American Sovereignty: LOST at Sea?
May 15, 2012 by Rod Gonzalez
Filed under National Info, Press Releases
Below is a letter sent from our own Paula Helton, via The Flortida Alliance, to our Senators regarding The Law Of The Sea Treaty (LOST). Following the letter are the emails for our two Senators so you may contact them if you agree with the contenet of the letter. We also have an article further describing LOST by Carrie Donovan, coordinator of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
A Tea Party Coalition, Working for Individual Freedom
May 11, 2012
Senator Marco Rubio
317 Senate Hart Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Bill Nelson
716 Senate Hart Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senators Rubio and Nelson:
There appears to be a renewed interest in the ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST.
We the grassroots leaders of Tea Party/912 patriot groups, and your constituents, write to you today to state our firm opposition to the ratification of LOST.
The Law of the Sea Treaty, which originated in the 1970’s, is yet another redistribution scheme of the United Nations, known as the “New International Economic Order”.
This treaty gives the United Nations authority over most of the world’s oceans, including the power to regulate and tax deep sea mining and redistribute the proceeds to Third World governments.
LOST fundamentally threatens U.S. sovereignty as any issues that arise would be adjudicated by a LOST Tribunal, which would contain members hostile to the United States. Tribunal rulings may not be appealed. The treaty is designed to replace national decision making with U.N. decision making.
At the heart of LOST is the “International Seabed Authority”, which supervises a mining subsidiary known as the Enterprise that is in turn ruled by an Assembly, Council, and various commissions and committees. In essence, in order to be allowed to mine companies would be required to pay substantial fees to the “Authority” while being mandated to do surveys for the Enterprise, their government-subsidized competition.
The treaty mandates a transfer of mining technologies to Third World companies by stating, “sponsoring states would have to facilitate such transfers if the “Enterprise” and Third World competitors are unable to obtain necessary equipment commercially”.
This treaty gives the United Nations international taxing authority and amounts to the backdoor implementation of the “Kyoto Protocol”
The United States would be required to provide twenty five percent of the budget for LOST, but have no control over how the money is spent.
LOST applies eminent domain to intellectual property giving the U.N. the power to seize technology and share it with potentially enemy states.
President Ronald Reagan wisely refused to sign the treaty. As the U.S. Attorney General at that time, Edwin Meese, stated, “It was out of step with the concepts of economic liberty and free enterprise”. Those words still ring true today.
You pledged to represent the best interests of the citizens of Florida and today we demand you uphold that pledge and vote a resounding NO on the Law of the Sea Treaty.
Respectfully,
Paula Helton, Gainesville Tea Party
Paula Schaff, Punta Gorda Tea Party
Pete Franco, South Pinellas 912
Alan Berkelhammer, Gainesville Tea Party
Tina Woode, Seminole 912 Project
Tim Curtis, Tampa 912 Project
Carole McManus, First Coast Tea Party
Leanne King, First Coast Tea Party
Don Forward, Titusville Patriots
Elaine Laffey, Tea Party Ft. Lauderdale
Nancy Meinhardt, Miami 912 Project
Marian Rowe, Brevard 912
Stacy Snow Feiler, Tampa Tea Party
Kathy Gibson, East Orlando Tea Party
Jason Hoyt, Liberty Restoration Foundation
RoseAnn Bright, Nature Coast 912
Pat Wayman, Venice 912 Project
Walter Hughes, American Citizens League
Sharon Calvert, Tampa Tea Party
Karin Hoffman, DC Works For Us
Pam Evans, DC Works For Us – Dade
Pam Wohlschlegel, Palm Beach County Tea Party
Email for Senator Rubio: http://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact
Email for Senator Nelson: http://billnelson.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm
The Law of the Sea Treaty (“Treaty”) was conceived in
1982 by the United Nations (U.N.) as a method for governing activities on, over,
and beneath the ocean’s surface. It focuses primarily on navigational and
transit issues. The Treaty also contains provisions on the regulation of
deep-sea mining and the redistribution of wealth to underdeveloped countries–as
well as sections regarding marine trade, pollution, research, and dispute
resolution. The Bush Administration has expressed interest in joining the
International Seabed Authority and has urged the U.S. Senate to ratify the
Treaty. However, many of former President Ronald Reagan’s original objections to
the Treaty–while modified–still hold true today, and many of the possible
national security advantages are already in place.
