CAN WE TRUST OUR GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT AMERICA'S INTERESTS UNDER THE NEWLY CREATED WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION?

Apparently the answer to the above questions is a resounding "NO". According to Congresswoman Helen Bentley (R-Maryland), in her remarks to the U.S. House regarding the question of America's interests under GATT-WTO, the U.S. Government and its agents, attorneys and agencies have defended foreign corporations against U.S. industry time and time again. Her revelations were astonishing and frightening:

"Mr. Chairman, we'll be asked to vote on the passage of GATT... likely in this session. The central feature, signally the major difference between the 'old' GATT and the 'new' GATT, will be the World Trade Organization, the enforcement arm of the new GATT.

"The basic structure of the WTO is much the same as the bi-national panels, now operating in the Canadian Free Trade Agreement. There, decisions are made on the validity of U.S. law... law already upheld by the trade courts of the U.S. However, [under the GATT-WTO] if the panel votes against the U.S. law, there is no appeal from the decision and U.S. law -- while not physically changed -- CANNOT be enforced by the U.S. government.

"The GATT will expand this power to render U.S. law impotent to 117 nations exporting into our markets, and the only representation to the WTO will be by the U.S. Trade Representative on appeals from industries which he chooses. This is a tremendous shift of power from the Congress to the Executive, from U.S. Courts to international panels meeting in secret.

"If we are being reassured that the Executive Branch will protect Congress' and the peoples' interests in the New World Order before the World Trade Court, then I think we should examine how past Presidents have viewed their charge to uphold U.S. international trade law.

"For at least 15 years, Executive Branch lawyers have lobbied for policy changes benefiting foreign interests, even appearing in Court for foreign positions on trade law against U.S. Producers.

"The most recent extraordinary behavior occurred at the Treasury Department in the challenge to California's Unitary tax law. Foreign lobbyists triggered the suit against California by having Treasury issue policy changes and thereby, ultimate charges against the state. Treasury then appeared on behalf of the foreign plaintiffs. Had California lost it would have cost the state billions in tax rebates.

"If this shook the states up -- the U.S. government as an adversary on behalf of foreign nations -- U.S. Corporations have been experiencing this right along.

"In anti-trust actions against the Japanese TV industry, representatives of the American industry struggled over 15 years in the courts. The U.S. Justice Department's Anti-trust division and the State Department appeared on behalf of the Japanese, against the U.S. plaintiffs before the Supreme Court in 1987.

"In 1992, the Commerce Department representing themselves as defendants in an anti dumping case, used Fujitsu, Mitsubishi and NEC's support against a U.S. plaintiff.

"The record is replete with U.S. government attorneys appearing in trade cases filed by U.S. companies, using U.S. taxpayers' money to argue in favor of foreign interests.

"If there has been such activism from the Agencies to confound the upholding of U.S. trade law before the 'new' GATT -- Treasury, State, Commerce, and Justice -- then what may we expect after GATT passes when the Courts will have no power to stop their attack on the body of domestic law as we saw occur when California won on the Unitary Tax?"

Note: After this damning evidence against the GATT-WTO, Congresswoman Bentley lost her bid for re-election.

THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE