A
Anonymous
Guest
This Bill passed the Montana Senate 44-6 and was transmitted to the House....Much of the aim is to send a message to Senator Baucus who now as the head of the Senate Finance Commitee will have a big say on whether "Fast Track" authority is again given to a President or as these esteemed lawmakers believe - that it should be done away with.....No more NAFTA's, CAFTA's, AFTA's that remove states rights.....
And this is not a Partisan Democrat/Republican issue as the MT Senate is made up of 26 Democrats and 24 Republicans......
--------------------------------------------
February 27, 2006
Contact: Joel Barkin at 202-441-5247
MT SENATE TELLS BAUCUS TO REJECT "FAST TRACK"
Montana Senate Overwhelmingly Passes Good Jobs & Democracy Act Sending Signal to Congressional Delegation to Reverse Course on Trade
The Montana State Senate fired a shot across the bow of current U.S. trade policy today, overwhelmingly passing (45 to 5) a resolution calling on Congress to reject the President's "Fast Track" trade promotion authority that has been used to negotiate bad trade deals that limit opportunity for workers and state legislatures' ability to govern.
Fast Track authority, which is set to expire June 30 of this year, delegates to the president Congress' trade policymaking authority. Fast Track has enabled passage of controversial trade deals including NAFTA, CAFTA and the World Trade Organization, which have all accelerated a trade and jobs crisis, marked by a near $800 billion trade deficit and stagnated wages.
Under these Fast Track-enabled trade policies, Montana's ability to create and enact its own laws is in jeopardy due to overreaching trade agreements that incorporate rules that have little to do with trade. Many of these trade pact rules contradict Montana laws that were already democratically enacted by state government.
U.S. Senator Max Baucus is a key figure in the Fast Track debate. His chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over trade policy, is critical in deciding the future of Fast Track and related policies. In the past he has been instrumental in the passage of Fast Track, a tenuous position in a state as economically populist as Montana. By contrast, this month the Sidney Herald reported that Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) is "against fast track," quoting the freshman lawmaker as saying: "I don't care if the president is a Democrat or a Republican, I think legislators need to scrutinize these things."
"Montanans are fortunate to have its senior senator play a key role in the debate over Fast Track and how to address failed trade deals like NAFTA. While it may sound like an inside the Beltway policy tool, Fast Track is an extraordinary device that strips Congress of any meaningful role and has delivered bad trade deals. We're hopeful Sen. Baucus will listen to the legislature and reevaluate his position to restore Congress' authority," said Joel Barkin, Executive Director of the Progressive States Network.
The Progressive States Network was founded in 2005 to drive public policy debates and change the political landscape in the United States by focusing on attainable and progressive state level actions. It accomplishes this mission by uniting policy makers with experts and grassroots organizations to provide the combination of efforts needed to advance good policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------
2007 Montana Legislature
About Bill -- Links
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 17
INTRODUCED BY J. ELLIOTT
A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF MONTANA URGING CONGRESS TO CREATE A SYSTEM THAT ENSURES THAT TRADE AGREEMENTS ARE DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED USING A DEMOCRATIC, INCLUSIVE MECHANISM THAT ENSHRINES THE PRINCIPLES OF FEDERALISM AND STATE SOVEREIGNTY.
WHEREAS, democratic, accountable governance in the states generally, and specifically the authority granted by the Montana Constitution to the Legislative Branch, is being undermined by international commercial and trade rules enforced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and established by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and is further threatened by similar provisions in an array of pending trade agreements; and
WHEREAS, today's "trade" agreements have impacts that extend significantly beyond the bounds of traditional trade matters, such as tariffs and quotas, and instead grant foreign investors and service providers certain rights and privileges regarding acquisition of land and facilities and regarding operations within a state's territory, subject state laws to challenge as "nontariff barriers to trade" in the binding dispute resolution bodies that accompany the pacts, and place limits on the future policy options of state legislatures; and
WHEREAS, NAFTA and other U.S. free trade agreements grant foreign firms new rights and privileges for operating within a state that exceed those rights and privileges granted to U.S. businesses under state and federal law; and
WHEREAS, NAFTA already has generated "regulatory takings" cases against state and local land-use decisions, state environmental and public health policies, adverse state court rulings, and state and local contracts that would not have been possible in U.S. courts; and
WHEREAS, when states are bound to comply with government procurement provisions contained in trade agreements, common economic development and environmental policies, such as buy-local laws, prevailing wage laws, and policies to prevent offshoring of state jobs, as well as recycled content laws, could be subject to challenge as violating the obligations in the trade agreements; and
WHEREAS, recent trade agreements curtail state regulatory authority by placing constraints on future policy options; and
WHEREAS, the WTO general agreement on trade in services (GATS) could undermine state efforts to expand health care coverage and rein in health care costs and places constraints on state and local land-use planning and gambling policy; and
WHEREAS, new GATS negotiations could impose additional constraints on state regulation of energy, higher education, professional licensing, and other areas; and
WHEREAS, despite the indisputable fact that international trade agreements have a far-reaching impact on state and local laws, federal government trade negotiators have failed to respect states' rights to prior informed consent before binding states to conform state law and authority to trade agreement requirements and have refused even to inform state legislatures of key correspondence; and
full resolution:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2007/billhtml/SJ0017.htm
And this is not a Partisan Democrat/Republican issue as the MT Senate is made up of 26 Democrats and 24 Republicans......