National Security Issues
Under the Treaty, a 12-mile territorial sea limit and a
200-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) are established. This sets a definitive
limit on the oceanic area over which a country may claim jurisdiction. However,
innocent passage–including non-wartime activities of military ships–is
protected. Even without the Treaty, these boundaries, and the precedent of safe
passage, are protected under multiple independent treaties, as well as
traditional international maritime law. Additionally, given the United States’
naval superiority, few countries would attempt to deny safe passage. However,
under the Treaty, intelligenceand submarine maneuvers in territorial waters
would be restricted and regulated.
Environmental and Economic Issues
Former President Reagan refused to sign the Treaty in
1982 due to its innate conflict with basic free-market principles (e.g., private
property, free enterprise, and competition). Twelve years later, the Clinton
Administration submitted to the U.S. Senate a revised version of the Treaty.
This revised version allegedly corrected many of the original objections to the
Treaty, but still failed to receive Senate ratification: Therefore, the United
States’ provisional participation expired in 1998. The Treaty still requires
adherence to policies that regulate deep-sea mining, as well as forcing
participants to adopt laws and regulations to control and prevent marine
pollution. Additionally, under the Treaty, a corporation cannot bring suit, but
must rely upon its country of origin to address the corporation’s concerns
before the U.N. agency.
Reagan’s Objections
- Former President Reagan’s first objection to the Treaty
was the Principle of the “Common Heritage of Mankind,” which dictates that
oceanic resources should be shared among all mankind and cannot be claimed by
any one nation or people. In order to achieve this goal, the Treaty creates the
International Seabed Authority (“Authority”) to regulate and exploit mineral
resources. It requires a company to submit an application fee of $500,000 (now
$250,000), as well as a bonus site for the Authority to utilize for its own
mining efforts. Additionally, the corporation must pay an annual fee of $1
million, as well as a percentage of its profits (increasing annually up to 7%),
and must agree to share mining and navigational technology–thereby ensuring
that opportunities aren’t restricted to more technologically advanced countries.
The decision to grant or to withhold mining permits is decided by the Authority,
which consists disproportionately of underdeveloped countries.
Technology-sharing is no longer mandatory, however, there are remaining
“principles” to guide its use and distribution. Additionally, the Council has
been restructured so that the United States has a permanent seat, and developed
countries can create a blocking vote. - Secondly, former President Reagan believed that the
Treaty would restrict the world’s supply of minerals. The Treaty was originally
designed to limit the exploitation of heavy minerals in order to protect the
mineral sales of land-locked, developing nations. This is no longer a severe
limitation, because production limits to preserve land-based mining have been
removed. - The third–and still valid–objection is that mandatory
dispute resolution restricts autonomy. Either a U.N. court or tribunal must
mandate maritime Issues involving fisheries, marine environmental protection,
and preservation, research, and navigation. A country may opt out if the dispute
involves maritime boundaries, military, or limited law enforcement activities.
Submitting to external jurisdiction creates an uncomfortable precedent.
Furthermore, it weakens the U.S. argument of autonomy when it refuses to submit
to the International Criminal Court. Additionally, a country must petition to be
excluded from mandatory jurisdiction requirements.
Carrie E. Donovan is Production and
Operations Coordinator in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for
International Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
Turtle on a Post
May 14, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Executive Branch, National Info
“You know he didn’t get up there by himself, he doesn’t belong up
there, he doesn’t know what to do while he’s up there, he’s elevated
beyond his ability to function, and you just wonder what kind of dumb
ass put him up there to begin with.”
