The US Labor Department signs an “agreement” with foreign nations to protect illegal workers
Yesterday U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis signed an “agreement” with several foreign nations which would guarantee protection to illegal aliens working in the United States. Here is some of what she said before she signed the document:
No matter how you got here or how long you plan to stay, you have certain rights. You have the right to be safe and in a healthy workplace and the right to a legal wage. We gather here today to strengthen our shared commitment to protect the labor rights of migrant workers in the United States. Unfortunately, due to language barriers and immigration status, migrant workers can be those that are most vulnerably abused.”
“We’re committed to ending that abuse and in a few moments we’ll sign a new partnerships between the Department of Labor and the embassies of Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador,” she said. “These are pledges between our governments to work together to educate migrant workers about their labor rights and prevent abuses in the workplace.”
“During the past year, we’ve signed similar agreements with the embassies–and I’m very proud of this–the embassies of Mexico, Nicaragua, and Guatemala,” said Solis, “and going forward we’ll be pursuing accords with governments from South East Asia and others in the Caribbean wanting to educate and protect those most vulnerable workers that live and reside in this country.”
We understand that many migrant workers in America are afraid to report mistreatment because it can lead to more abuse, the loss of job, a job, or deportation,” she said. “With these partnerships we seek to remove those fears
Clearly when she says, “no matter how you got here” and “deportation” she is talking about protecting the rights of illegal aliens. This “declaration” will authorize the use of United States Treasury funds for the education of illegal immigrants on what rights they have to work in this country illegally. As illogical as that statement sounds, and as offensive as it is that any treasury dollars will be used for this purpose, there is something about this that bothers me even more than what is in the “declaration.”
What bother me more is the “declaration” itself, or more specifically, who is signing this “declaration.” This is being called an “agreement” between the US Labor Board and ambassadors of these foreign nations. I find this terminology to be quite interesting because I always thought that an agreement between two or more nations was called a treaty. Now, I am getting older so perhaps I am mistaken so before I decided to go any further I decided it best to look up the definition of the word “treaty.”
Here is what dictionary.com says is the definition of a treaty: “a formal agreement between two or more states in reference to peace, alliance, commerce, or other international relations.” It certainly seems to me as if this agreement qualifies as a formal agreement between two or more states on international relations.
So the US Labor Secretary has signed a treaty with several foreign nations and that is what I find to be quite disconcerting. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution clearly gives the president the authority to negotiate treaties with foreign nations. Hilda Solis negotiating on behalf of the president in and of itself is not the problem because every president–including George Washington with Jay’s Treaty–has authorized other people to negotiate treaties in the name of the president. It goes without saying that the person chosen to negotiate a treaty will be seeking to secure the president’s position or the president will simply refuse the treaty. But still, it is up to the president to sign this treaty, not the labor department–that is where the first problem lies.
But there is another problem, and it is even more troubling than the first because Article II, Section 2 of the constitution also states that the Senate must approve the treaty by a 2/3 majority. This was done to ensure that the president did not become to powerful in foreign affairs. But this new “agreement” was never voted on by the Senate, so while Hilda Solis speaking on behalf of the president, and while she secured this agreement in Barack Obama’s name this agreement should have been sent to the Senate for an up or down vote.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you approve of this new agreement–and I think everyone who is reading this knows what my position on illegal immigration is–what is at stake here is the constitution and the procedures set up in the constitution because they have been ignored by the Obama regime once again. Barack Obama has used this terminology to avoid sending this “agreement” to the Senate for a vote–he has once again done an end around and avoided the constitutional restraints placed on the president.
Perhaps you agree with this new “agreement” but that does not mean that you should agree with the manner in which it has been secured because you must remember that the next time a president of the United States usurps the constitution it may be on an issue in which you are in total disagreement. But by that time it will be too late because a precedent will have been set and all of the king’s subjects will be beholden to his whims.
America's Watchtower 
Agreement sounds “nice”, doesn’t it? I too, had not seen where the Senate was involved anywhere I was searching. The problem is, it goes against the Constitution any way you look at it. You are right, if it was a Republican president, the Dems would be screaming and that could happen in the future. Don’t they say to “be careful what you wish for”? I have a big problem with my money being used to educate illegals under the assumption that it is ok to come here and work, the government will help you deal with those nasty people that want you to go home. Who’s country is this anyway? My take is to come back when you can show us you want to be a REAL citizen and respect the Constitution. From what I see, they start off doing something illegal like CROSSING THE BORDER, so why should they care if they do more illegal things.
LikeLike
This is what the liberals do; they change the terminology to suit their goals. That is what political correctness is all about and that is what they have done here. They could not call this what it was because then people would ask questions, so they changed the terminology but I don’t think this will fool anyone. Will it?
LikeLike
Since when does a Sec. of Labor sign international agreements? If someone has no right to be in this country what rights other than basic human rights do they have? And now the government is going to spend our money to educate illegals about their rights? WTHIT!
LikeLike
Welcome to the new and improved USA, right?
LikeLike
I don’t see how they can get away with this!
LikeLike
Well this agreement is not binding. They forgot one thing…the NLRB has no constitutional authority to sign an international treaty or agreement. Oh that’s right this administration doesn’t care about our constitution. I guess it’s up to use to write our elected leaders and remind them about their responsibility to support and defend the constitution. This is clearly a case where they should stand up and be heard.
