IAHF Webmaster: Breaking News, Codex Emergency, What to Do

IAHF List:

Some of you have sent me copies of letters from congressmen who voted for CAFTA and who are making a vain attempt to do spin against our concerns about CAFTA and CODEX.

One such LIAR is Congressman Ramstad from Minnesota. See my response to a letter he sent Brian Agar below, and use it as a template when responding to your own member of congress if they attempt similar spin.

See the list below of members who voted for CAFTA because we need to drive them all from office for violating their oaths. We also need to all read this updated article by Paul Taylor which discusses the threat posed by harmonization language in FTAA which we must clearly kill:

My responses to Ramstad are contained below in [Square Brackets] interspersed among his spin to help you see through it.

September 9, 2005

Brian Agar
5666 Lincoln Drive, Suite 101
Edina, Minnesota 55436

Dear Brian:

Thank you for contacting me with your concerns about the impact
of the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) on
access to dietary supplements.

Codex Alimentarius guidelines are not binding on the U.S. and will
not affect domestic sales of dietary supplements. Codex guidelines
are not binding on any country unless that country incorporates
them into their own law.

IAHF: [Very misleading. Although its TECHNICALLY true that Codex standards "aren't binding", the WTO can easily move to impose trade sanctions against us should we fail to harmonize our laws to them. Thus, if we DON'T harmonize, and a trade dispute is launched against us which we could easily lose, the WTO could impose trade sanctions (huge fines) against us to PRESSURE congress into harmonizing to Codex. Thus, its true that they can't directly FORCE you to conform, but they can sure make you wish you HAD. Our reality is that they can and do exert enormous pressure on congress to change our laws. For clarification, read this article http://www.thelawloft.com/Freedom/050125_us_law.htm]

Both the House and Senate CAFTA bills specifically state that any
provision in CAFTA that is inconsistent with U.S. law will not
take effect. Due to the Dietary Supplement Health and Education
Act of 1994, which governs the use of dietary supplements in the
U.S., CAFTA will not limit dietary supplement access.

IAHF: [Very misleading. See http://www.coalitionforhealthfreedom.org/docs/Comments_on_CAFTA_v7.pdf]

Additionally, the 1997 Food and Drug Modernization Act
guarantees that dietary supplements are not part of ongoing trade
negotiations. These U.S. laws override CAFTA and guarantee
Americans' access to dietary supplements.

IAHF: [While in THEORY this is true, in REALITY, congress hasn't been enforcing the law here, Congress hasn't been holding the FDA's feet to the fire. I know this because I am the one who did the LEGWORK on Capital Hill in '97 to get this amendment to the FDA Modernization Act, and I know that FDA is ignoring it via their actions and participation at Codex meetings. I wrote to the FDA's legal department expressing my concerns about this and received a response from L Robert Lake showing FDA's legal interpretation of my amendment.]

[Its clear to me that their interpretation was made possible by Senator Kennedy watering down the language of my amendment. Its also clear that FDA is ignoring the will of congress and the will of the people as expressed via my amendment and as shown via Congressman Paul's "Dear Colleague" letter which helped us GET this amendment, and which I influenced, and also via Senator Hatch's comments about my amendment in the Conference Report for this legislation (which I have on the IAHF website.) If Congress had not WHITEWASHED the oversight hearing on Codex that I pushed for for 5 years on March 20, 2001, I might agree with Ramstad, but the bottom line here is that we're not being protected, and FDA's actions at Codex reflect the fact that we've been set up like bowling pins.]

In addition, Section Six of CAFTA does not require, recommend
or even mention harmonization to national sanitary or
phytosanitary regulations, and the U.S. will not be required to
change its existing laws with respect to phytosanitary regulations.

IAHF: [Bull- Section 6 of CAFTA pertains to the SPS Agreement (Sanitary Phytosanitary Agreement) and it requires us to establish an SPS committee for the purpose of insuring that we enter into a constant process of harmonization: see http://www.coalitionforhealthfreedom.org/docs/Comments_on_CAFTA_v7.pdf Demand that he try to do spin against THIS, and let him know that when he voted for CAFTA http://capwiz.com/liberty/issues/votes/?votenum=443&chamber=H&congress=1091&tally=1, he violated his oath of office and we must now remove him because he's a traitor and a collectivist who clearly opposes individual rights and is trying to destroy this country and force us into a hemispheric dictatorship under FTAA which CAFTA was a stepping stone towards.]

Thank you for contacting me, as I always appreciate hearing from
you. Please let me know whenever I can be helpful to you or your

Member of Congress

IAHF Comment: this guy is a TRAITOR. The Commerce clause in the constitution specifically states that only CONGRESS can determine our laws pertaining to commerce. This clearly is the sort of entangling alliance the founders warned us against, and it has grave consequences for US sovereignty.