Hat tip: Donald R. Dodge
US Chamber Ad against Sen Nelson
May 9, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Constitution, Healthcare, Hot Topics, Legislative Branch, National Info
Published on May 9, 2012 by USCC
Too Funny – Hammer the EPA
May 9, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Environment, Executive Branch, National Info, Property Rights, States Rights
This is a real campaign ad for Texas Railroad Commissioner!
Hat tip: EPAabuse.com
Related post: EPA Official Resigns Over ‘Crucify’ Remarks
Obama Kicks Off Campaign To Half Empty Arena
May 8, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Executive Branch, National Info
Although president Obama has been campaigning for re-election since January, 2009, the official kick off wasn’t until Saturday, May 5th, 2012. This magical event took place at an indoor arena at Ohio State University. Although the campaign was predicting a full house, the venue had thousands of empty seats. Click here or on the photo for the video.
EPA Official Resigns Over ‘Crucify’ Remarks
May 1, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Environment, Executive Branch, Hot Topics, National Info
Armendariz
Very good news. I wonder if he still has any of the $540,000 in federal grant money he received left over? Or did he spend it all on the Statist Kool-Aid?
Former business unfriendly EPA District 6 administrator Al Armendariz, who was caught on Video making the following statement in a meeting in 2010, has resigned. Tell me again, what is the definition of Karma?
“It is kind of like how the Romans used to conquer the villages in the Mediterranean — they’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere and they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them. Then that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.”
(Note: Post continues below video)
Senator James Inhofe (R OK) responds to EPA apology for using the word “crucify” on Fox and Friends (before Armendariz’ resignation).
Read the full story at: thehill.com.
The Heritage Foundation has a new article on this. Read it at heritage.org.
New Americans For Prosperity Wasteful Spending Ad
April 27, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Economy, Executive Branch, National Info
AFP just rolled out a new “Wasteful Spending” Ad. The ad will start on Friday and be aired in 8 States. The ad highlights government funds that have been wasted on failed green energy policy and to support foreign companies and foreign jobs.
The ad will run April 27 through May 10 in the following States: Florida, Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia and New Mexico.
Equality and Fairness and the US Postal Service
April 22, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Executive Branch, Legislative Branch, National Info
Read the article at: Commonsensepost.com.
Bill Nelson: Vote Him Out!
April 20, 2012 by Laurie Newsom
Filed under Hot Topics, Legislative Branch, National Info
Tom Tillison of the Florida Political Press takes note of Tea Party political action calling out Bill Nelson on his support of Dodd-Frank.
Tea Party Coalition Questions Bill Nelson’s Support Of Dodd-Frank
April 20, 2012 Federal, Political News
By Tom Tillison
Florida Political Press
Some members of the Florida Alliance, a loose coalition of tea party and 9/12 Project groups, as well as other conservative organizations, have come together to question Sen. Bill Nelson on his support of The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.
The ‘Dodd-Frank Act’ is a failed attempt at financial regulatory reform sponsored by the Democratic controlled 111th Congress and the Obama administration that includes nearly 500 new rules by a dozen government agencies, sixty-seven new government studies, and 93 new government reports.
In response to a House Financial Services Committee report out this week detailing the burden this legislation has placed on small businesses in the form of onerous Federal regulations, the Florida Alliance is seeking an explanation from Nelson on why he stands behind this new law.
Florida Alliance: A Tea Party Coalition, Working for Individual Freedom
April 19, 2012
Sen. Bill Nelson
716 Senate Hart Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Sen. Nelson:
A new House Financial Services Committee report unveiled yesterday contains some very alarming details regarding the Dodd-Frank bill such as:
1. Rule making for only 46% of the bill has resulted in more than 5300 pages of rules.
2. The bill is forcing community bankers to hire compliance officers to deal with the onerous regulations, rather than loan officers; thus, increasing the cost of banking which ultimately will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher interest rates and fees.
3. The sheer volume of these rules and regulations layered upon existing regulations is having a negative impact on small businesses as they are forced to spend increased amounts of time and money wading through the red tape.
4. It is estimated it will take at least 24 million man hours per year in order to comply with Dodd-Frank.
5. The onerous regulations of Dodd-Frank are preventing investors from putting their capital to work in our economy.
We, the undersigned Tea Party leaders across the State of Florida, and your constituents, would like your response to the following questions:
1. Did you even read the massive Dodd-Frank Bill?
2. Was it your intent in voting for this bill to create even more onerous Federal regulations in order to hamper economic growth?
3. Have you read the 5300 pages of new rules associated with Dodd-Frank?
4. Why was it more important for you to pass Dodd-Frank than an actual Senate budget?
Your response to our questions may be forwarded to:
The Florida Alliance
http://www.flalliance.com/
Thank you,
Paula Helton, Gainesville Tea Party
Kathy Gibson, East Orlando Tea Party
Walter Hughes, American Citizens League
Alan Berkelhammer, Gainesville Tea Party
Clyde Fabretti, West Orlando Tea Party
Don Forward, Titusville Patriots
Pete Franco, South Pinellas 912
Pat Wayman, Venice 912
Peter Lee, East Side Tea Party
Nancy Meinhardt, Miami 912 Project
Tina Woode, Seminole 912 Project
Jim Kelly, SW FL 912 Project
Paula Schaff, Punta Gorda Tea Party
Sharon Calvert, Tampa Tea Party
Pam Wohlschlegel, Palm Beach County Tea Party
Jason Hoyt, Liberty Restoration Foundation
Elaine Laffey, Tea Party Ft. Lauderdale
Jay Jacobs, Baker County Tea Party
Carole McManus, First Coast Tea Party
Karin Hoffman, DC Works For Us
Barbara Knick, Brevard 912
Don Hensarling, DC Works For Us Tampa Bay
Bill Landes, Florida Minutemen & WinterHaven 912
Obamamania and Chirping Crickets
April 20, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Executive Branch, National Info
What’s the sound of a liberal repeating false statements over and over again? Well according to Michele Malkin, “It’s the sound of crickets chirping.” Continue reading at commonsensepost.com.
Atwater Considering A Senate Run Comes As No Surprise To Tea Party
April 16, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Hot Topics, Legislative Branch, National Info
In an interview posted today on the Shark Tank, Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater stated that he is taking a look at entering the U.S. Senate race after being approached by “serious-minded conservatives”.
“It’s late. But I share the same deep-seated concern they hold. This is an extraordinary country. It’s an exceptional place on the planet and if we don’t turn it around soon, frankly it will be too late for another generation,” said Atwater. “I think I have a responsibility to sit back (and listen) to these people that I respect greatly and are serious-minded conservatives of this great state to take a hard look at it.”
For tea party activists, this comes as no surprise. His name was floated around in tea party circles over six months ago as a potential candidate in the race, culminating with a surprise visit to the P5 Tea Party Hospitality Suite at the Peabody Hotel on Sept. 23, 2011.
Atwater briefly spoke to the gathering then and was warmly received.
With Connie Mack’s clear inability to seal the deal, despite multiple advantages, and George LeMieux having yet to gain serious traction, FPP sees Atwater’s entry into this race as a positive step.
The effect will be to push both Mack and LeMieux to raise their game and establish once and for all that they are the candidate to defeat incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson, or succumb to a better choice. With the balance of the Senate at stake, this is no time for uncertainty.
Hat tip: Florida Political Press
Fight for Freedom
April 15, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Constitution, Executive Branch, National Info
I published a post last week entitled Never Worked? It contained a large picture (appropriate since the family is huge) of the Romney Family. While I’ve never been a big Mitt Romney fan, my purpose was to illustrate the ridiculousness of Democratic operative Hilary Rosen’s attack on the presumptive Republican nominee’s wife.
There’s a comment on this post that links to a video promoting Ron Paul, and doesn’t speak to the Hilary Rosen attack on Ann Romney at all. The video begins with an advertisement which is a timeless Ronald Reagan clip entitled Fight for Freedom. It then segues into the Ron Paul clip.
Unfortunately, after this Reagan clip ends, and the Ron Paul video plays, unlike Ronald Reagan’s legacy, it disappears. It’s hard to get the Reagan piece to replay. Here’s the standalone version of this uplifting Reagan video so you can watch whenever and as often you like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39sKHeK3l0Y&feature=trueview-instream
Voter ID Laws: Racist or Reasonable?
April 14, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Hot Topics, National Info
Brandon Darby has a new article on Breitbart.com and has asked us to re-post it here:
There’s been much said lately about election integrity and voter identification laws. Both sides of the American political spectrum have raised concerns over polls and potential abuses in the American voting process. In fact, due to the serious voter registration irregularities identified by groups like True the Vote in Texas, along with the numerous voter fraud convictions across the nation involving workers from politically motivated groups like the failed organization ACORN, many states are pursuing photo identification as a means of addressing such assaults on election integrity. Continue reading on Breitbart.com.
Never Worked?
April 13, 2012 by Alan Berkelhammer
Filed under Executive Branch, Hot Topics, National Info, News Articles, Uncategorized
Hilary Rosen: Eat Your Heart Out!
Liz Carter Photo
Who Corporate America Supports
April 12, 2012 by Rod Gonzalez
Filed under Hot Topics, National Info
We always hear how the left informs their followers which companies they are unhappy with, and as such, who they should boycott. It is certainly their right to support those with the same ideology. Below is a list that was forwarded to us describing WHO some of our popular corporations decide to support with their political contributions.
Rite Aid donated $517K, 60% went to Democrats
Magla Products (Stanley tools, Mr. Clean) donated $22K, 100% went to Democrats
Warnaco (undergarments) donated $55K, 73% went to Democrats
Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia donated $153K, 99% went to Democrats
Estee Lauder donated $448K, 95% went to Democrats
Guess, Inc. donated $145K, 98% went to Democrats
Calvin Klein donated $78K, 100% went to Democrats
Liz Claiborne, Inc. donated $34K, 97% went to Democrats
Levi Straus donated $26K, 97% went to Democrats
Olan Mills donated $175K, 99% went to Democrats
WalMartdonated $467K, 97% went to Republicans
K-Mart donated $524K, 86% went to Republicans
Home Depot donated $298K, 89% went to Republicans
Target donated $226K, 70% went to Republicans
Circuit City Stores donated $261K, 95% went to Republicans
3M Co. donated $281K, 87% went to Republicans
Hallmark Cards donated $319K, 92% went to Republicans
Amway donated $391K, 100% Republicans
Kohler Co. (plumbing fixtures) donated $283K, 100% Republicans
B.F. Goodrich (tires) donated $215K, 97% went to Republicans
Proctor & Gamble donated $243K, 79% went to Republicans
Spirits
Southern Wine & Spirits donated $213K, 73% went to Democrats
Joseph E. Seagrams & Sons (incl. beverage business + considerable media interests) donated $2M+, 67% went to Democrats
Gallo Winery donated $337K, 95% went to Democrats
Coors & Budweiser donated $174K, 92% went to Republicans
Brown-Forman Corp. (Southern Comfort, Jack Daniels, Bushmills, Korbel wines – as well as Lenox China, Dansk, Gorham Silver) donated $644 K — 80% went to Republicans
Hungry?
Sonic Corporationdonated $83K, 98% went to Democrats
Triarc Companies (Arby’s, T.J. Cinnamon’s, Pasta Connections)donated $112K, 96% went to Democrats
Pilgrim’s Pride Corp. (chicken) donated $366K, 100% went to Republicans
McDonald’s Corp. donated $197K, 86% went to Republicans
Darden Restaurants (Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Smokey Bones, Bahama Breeze) donated $121K, 89% went to Republicans
