G-20 Summit Is Not Just a Mexican Vacation

Although Los Cabos, Mexico is a fabulous vacation destination, Americans will pay no attention to the activities of the G-20 Summit there because they do not understand what G-20 members do or care, but they should. Even Congress pays scant attention to this group that was established in 1999.

Rebecca M. Nelson, an analyst in International Trade and Finance, made a wise suggestion in her report, “The G-20 and International Economic Cooperation: Background and Implications for Congress.” (Congressional Research Service, April 12, 2012) “Congress may want to exercise oversight over the Administration’s participation in the G-20 including the policy commitments that the Administration is making in the G-20 and the policies it is encouraging other G-20 countries to pursue.” Keeping in line with the idea of legislating retroactively, ex-post facto, the author suggests, “legislative action may be required to implement certain commitments made by the Administration in the G-20 process, and commitments made at the G-20 may shape the congressional legislative agenda.” In other words, unelected bureaucrats with agendas determined by lobbying groups have made promises at previous G-20 meetings. Said bureaucrats may now force legislators to implement their promises into law.

---

It is true that “policy announcements and commitments that G-20 leaders make at summits are non-binding, and the record of implementing these commitments is wide ranging.” However, bureaucrats were very successful in coordinating fiscal global policies, tripling International Monetary Fund reserves, and establishing the Financial Stability Board to monitor regulatory reforms, pushing us ever closer to total globalization and world governance. Americans remember G-20 summits as protests against evil capitalism by environmentalists, unions, socialists, anti-war activists, and anarchists. These protests always turn violent at some point, resulting in heavy destruction of private property. Hard-working citizens usually absorb the cost of the anarchists’ right to protest. It does not occur to the average person that these meetings may make decisions that directly or indirectly affect their pocketbooks such as the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, food security, foreign aid, the environment, giving more taxpayer dollars for various international trade schemes, and more contributions to the IMF to “correct global imbalances.” The G-20 group was presented as a forum for economic cooperation and coordination. It started with G-5 (France, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, and United States) after the collapse of the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system. It then became G-7 with the inclusion of Canada and Italy, and G-8 with the inclusion of Russia. Twelve “emerging economies” were invited to join in 2008, the idea of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and it became G-20. The end goal is to coordinate globalism. The U.S. bureaucracies involved in the G-20 summits are the Treasury Department (coordinator), the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Department of Energy, the National Security Council, the U.S. Trade Representative, and the supposedly independent Federal Reserve. During the June 2012 Summit in Los Cabos, discussions will be centered on the Eurozone as a threat to globalism. In terms of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the European Union produces $18,543 billion of final goods and services, placing it in the number one spot, trailed by U.S. with $15,495 billion, and China with $7,744 billion. Other topics included in discussion are:

• “Improving the international financial architecture in an interconnected world” (perhaps developing a Marshall Plan for EU nations with U.S. dollars borrowed from China?)
• “Enhancing food security and addressing commodity price volatility” (does food security involve slaughtering farm-raised pigs in Michigan and fines for growing a garden in your own back yard?)
• “Promoting sustainable development, green growth, and the fight against climate change” (main focus of United Nations Agenda 21)
• “Economic stabilization to promote growth and employment” (shovel-ready jobs?)
• “Fostering financial inclusion” (redistribution of more capitalist wealth to third world nations?)

Since global warming has been debunked, the bureaucrats and environmentalists have changed their tactics and terminology to “climate change” and are forging ahead with their plans to fundamentally change the way we do business, trade, live, eat, breathe, and exist in general. We have to pay the “green piper” if we want to live on their new and improved, socially just, environmentally just, green-growth planet.