By Henry Lamb
Sovereignty means "supreme, independent authority…." National sovereignty means "supreme, independent authority in government." The United States bought its sovereignty with the blood of sovereign individuals who laid down their lives so this nation could be free from the dictates and demands of another nation.
The United States joined the community of nations as a sovereign nation. Over time, however, little by little, this sovereignty has been stolen.
Article two of the Convention on the Law of the Sea declares: "The sovereignty over the territorial sea is exercised subject to this Convention and to other rules of international law." This treaty, if ratified, will steal a little sovereignty from the United States.
A little sovereignty was stolen by the North American Free Trade Agreement, by Article 511, which requires that each member nation conform its laws to NAFTA's uniform regulations within 180 days of the issuance of regulations. These NAFTA regulations are issued by non-elected bureaucrats. Their power to compel the United States to change its laws is the usurpation – or theft - of national sovereignty.
The U.N.-funded Commission on Global Governance declared in 1995, that national "sovereignty has to be exercised collectively."
There is no such thing as "collective" sovereignty. Sovereignty is "supreme and independent authority," or it is not sovereignty. A nation that exercises its sovereignty "collectively" is not a sovereign nation, but a member of a collective government that exercises authority over the members of the collective.
The Brookings Institution has issued a new Plan for Action which claims that:
Brookings' "responsible sovereignty" sounds very much like the U.N.'s "collective sovereignty" - neither is the "supreme and independent authority" for which our forefathers died.
It is little wonder that the Brookings Action Plan is a reflection of the plan offered by the Commission on Global Governance. Of the 16-member group that produced the document, 13 are members of the Council on Foreign Relations, the organization created in 1921 expressly to prepare the United States to accept the United Nations and the idea of global governance.
The European counterpart to the CFR is the Royal Institute of International Affairs, also known as the "Chatham House Gang." They have been far more successful in preparing Europe for the notion of "collective" sovereignty. It took decades to create the European Union, but it is now firmly in place, and is exercising considerable power in the United Nations and in the G20 meetings.
The people who exercise this power hold the common belief that an international government should regulate the affairs of individuals, organizations, companies, and the governments of subsidiary nations.
The Obama administration appears to share this belief. Obama has publicly committed to support an international system of regulations on energy use. As a Senator, Obama's Global Poverty Act attempted to force the U.S. into compliance with the U.N. directive to increase payment to international aid to 0.7% of GDP, at an estimated cost of nearly $845 billion over 10 years. Obama has demonstrated his determination to ignore free-market principles by bailing out private industries and then exercising management-by-government.
Obama – by his actions – believes that government is the solution to all problems caused by the failure of capitalism. The truth is that government intervention in free-market capitalism is the cause of the problems.
The massive intervention proposed by the Obama administration can only worsen the domestic situation in the long run. And Obama's propensity to submit to the international community's regulatory regime is sure to redistribute America's wealth to achieve a more equitable global poverty for all.
This situation is not simply a possibility for some future generation. It is a real and present danger. It is happening now with every deficit-laden bill passed by Congress and with every new international entanglement that steals a little more of our national sovereignty.
There is only one remedy: throw the bums out!
Start looking, now, for a replacement for your representative and your senators. A good, simple yardstick to measure your representative's dedication to the Constitution is to ask him/her to co-sponsor the Enumerated Powers Act (HR450) – or to explain in writing why not. If you get a mealy-mouthed non-responsive reply, tell the editor of every newspaper and every talk show host in your district. Voters must hold their representatives accountable.
This current batch of people who populate the government appear to have little regard for the principles of freedom founded on the national sovereignty won at Valley Forge. They appear eager to watch that sovereignty be stolen, little by little, through more and more international entanglement. They seem hell-bent on stripping sovereignty from every individual and doling out instead, limited freedoms to those who conform to government-prescribed values.
The Sovereignty of individuals and of our nation is in great jeopardy. Now is the time for individuals to stand up and be counted.