H.R. 193 – The American Sovereignty Restoration Act

With Donald Trump on a well-earned vacation (tweet-free for 18 hours and counting!) and Congress mercifully taking the weekend off from letting the mentally ill have guns and mining companies do pretty much whatever, it’s a good time to try to get ahead of the game a little bit and profile another bit of legislation that hasn’t been acted on yet – one where there’s still time to digest the ramifications and press Congress to listen to us.

So, after having a peek at the indispensable Congress.gov and having seen several Facebook friends share stories about this bit of legislation, I’m going to have a peek at H.R. 193, The American Sovereignty Restoration Act. It’s a repeal bill, specifically one that targets legislation from 1945 – The United Nations Participation Act. So, in case you were wondering why our sovereignty needs restoring, and who we ceded it to in the first place, it’s the UN.

The bill is authored by Rep. Mike Rogers, a Republican from the 3rd District of Alabama, where he’s won reelection with 64% or more of the vote for the last four cycles. In 2014 and 2016, his opponent was a promising young Democrat named Jesse Smith, a 14 year army combat veteran with a stellar biography and absolutely no chance of winning in this district. Rogers beat him by almost identical 34-point margins in both races.

One of the dangers of that level of Congressional job security is that members with literally nothing to lose tend to do things and promote legislation that members who are in closer districts don’t necessarily jump on board with. In Rogers’ case, it’s introducing legislation that specifically says that the United Nations is not only a threat to our sovereignty as a nation, but actually stripped it from us seventy years ago, and new we need it back.

According to the bill, we can get it back by passing legislation that terminates our membership in the United Nations,

including any organ, specialized agency, commission, or other formally affiliated body; and [requires] closure of the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

The bill prohibits: (1) the authorization of funds for the U.S. assessed or voluntary contribution to the U.N., (2) the authorization of funds for any U.S. contribution to any U.N. military or peacekeeping operation, (3) the expenditure of funds to support the participation of U.S. Armed Forces as part of any U.N. military or peacekeeping operation, (4) U.S. Armed Forces from serving under U.N. command, and (5) diplomatic immunity for U.N. officers or employees.

No more American military participation in UN peacekeeping missions, no more trick or treat for UNICEF, no more jokes about diplomatic immunity. On the flipside, there will be many, many more conspiracy theories from conservative friends about Agenda 21.

That’s right, in the interest of “reaching out” and “understanding” the other side, and “walking in their shoes,” or whatever trite nonsense people are saying to make themselves feel better about the grim reality of who we share our country with, let’s dip our toe into the fever swamp from which this legislation bubbled forth. After all, judging from the search results I got when researching this, the only ones interested in the bill besides Congress.gov and GovTrack are fringe websites from groups like The American Policy Center (and no, I’m not linking you to them), who are proud of their “30 years leading the fight for American property rights and sovereignty.” Let’s see what they think:

In the past, both Paul’s and Roger’s bills have been ignored by Congress, but things are changing. Americans are beginning to understand the UN threat. Obama has actually stood before the UN General Assembly and called for Americans to surrender our national sovereignty to this world body.

As Obama worked feverishly to build UN intrusion into our lives through actions like Agenda 21 and by joining the UN’s Strong Cities Network to militarize our police, the rest of the world has started to revolt against UN global policies that are destroying their national independence and economies.

The Brexit vote in England was the shockwave heard around the world. The European Union is the first such organization of the UN’s goal to create such unions in every region of the world, including North and South American Unions; an Asian Union and so forth. The EU was to be the wave of the future. England struggled under its shackles until it could no longer stand it and so revolted. As the vote came in suddenly other members of the EU started thinking – if England can escape, why not them? Suddenly the global New World Order juggernaut has begun to show cracks.

How reasonable! Let’s spend more of our time trying to understand more about this totally normal and mainstream viewpoint!

Or, we can keep a close eye on this nonsensical legislation, contact our Representatives to make sure it doesn’t see the light of day, let alone passage, and get back to living in the real world of actual problems and things that matter. We could mention that maybe giving up our seat at the table of international affairs isn’t such a great idea. We could point out that having a permanent seat on and standing veto at the UN Security Council is probably a benefit to America and its interests overseas. We could maybe look a move or two ahead and realize that if there’s a huge power vacuum in the international community, the countries willing to take it (Russia and China) probably wouldn’t be doing a whole lot of looking out on our behalf.

In short, we can make sure we keep living in a world where conspiracy theories aren’t legislated by paranoid Congressmen who don’t have to worry about the repercussions for their reaching out to the lunatic fringe.

Advertisements