(Updated Nov. 13, 2002 below.)
Is the Way Congress Votes Moral or Even Legal?
By Devvy Kidd
October 1, 2002
When you go to the ballot box to elect individuals to the U.S. Congress, is one of your expectations that they read the legislation that comes before them? Bills that may very well pass both the house and senate, then are signed by the President and made into law affect you, your family and the future of this nation.
Here's a news flash for you. Members of Congress do not read the bills that become law - at least not on a regular basis and not on some of the most draconian, oppressive laws ever to be imposed against the people of this free Republic.
Back in 1994, a lame duck Congress voted on the hideous "free" trade treaty, GATT, whereby the united States of America totally and completely abrogated its sovereignty to a foreign body - the WTO. At the time of the vote, counterfeit U.S. Senator Bob Dole said, "Any way you cut it, we're the big beneficiary." Counterfeit U.S. Senator Ernest Hollings had just the opposite prediction, "...described the vote as 'the gravest mistake the U.S. has ever made on economic policy.'"
Hollings' statement turned out to be right. Our nation has been plundered as a result of GATT and We, the People, our businesses, our commerce, and our livelihoods, have been under attack ever since, losing virtually every single challenge made by some foreign country. On September 26, 2002, counterfeit U.S. Senator Max Baucus said he was deeply troubled by the WTO dispute settlement process and "Things are looking more and more... like a kangaroo court against U.S. trade laws."
Funny thing about Baucus' stand on trade. He's a "free" trader. On his web site it states, "I've also been a leader in the successful efforts to open Chinese markets to U.S. products and to bring China into the World Trade Organization." Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. Do business with our mortal enemy, the Communist Chinese? Remember, in October 2001, a video came out officially sanctioned by the Communist Chinese government which glorified the attacks on America last September 11, 2001, with the moderator chiming that we got what we deserved. That's a fact.
The vote on GATT was 76-24. Guess how many members of the entire Congress read GATT? One! Former counterfeit Senator Hank Brown (R-CO). He's the only one who read this 28,000 page treaty and declared that in no way would he vote for it.
During the hearings on this monster, French financier Sir James Goldsmith testified in front of Earnest Hollings' committee. He demonstrated that GATT would gut the American textile market. The following are some quotes from the Washington Times, December 6, 1993; they accurately reflect Sir Goldsmith's statements during the hearings, which I watched on TV:
"Global free trade will force the poor of the rich countries to subsidize the rich in poor countries. What GATT means is that our national wealth, accumulated over centuries, will be transferred from a developed country like Britain to developing countries like Communist China, now building it's first ocean going navy in 500 years."
"China, with its 1.2 billion people, three Indochinese states with 900 million, the former Soviet republics with some 300 million, and many more can supply skilled labor for a fraction of Western costs. Five dollars in Communist China is the equivalent of a $100 wage in Europe."
"It is quite amazing that GATT is sowing the seeds for global social upheaval and that it is not even the subject of debate in America....If the masses understood the truth about GATT, there would be blood in the streets of many capitals. A healthy national economy has to produce a large part of its own needs. It cannot simply import what it needs and use it's labor force to provide services for other countries."
"We have to rethink from top to bottom why we have elevated global free trade to the status of sacred cow, or moral dogma. It is a fatally flawed concept that will impoverish and destabilize the industrialized world while cruelly ravaging the Third World."
Sir Goldsmith could see into the future, only it's been far worse than he predicted.
The infamous Brady Bill was voted on by only two counterfeit U.S. Senators, Bob Dole and George Mitchell. They pronounced the measure adopted by unanimous consent, a 'parliamentary device' that allowed the leaders to pass the legislation themselves, by voice vote, after ascertaining that no Senator would object.
According to the NY Times, November 25, 1993, there were 97 empty senate seats. "After days of personal animus and futile back room dealing, Republicans backed down without much to show for their efforts. The bill passed without debate, with only three Senators sitting in a chamber emptied by the Thanksgiving holiday." What an outrage.
Is this what our Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution? Since when does our Republican form of government practice 'parliamentary devices'? Yes, Art. 1, Sec. 5, Clause 2 of the Constitution states that "Each House may determine the Rules of its proceedings..." But, don't you as the individual being represented, want your house member or senator to personally vote on all bills that might become law? I do.
How about the so-called "Patriot Act"? According to Congressman Ron Paul, your elected representatives weren't even allowed the text of the bill until it was time to vote! What an outrage. Every member of Congress should have refused to vote on that draconian, insidious monster, without being given the proper time to read, evaluate and make sure all provisions are constitutional. Instead, virtually every member of Congress caved in and voted. This too is an outrage.
When I ran for Congress against NWO supporter, Congressman Wally Herger, he admitted on a radio show under much pressure from callers, that he never read the 2200 page NAFTA treaty, yet he voted for it anyway. Is this what the people of his district elected him to do? Just what is it these people do all day for their $15,000 a month salary?
Yet, in a little over a month, the parties faithful, both Democrats and Republicans, will head down to the polls, push buttons on machines that have no accountability and "reelect" the same bunch of people who don't even read the bills they vote on. Or, just as bad, they use things like parliamentary devices' so everyone can go home for the holidays while We, the People must live under the tyranny they leave behind. Karl Marx must be smiling from Hell.
* * *
Updated Nov. 13, 2002
November 13, 2002 at 9:52 a.m. ET
Should U.S. House members vote on sweeping legislation before they even read it?
The U.S. House is scheduled to vote on a revised version of legislation creating the Department of Homeland Security by 2:00 p.m. ET today. The time now is just before 10:00 a.m ET and the revised text is not available to read and we've been told the revised text might not be available for awhile.
The only information available is a Congressional Quarterly summary. So House members will have to rely only on a summary to decide their vote on the biggest reorganization of the federal government since the Department of Defense was created in 1947. But we have been alerted to expect important changes in this revised Homeland Security bill.
For example, The New York Times recently reported about the Pentagon's plan to create a computer system that "will provide intelligence analysts and law enforcement officials with instant access to information from Internet mail and calling records to credit card and banking transactions and travel documents, without a search warrant" of American citizens.
"Pentagon Plans a Computer System That Would Peek at Personal Data of Americans," Nov. 9, 2002, by John Markhoff
Is this new system included in the revised Homeland Security legislation? We don't know and when we asked -- nobody will talk about it.
Should your U.S. representative vote on any legislation, let alone legislation as sweeping as Homeland Security, before he reads it? We say no. In the remaining few hours left, please urge your representative to withhold his vote until he reads the text of the bill. To send your message, go to: