Does SPP and NASCO
support the “NAU”?
By Eric Coltrane
For the past few years, the subject of a North American Union (NAU) has come up in various conversations I’ve had. In those conversations, not once have I heard that anyone has wanted it, or think this country should be involved in the NAU. So, who are these individuals/organizations that feel this country should be part of the NAU? Two well-known groups are the “Security and Prosperity Partnership” (SPP) and “North America’s SuperCorridor Coalition” (NASCO). To be fair, these organizations claim no attempt to create the NAU, but their efforts would lay the framework for such a “Union” to be organized in the future.
Contrary to popular belief, the SPP does update and consult regularly with members of Congress on efforts and plans. My question to them would be, “who are these congressmen and who do they represent, the citizens of the United States or Corporate America”? The SPP was formed by the Bush administration. The stated purpose of the SPP is to create security and prosperity for Mexico, Canada, and the United States.
The agencies involved from these three countries are the Department of Commerce and the Department of Homeland Security for the United States. The Department of Economy, and the Department of Interior in Mexico. In Canada, it’s the Ministry of Industry and the Ministry of Public Safety. In my opinion, President Bush (or Congress for that matter) does not represent the citizens of the United States, but large self-serving corporations. It would stand to reason that the SPP would also represent these same self-serving corporations.
Launched in 2005 as a White House-driven initiative, the SPP claims that their efforts will improve the quality of life for American citizens. Have Americans seen an improvement in the quality of their life since 2005? In fact the United States is undergoing one of the worst financial crises in its history! More financial regulation or artificial security has not improved life or prosperity for most citizens in the United States.
NASCO is not a government agency, but a non-profit organization formed by public and private sectors in 1994. The stated intent of NASCO is to improve existing infrastructure along the I-35, I-29, and I-94 highways. A map that they have since taken off their website shows the main ports to be in Mexico. All goods would then be routed from there north into the United States and all goods south into Mexico.
Many believe that this would dramatically damage the West Coast ports of entry and the economies created by those ports. NASCO claims that the intent is to control security and transportation of all goods and legitimate persons entering and leaving the United States. NASCO claims to have no control over ports on the West Coast and the shipping of goods to those ports. If their intent is to control the security and transportation of all goods entering the U.S., wouldn’t it stand to reason that the preferred ports would be the Mexican ports created under NASCO’s plan? If NASCO truly wants to improve existing infrastructure, why create new ports in Mexico? The infrastructure that exists has worked for many years. Yes, it is deteriorating, but why not make improvements to it?
Do these two organizations intend to create a North American Union? I, for one, could not say. Are their efforts improving the lives of most Americans? Ask around and see what the response is. Would American citizens support a North American Union? Here, too, ask your neighbors. Who exactly would benefit from the efforts of these two organizations? Most likely, those same self-serving corporations that have always benefitted.
The United States is in dire straits and very few in public office are considering the correct strategies to liberate the citizens from the grip of disaster. A North American Union is not the answer. Not now, not in the future - no matter what kind of prosperity picture they paint.
