Brick Back Bricker: True Conservatives Don't Trade Away Sovereignty

I wanted to use this entry to share an excellent article that I recently came across, on a subject that most other conservative commentators never discuss. I had included this column in a past blog entry, but this piece seems especially relevant after I saw something on the news, just yesterday, about how President Bush recently spoke to the Organization of American States, with central American trade issues being the new hot topic.

The television news item I saw mentioned the issue of CAFTA, and listed the groups that were opposing this proposed treaty - namely the labor unions, the textile manufacturers, and the sugar industry. As has become unfortunately common in the prevailing understanding of these types of topics, there was no mention of strict constitutionalists or pro-sovereignty conservatives, or of laizze-faire capitalists who know the difference between free trade and free trade "agreements."

The opinion piece that I wanted to feature here is a recent article by a young conservative columnist who I recently found... Here is the article (which has been annotated with hyperlinks):
It's Time to Bring Back Bricker
Nathan Tabor on the amendment that almost saved our sovereignty

I was pleasantly surprised to see this piece in my inbox; Mr. Tabor is now one of my favorite columnists. Can you imagine any Establishment Republican or neoconservative commentator taking this position?

This article prompted me to look further into this proposed amendment, which came rather close to passing. If it had been adopted, we may not have to have the current debate over CAFTA or the FTAA, or LOST, a.k.a. UNLOST (which Mr. Tabor has also written about). And there might be no NAFTA or GATT, and other [already-]unconstitutional agreements that violate our national sovereignty, and our founding principles of republican liberty.

Not surprisingly, few other "conservative" commentators have ever dared to tread along this path. Professor Thomas Woods (more recently the author of the bestselling book on American History - without the P.C.) had previously written this in-depth piece on the Bricker Amendment. Another popular conservative/libertarian writer had penned a shorter article on this topic, around the time that he was the Republican nominee for U.S. Congress - against Nancy Pelosi (who was then a war hawk).

I recently became aware that Nathan Tabor, the author of the above-featured article, has started a new website, Conservatives for Congress. In the closing of that column, Mr. Tabor, himself recently a congressional candidate in North Carolina, mentioned that Senator John Bricker was the "Jesse Helms" of his time. In our present time, Mr. Tabor has been called the young 'Jesse Helms' (and one of the other candidates in his primary race was known as the African-American 'Jesse Helms'). I wish Mr. Tabor the best in his current and future efforts to help reclaim our true-blue American values of constitutionalism and traditional republicanism. Thank God that there are leaders like him within our generation, and within the Republican Party... especially in the midst of the statist liberal/neoconservative mindset that has seemingly taken over Washington, and much of America (even in the "red states").

As for the Bricker Amendment, its prospects for passage don't seem too good... at least as of now. But perhaps when Nathan Tabor is elected to Congress, he can help push that sucker through!

Posted by Aakash at June 7, 2005 7:47 PM