Ron Paul and the Highway Conspiracy

Oh, Ron, most of your performance in last night's non-debate was not so bad. It does seem sometimes that the other guys smack you around too much with "arguments" that would fit on a bumper-sticker (e.g., John McClain's "let them win!").

But then there was that question from Arlington, Texas [debate transcript]:

I’ve met a lot of your supporters online, but I’ve noticed that a good number of them seem to buy into this conspiracy theory regarding the Council on Foreign Relations and some plan to make a North American Union by merging the United States with Canada and Mexico. These supporters of yours seem to think that you also believe in this theory.

So my question to you is, do you really believe in all this, or are people just putting words in your mouth?

I cringed and held my breath, wondering if you would take the bait or find some way to disarm this. You did the former, saying:

Well, that all depends on what you mean by “all of this.” The CFR exists. The Trilateral Commission exists. And it’s a, quote, “conspiracy of ideas.” This is an ideological battle. Some people believe in globalism. Others of us believe in national sovereignty.

And there is a move on toward a North American Union, just like early on there was [sic] am move on for a European Union, and it eventually ended up — so we had NAFTA and moving toward a NAFTA highway. These are real things. It’s not somebody made these up. It’s not a conspiracy. They don’t talk about it, and they might not admit about it, but there’s been money spent on it. There was legislation passed in the Texas legislature unanimously to put a hold on it. They’re planning on millions of acres taken by eminent domain for an international highway from Mexico to Canada, which is going to make the immigration problem that much worse.

Oh, Ron, you might as well have then put on an aluminum foil hat carefully designed to protect your brain from the mind-control rays broadcast by those secret satellites in geosynchronous orbit overhead.

The NAFTA Superhighway. There's just no "there" there. It would be nice to be able to excuse this, dismiss this as some sort of momentary lapse, some confusion in the heat of the moment. The fact is, though, that you do believe this. The proof is in an article that you wrote about a year ago for your "Texas Straight Talk" column. It appears on your congressional web site.

Yes, there is a quasi-governmental organization called the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). Here's what it is:

The SPP is a White House-led initiative among the United States and the two nations it borders – Canada and Mexico – to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation. The SPP is based on the principle that our prosperity is dependent on our security and recognizes that our three great nations share a belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions. The SPP outlines a comprehensive agenda for cooperation among our three countries while respecting the sovereignty and unique cultural heritage of each nation. The SPP provides a vehicle by which the United States, Canada, and Mexico can identify and resolve unnecessary obstacles to trade and it provides a means to improve our response to emergencies and increase security, thus benefiting and protecting Americans.

They seem to be well aware that there's an element who view them as something quite sinister, devoting a very detailed page on their website to addressing and refuting the many myths that have arisen.

You say:

The proposed highway is part of a broader plan advanced by a quasi-government organization called the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” or SPP.

The SPP was first launched in 2005 by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco.

The SPP was not created by a treaty between the nations involved, nor was Congress involved in any way. Instead, the SPP is an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments. One principal player is a Spanish construction company, which plans to build the highway and operate it as a toll road. But don’t be fooled: the superhighway proposal is not the result of free market demand, but rather an extension of government-managed trade schemes like NAFTA that benefit politically-connected interests.

The real issue is national sovereignty. [. . . .] The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union--complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union. Like the European Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition of national sovereignty altogether.

Here are the facts:

The cooperative efforts under the SPP . . . seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

[. . . .]

The SPP respects and leaves the unique cultural and legal framework of each of the three countries intact. Nothing in the SPP undermines the U.S. Constitution. In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States.

[. . . .]

The U.S. government is not planning a NAFTA Super Highway. The U.S. government does not have the authority to designate any highway as a NAFTA Super Highway, nor has it sought such authority, nor is it planning to seek such authority. There are private and state level interests planning highway projects which they themselves describe as "NAFTA Corridors," but these are not Federally-driven initiatives, and they are not a part of the SPP. [. . . .] Many States in the American Midwest are proposing or undertaking highway projects to improve or build roads as Federal-aid and State or private sector revenue becomes available. All projects involving Federal-aid funds or approvals are subject to normal Federal-aid requirements, such as review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including public involvement. This public involvement, the common thread among all these activities, makes them anything but “secret.” In addition, Congress directs Department of Transportation funding for specific highway projects.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will continue to cooperate with the State transportation departments as they build and upgrade highways to meet the needs of the 21st century. Rather than evidence of a secret plan to create a NAFTA Super Highway that would undermine our national sovereignty, the FHWA’s efforts are a routine part of cooperation with all the State transportation departments to improve the Nation’s highways.

This doesn't sound so sinister to me. So did all this spring, full-formed, from someone's fevered brain? From what I've been able to determine, the NAFTA highway theory comes from a mix of xenophobia and paranoia, with a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of the SPP and the planned Trans-Texas Corridor multimodal project:

On November 13, the Texas Department of Transportation, in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration, released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed I-69/Trans-Texas Corridor project.

Using existing highways will be the first consideration as state transportation officials continue work to identify an alignment for I-69/TTC from far South Texas to Northeast Texas.

The report recommends continued environmental studies and public comment on the narrower study area to see where I-69/TTC can be located while minimizing environmental impacts. It proposes using existing highways first with new corridors as a secondary option.

Even this somewhat less malevolent seeming proposal has its own grassroots alarmist opposition, though they sound more concerned with local issues than with an over-reaching mass conspiracy.

Then again, perhaps they were thinking about this [caveat lector to the humor-impaired].

I could go on and on about this, but Christopher Hayes' article earlier this year for The Nation did a better job of debunking the NAFTA Highway conspiracy theory than can here. Well worth reading if you still have any doubts.

Now, if there's one thing I've learned over the years it's that our government will lie to its citizens. But before I buy into a vast continent-spanning conspiracy involving the governments and secret elites of three countries, I want to see something more than an article that says it's happening. Show me some kind of documentation, or better yet... show me the money.

As they say in Arkansas, Ron, I think you may have just shot yourself in the foot.