The case can be
made that if they have already pressured
us to do things, they may well do
it once again.
2005 Ron Paul 57:15
Our administration is not too interested in the Kyoto Protocol, but that
may well come down the road, and the
enforcement of the Kyoto Protocol
many believe will be enforced by the
WTO.
2005 Ron Paul 57:16
So this is big government, pure and simple. It does not endorse free trade
whatsoever. It endorses managed trade;
and too often it is managed for the
privileges of the very large, well-positioned
companies. It does not recognize
the basic principle that we should defend
as a free society individuals ought
to have the right to spend their money
the way they want. That is what free
trade is, and you can do that unilaterally
without pain and suffering.
2005 Ron Paul 57:17
So I ask Members to consider, why should we not reclaim some of our prerogatives,
our authorities, our responsibility?
We have given up too much
over the years. We have clearly given
up our prerogatives on the declaration
of war, and on monetary issues. That
has been given away by the Congress.
And here it is on the trade issue.
2005 Ron Paul 57:18
I can remember an ad put out in the 1990s when the WTO was being promoted
and they talked directly, it was
a full page ad, I believe, in the New
York Times. They said, “This is the
third leg of the new world order.” We
had the World Bank, we had the IMF,
and now we had the World Trade Organization.
2005 Ron Paul 57:19
So if you are a believer in big government and world government and you
believe in giving up the prerogatives of
the Congress and not assuming our responsibility,
I would say, go with the
WTO. But if you believe in freedom, if
you believe in the Constitution and if
you really believe in free trade, I would
say we should vote to get out of the
WTO.
2005 Ron Paul 57:20
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my remaining time be allotted
to the gentleman from Vermont
(Mr. SANDERS) and that he be able to
control that time.
| |
