The NAFTA Superhighway: Anatomy of a Conspiracy Theory

Conspiracy theories don't brew overnight.

It was a little more than a year ago that Human Events journalist and right wing whisperer Jerome Corsi began slinging a series of accusations at President Bush in an article about an alleged "NAFTA Superhighway." Corsi said the president was secretly planning to build a giant twelve-lane highway using millions of acres of private land between the Mexican border and the Canadian; he said it was part of a broader plan to merge the three nations into a North American Union; he also said a certain planned highway -- the Tran Texas Corridor -- was only the beginning.

Human Events isn't a terrific place to turn for news, and Corsi isn't the sort of writer on which to rely, but the topic was seductive. No one in mainstream or left wing media took much interest in these stories, but over the next months articles began piling up on the web's most conservative sites: Human Events, World Net Daily, The John Birch Society.

Several months later, in September of 2006, Representative Virgil Goode authored a bill opposing the highway, among other things. Representative Ron Paul, Internet darling and current candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, signed on as a cosponsor and issued a statement to his constituents expressing his concern over the highway.

The bill earned a mention on Wonkette, but all the other media attention was rants and raves from the aforementioned websites and bloggers with names like patriotsteve and joeblogusa. They were bilious over the erosion of U.S. sovereignty, terrified of this new conduit for illegal immigrants, and indignant over the proposed government land grab. Over the course of the winter and spring, the NAFTA Superhighway was making noise only in one very small corner of the Internet.

Two things have happened during this frenetic campaign summer. One, everyone seems to have suddenly noticed the NAFTA Superhighway. And two, it has become very clear that it doesn't exist.

This new wave began back in May, when McClatchy became the first mainstream media outlet to address the topic, eliciting at least one official denial in an the article that failed to take a position on whether the entire endeavor was a rumor or not.

Between then and now, Google Alerts for "nafta superhighway" went from one or two a day to more like six or eight: more editorials in local papers opposing the highway, more blogs from more or less anonymous bloggers. This month, the dam burst. Corsi reported an official denial from Dick Cheney. A piece on The New York Times' Caucus blog reported that constituents in Iowa were posing questions about the highway to Republican candidates. A segment on the Colbert Report poked fun at an author convinced not only that the highway will be built, but that it will destroy the American way. Finally, just as I sat down to write this blog, the final word. Christopher Hayes' article for The Nation appeared online last week, putting to rest the rumors, the whispers, and the doubts. The left-leaning media agrees that the highway doesn't exist, which is not entirely a surprise since the right has long taken ownership over this particular conspiracy theory. Townhall.com, a conservative website whose contributors have repeatedly declared opposition to the NAFTA Superhighway, this week published an editorial that outed the Superhighway as a conspiracy -- one that right wingers were orating about but failing to address as a decoy.
For most of us, this is over. But discussion about the NAFTA Superhighway isn't going to disappear.

It won't go away, partly, of course, because it's self-perpetuating in a media world where every blog post means three circular blog posts about the first post. It's also pre-elections jitters, and there are perhaps more political questions being asked than during the average vacation month.

Most significantly, it isn't going away, and it won't go away, because the highway has never been the point. For every journalist, blogger, politician, constituent and lonely heart that has raged about this highway, the anger has never been about the highway itself as much as about fear for the future of America and anger at what has happened to the country under this administration. It's no great mystery that many conservatives feel betrayed by Bush -- on immigration, on spending, on the economy. Many Americans on the right thought the Christian Texan might make their nation feel more like their own again, but he's failed them. Which might also explain why the right has been so seduced by this particular conspiracy. The left are no happier with Bush, but they had fewer stairs to fall down.

The left won't let it go either. This is the inverse of the 9/11 truth movement: it's the evidence for the non-conspiracy-prone left that the other side has a fringe they would rather disown. It is with unbridled glee that the left leaning media outlets are starting to pick up on just how deep the NAFTA highway conspiracy river runs.

During these blurry dogs days of August the "highway" has been a method for getting into madness of American politics: how fractious we have become, how uncertain the future is, and the degree to which we can be forgiven for failing to trust our current government.

Comments

[NarutoUzimaki]

The Nafta superhigway doesn't exist? Thats because their still building it...

Another thing that exists that people now deny is the Amero, the currency that will replace the dollar....We will see the NAU in our lifetime, or at least we will see the US try to bully Canada into the NAU.

[JustAnotherJoe]

Conspiracy theories aside, Google "Interstate 69". (No, not making the number up) States want to extend the already existing Port Huron - Indianapolis interstate to the Mexican border. States along the proposed route are already conducting enviromental impact studies and the like. Each state refers to its portion of I-69 as a NAFTA highway or some derivative thereof. The problem is that in Texas, Rick Perry wants the "four football field wide" I-69 to be a toll road. Most including many progressives in the state see a problem with the potential use of imminent domain to secure land (a lot of land for a four hundred yard wide corridor) for essentially a privately run for profit toll road to be built and managed by a privately owned company called Cintas. Here's a link from TxDot detailing the plan.

http://ttc.keeptexasmoving.com/projects/i69/

Environmental impact studies and town hall meetings are under way. While I don't buy into the rhetoric of our country's sovereignity being at stake, there is a little more to this proposed highway , at least for the Texas portion of I-69, than your article implies. Cintas stockholders, CEOs, among others are going to get very rich off this. Who would you rather get the tolls, the state or a private company?