--------------------------------------------
February 27, 2006
Contact: Joel Barkin at 202-441-5247
MT SENATE TELLS BAUCUS TO REJECT "FAST TRACK"
Montana Senate Overwhelmingly Passes Good Jobs & Democracy Act Sending Signal to Congressional Delegation to Reverse Course on Trade
The Montana State Senate fired a shot across the bow of current U.S. trade policy today, overwhelmingly passing (45 to 5) a resolution calling on Congress to reject the President's "Fast Track" trade promotion authority that has been used to negotiate bad trade deals that limit opportunity for workers and state legislatures' ability to govern.
Fast Track authority, which is set to expire June 30 of this year, delegates to the president Congress' trade policymaking authority. Fast Track has enabled passage of controversial trade deals including NAFTA, CAFTA and the World Trade Organization, which have all accelerated a trade and jobs crisis, marked by a near $800 billion trade deficit and stagnated wages.
Under these Fast Track-enabled trade policies, Montana's ability to create and enact its own laws is in jeopardy due to overreaching trade agreements that incorporate rules that have little to do with trade. Many of these trade pact rules contradict Montana laws that were already democratically enacted by state government.
U.S. Senator Max Baucus is a key figure in the Fast Track debate. His chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over trade policy, is critical in deciding the future of Fast Track and related policies. In the past he has been instrumental in the passage of Fast Track, a tenuous position in a state as economically populist as Montana. By contrast, this month the Sidney Herald reported that Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) is "against fast track," quoting the freshman lawmaker as saying: "I don't care if the president is a Democrat or a Republican, I think legislators need to scrutinize these things."
"Montanans are fortunate to have its senior senator play a key role in the debate over Fast Track and how to address failed trade deals like NAFTA. While it may sound like an inside the Beltway policy tool, Fast Track is an extraordinary device that strips Congress of any meaningful role and has delivered bad trade deals. We're hopeful Sen. Baucus will listen to the legislature and reevaluate his position to restore Congress' authority," said Joel Barkin, Executive Director of the Progressive States Network.
The Progressive States Network was founded in 2005 to drive public policy debates and change the political landscape in the United States by focusing on attainable and progressive state level actions. It accomplishes this mission by uniting policy makers with experts and grassroots organizations to provide the combination of efforts needed to advance good policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------
2007 Montana Legislature
About Bill -- Links
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 17
INTRODUCED BY J. ELLIOTT
A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF MONTANA URGING CONGRESS TO CREATE A SYSTEM THAT ENSURES THAT TRADE AGREEMENTS ARE DEVELOPED AND IMPLEMENTED USING A DEMOCRATIC, INCLUSIVE MECHANISM THAT ENSHRINES THE PRINCIPLES OF FEDERALISM AND STATE SOVEREIGNTY.
WHEREAS, democratic, accountable governance in the states generally, and specifically the authority granted by the Montana Constitution to the Legislative Branch, is being undermined by international commercial and trade rules enforced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and established by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and is further threatened by similar provisions in an array of pending trade agreements; and
WHEREAS, today's "trade" agreements have impacts that extend significantly beyond the bounds of traditional trade matters, such as tariffs and quotas, and instead grant foreign investors and service providers certain rights and privileges regarding acquisition of land and facilities and regarding operations within a state's territory, subject state laws to challenge as "nontariff barriers to trade" in the binding dispute resolution bodies that accompany the pacts, and place limits on the future policy options of state legislatures; and
WHEREAS, NAFTA and other U.S. free trade agreements grant foreign firms new rights and privileges for operating within a state that exceed those rights and privileges granted to U.S. businesses under state and federal law; and
WHEREAS, NAFTA already has generated "regulatory takings" cases against state and local land-use decisions, state environmental and public health policies, adverse state court rulings, and state and local contracts that would not have been possible in U.S. courts; and
WHEREAS, when states are bound to comply with government procurement provisions contained in trade agreements, common economic development and environmental policies, such as buy-local laws, prevailing wage laws, and policies to prevent offshoring of state jobs, as well as recycled content laws, could be subject to challenge as violating the obligations in the trade agreements; and
WHEREAS, recent trade agreements curtail state regulatory authority by placing constraints on future policy options; and
WHEREAS, the WTO general agreement on trade in services (GATS) could undermine state efforts to expand health care coverage and rein in health care costs and places constraints on state and local land-use planning and gambling policy; and
WHEREAS, new GATS negotiations could impose additional constraints on state regulation of energy, higher education, professional licensing, and other areas; and
WHEREAS, despite the indisputable fact that international trade agreements have a far-reaching impact on state and local laws, federal government trade negotiators have failed to respect states' rights to prior informed consent before binding states to conform state law and authority to trade agreement requirements and have refused even to inform state legislatures of key correspondence; and
full resolution:
http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/2007/billhtml/SJ0017.htm