LikeLike
That’s the real problem here, they simply have no regard or respect for the consitutition and I hope that when the Congress gets back in session that they take a good, hard look at this.
LikeLike
Hilda Solis is a reconquista that believes the American Southwest belongs to Mexico and the mythical land of “Aztlan” that never existed in reality. Her and the rest of the ethno-centrists she pals around with are looking to make it a reality. She’s garbage.
LikeLike
And the sad part is they are pulling it off. Sure, that part of the country will still be called the US but for all intents and purposes it will be lost if we allow these people to continue pushing these disasterous immigration policies.
LikeLike
Wow, they trampled the Constitution and our laws coming and going with this agreement. First of all, the Department of Labor has no authority to negotiate anything. Second, whatever happened to respecting the laws of the nation you are living in? So much for common decency.
LikeLike
Great question Larry, but the illegals are not interested in our laws or they would not come here illegally in the first place. I still can’t understand how the DOL was allowed to get away with this.
LikeLike
They get more brazen by the day. When will it stop?,Yet where is the outcry. Great breakdown Steve.
LikeLike
There just isn’t much of an outcry. I think people are just going with the flow. They think if the adm. is doing something, well it must be legal. At some point the blinders have to come off and then they will be standing around thinking WTH! Let’s hope it won’t be too late to put things back to what they should be. When Congress comes back is when most think it will be straightened out. I am not so sure about that. Other than a handful that will be saying it is wrong, most will just go along with it. They have their nice pensions and healthcare and are just waiting til they can retire. That handful will be attacked by the MSM and things will go along as usual, the nothing to see here, move along. It used to be that the media reported on the true story of what was happening, now they get their talking points and go with that. What wimps they have become. That goes for most of the tv shows, too. If we didn’t have the internet to do our own searching, that garbage is what we would be hearing, only. We know for that reason, why they are going after the internet. Keep your fingers crossed that never happens, or we will be pushed back to using ham radios and cbs for communication with like minded people. That may sound stupid, but until the FCC shuts that down, it would be an alternative. That is why I have kept my ham license. We are having things taken from us each day, but most people are just going about their lives just living, can’t blame them, but at some point they have to wake up!
LikeLike
Thank you, they are not going to stop because nobody has been able to stop them. Until they are challenged they will grow more and more powerful until they are out back in their place.
LikeLike
Wow. Excellent find and analysis, Mr. D. Thanks for it
LikeLike
Thank you, my pleasure.
LikeLike
I’m not sure it rises to the level of a treaty – there are plenty of arrangements we enter into with other sovereign nation that aren’t treaties. We have reciprocal agreements with most countries, for example, relative to the exchanging of ambassadors. We don’t need a treaty to recognize a regime or accept its ambassador’s credentials.
As to the meat and potatoes of the agreement, I take it that pretty much everyone who’s expressed opposition to the Labor Department’s action is in favor of foreign workers being abused and exploited. Why else would anyone object to educating migrant workers on workers’ rights in the USA?
As to illegals, yeah, they’re there, but the number of legal migrants is greater, and it’s disingenuous to oppose an education program because some of those educated might learn that Constitutional rights aren’t only for citizens.
On the other hand, I think that the introduction to these courses – held in the home country, before workers migrate to the USA – should concentrate on the legal requirements for gaining entry into the US and obtaining employment.
The problem, though, isn’t with the workers as much as it’s with the employers, and as long as American employers insist on employing those who are here illegally and do so without sanction, they will simply keep on coming.
And here’s a factoid: ten years ago, I was HR Director at a factory in New Jersey that employed about 175 production workers. I’d say they were split about evenly between Latino on the one hand and Indian and Pakistani on the other, with maybe a couple dozen whites and Pacific Asians. We were murder on documentation, and doublechecked every green card and social security number of all people we hired. When we had people with bad documents, we gave them the chance to clear things up, and those who couldn’t got fired (maybe 99.9% of those with bad documents). I felt bad for most of those I let go for illegality, because all they wanted to do was work, and they were good workers, but our company policy was clear. What that means, by the way, is that the overwhelming majority of Latinos that came knocking on our door looking for work was legal (I never met an illegal Indian or Pakistani).
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
And while we were fastidious about obeying the law, many of those I hired told me how they had routinely been maltreated by former employers, through such practices as not paying for all hours wowrked, not paying premium pay for overtime, threatening them with deportation if they didn’t work weekends, etc. One fellow told me that when his boss told him that if he didn’t come to work on Sunday, he’d send La Migra to deport him; he told his boss he was here legally and couldn’t be deported (he knew his rights) – so within the week, the boss fired him and hired a real illegal.
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
After having read more about this story it appears as if this is not some new treaty that was signed, but rather an assurance by the Labor Board that current laws will also include the protections of illegal aliens working in the United States. While this may not be a violation of the constitution providing protections to illegal aliens might be a violation of federal law considering the fact that it is illegal for companies to hire illegal aliens. This agreement seems to be at odds with federal law.
I don’t think that anyone here is condoning the exploitatioin of migrant workers, you must remember there is a difference between legal immigrants and illegal immigrants and while nobody wants to see anyone exploited the fact is that illegal immigrants should not be working in the United States in the first place.
LikeLike