[StopThePlanet]

You forgot to mention the Kansas City Smart Port project http://www.kcsmartport.com/sec_corridors/corridors.htm

[takemeaway]

I live in an area of Texas where the I-69 is proposed to go. I have reviewed the site you reference because, last year, I was going to buy land in the area. A landowner whose land I was interested in mentioned the land was on one of several alternative routes for the proposed highway.

I looked up the internet site you reference and decided not to buy the land.

I imagine that the states will have a real fight on their hands when they try to implement such a huge landtaking.

Our Supreme Court recently reinforced emminent domain and many states scrambled to make it illegal to take people's property for commercial projects. I don't know how many suceeded.

I don't know if Texas passed a law disallowing the taking of private property for commercial enterprises or not.

I don't care how you package it, this huge highway is a NAFTA Highway and they are actively pursuing their project. Governor Perry is a huge champion of the project.

I just wonder when the shoe will finally fall.

I can't believe they are trying to deny their highway by saying it's a states' project.

Hitler built huge highways all over the country, too.

[thaw]

mommadona-- a number of the issues you raise are addressed in the aforementioned nation article

[mommadona]

Yes, you are right.

She then states it's a myth.

"Two things have happened during this frenetic campaign summer. One, everyone seems to have suddenly noticed the NAFTA Superhighway. And two, it has become very clear that it doesn't exist."

As I posted, the fact is it DOES exist:

""NAFTA Superhighway" - As of late, there has been much media attention given to the "new, proposed NAFTA Superhighway". NASCO and the cities, counties, states and provinces along our existing Interstate Highways 35/29/94 (the NASCO Corridor) have been referring to I-35 as the 'NAFTA Superhighway' for many years, as I-35 already carries a substantial amount of international trade with Mexico, the United States and Canada.

There are no plans to build a new NAFTA Superhighway - it exists today as I-35."

WALKS like duck
QUACKS like duck
DUCK.

[mrkerb]

Look up 'Amero' on your preferred search engine. It is part of this story.

[sguy]

It may not become a reality but here in Texas there have already been public hearings on it and a drawing of the right-of-way East of Dallas.

[takemeaway]

Same down here east of 35 between San Antonio and Austin.

[mommadona]

Please do your homework before posting:

http://www.nascocorridor.com/

SuperCorridor & NAFTA Highway Defined

SuperCorridor - not "Super-sized". As defined in Webster's dictionary, "Super" means "more inclusive than a specialized category". NASCO uses the term "SuperCorridor" to demonstrate we are more than just a highway coalition. NASCO works to develop key relationships along the EXISTING corridors we represent to maximize economic development opportunities along the NASCO Corridor, as well as coordinate the development of technology integration projects, inland ports, environmental initiatives, university research, and the sharing of "best practices". NASCO is particularly focused on coordinating the efforts of local, state and federal agencies and the private sector to integrate and secure a multimodal transportation system along the existing "NASCO Corridor."

"NAFTA Superhighway" - As of late, there has been much media attention given to the "new, proposed NAFTA Superhighway". NASCO and the cities, counties, states and provinces along our existing Interstate Highways 35/29/94 (the NASCO Corridor) have been referring to I-35 as the 'NAFTA Superhighway' for many years, as I-35 already carries a substantial amount of international trade with Mexico, the United States and Canada.

There are no plans to build a new NAFTA Superhighway - it exists today as I-35.

http://www.nascocorridor.com/pages/about/about.htm#defined

[mommadona]

And WHY do you say this is not a possibility?

"I am not a crook."
~Richard Nixon

It's a 'THREE AMIGO' moment...."We don't NEED no stinkin' badges...."

"Myth: The U.S. Government, working though the SPP, has a secret plan to build a "NAFTA Super Highway."

Fact: 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.

Myth: The U.S. Government, through the Department of Transportation, is funding secretive highway projects to become part of a “NAFTA Super Highway”.

Fact: 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.

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.

Myth: U.S. Government officials sponsored a secret SPP planning meeting in Banff, Alberta in September 2006.

Fact: The U.S. Government did not sponsor the meeting in Banff. The North American Forum, a private initiative that is separate from the U.S. Government, hosted the September 12-14, 2006 conference “Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment.” Academics, businesspersons, private citizens, and government officials from the U.S., Mexican, and Canadian governments attended the conference.

The North American Forum is not a product of the SPP."

http://www.spp.gov/

AND IF YOU BELIEVE THIS....I'VE GOT AN INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE FOR SALE UP IN NEW YORK.

[steamboat]

To all of you who will say what the future is, just remember, it was Bill Clinton who pushed and signed the NAFTA deal.

[jinjinpinti]

We can't build a decent highway between our coasts, can't maintain those we have built, bridges and other infrastructure are crumbling, can't get our oil refineries or electrical grid up to snuff...or a build a 700 mile wall on a 2200 mile border.....Hah, this so called Nafta superhighway is the least of my worries.

[Hollyse]

Think Again.... "Presidential Signing" papers...Pres. Exec Orders... I'm the Decider...
Somehow this admin. desperately needs to show housing construction, materials and supplies coming from Home Depot/Lowes, new job openings.. Not happening here in the USA! What better way to further divide this country into two separate sttes using a superhighway. Already there's talk of eliminating the elctorical college replacement by dustrict. Let's also mention many toll roads already leased to foreignors who carry indefinte time renewable leases. Now let's have Americans complain why roads aren't being maintained!