American Policy Center » 2005 » June
- CAFTA in the U.S. Senate!
- Group Calls for End to the Endangered Species Act’s ‘Reign of Terror’
- Fraudulent Feds Caught Red-handed Caught in Government's Vise
- Stop Invasive Species Nightmare!
- UN’s Agenda 21 Targets Your Mayor
June 30, 2005
Action Alert! Action Alert! Action Alert!
From our friends at Rep. Ron Paul’s Liberty Committee…
“CAFTA is NAFTA on steroids!” That’s how one experienced trade attorney describes the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA).
And CAFTA is on the move.Yesterday morning, the U.S. Senate Finance Committee endorsed CAFTA, sending it to the full Senate for a vote which will likely take place in two days. The vote will be close, but pro-CAFTA forces believe they have enough votes to get it passed by the Senate. If they do, they will claim “momentum” and get the U.S. House to vote on it soon thereafter.
The pro-CAFTA forces aren’t really for true free trade. They are for global managed trade — because that is what CAFTA (like NAFTA) really is. Think about it. Why does it take over 1,000 pages to define free trade?
We’ve had over 10 years of NAFTA so we should know what to expect with CAFTA. Again, “CAFTA is NAFTA on steroids!”
CAFTA fits hand-in-glove with the world-government agenda to make the U.S. just another client state. How?
Consider: CAFTA article 10.16.3 places the United States under the jurisdiction of international tribunals supervised by the United Nations.
Consider: CAFTA article 10.5.2(a) states that these international tribunals must use”customary international law” as established by the “principle legal systems of the world” when deciding cases.
Welcome to the United Nations’ world court system! And then there’s the unconstitutional granting of “fast track” authority to the
president. Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the sole authority to regulate international trade. But CAFTA, like NAFTA, treats the U.S. Constitution as a relic.
We already suffer from the World Trade Organization and its international bureaucrats. CAFTA will add another layer of unaccountable world elites who will tell us what we can and cannot do.
Even the French understand the critical importance of national sovereignty. They recently rejected the proposed constitution of the European Union. Remember that the E.U. started as a trade agreement in 1957, and now it is a regional supra-government.
NAFTA. CAFTA. And then the Union of the Americas. We strongly urge a “no” vote on CAFTA. Tell your U.S. senators to reject CAFTA!
* Action to Take *
1. Call both of your Senators and tell them to vote NO on CAFTA! Senate switchboard: (202) 224-3121. Simply ask for your Senators by name. Act fast! The vote could take place at any time!
2. To send an electronic message to your Senator, go to: http://capwiz.com/liberty/issues/alert/?alertid=7774311&type=CO
***PLEASE SEND THIS URGENT ALERT TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE***
Washington, D.C.—In a letter to House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo (R-CA), the American Policy Center (APC) and over 50 public policy groups called for an end to the federal government’s unconstitutional practice of taking land and property rights under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Chairman Pombo plans to make reauthorizing the ESA a priority of the current Congress.
“There are some who claim that the Act needs to be ‘strengthened,’ ‘updated,’ or ‘modernized,’” said APC president Tom DeWeese. “How absurd. For three decades this law has done nothing but steal property, destroy economies, shatter livelihoods, cost billions of dollars, and even take lives. The ESA needs to be repealed, not ‘modernized.’”
The letter APC signed notes that “the ESA is a direct affront to the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment,” and warns: “Those who don’t understand what’s wrong with the ESA — its almost unchecked power to coerce law-abiding citizens, regardless of the consequences — will never know how to fix the law.”
The Endangered Species Act has been a remarkable failure since its inception in 1973. According to the House Resources Committee, in its 32-year existence the law has failed to recover over 99% of the roughly 1,300 species it lists as threatened or endangered.
The cost of this failure to Americans has been enormous. For example, when the Spotted Owl was dubiously listed under the ESA in 1990, tens of thousands of Americans lost their jobs and their livelihoods. In 2001, four firefighters in the state of Washington lost their lives due to bureaucratic fumbling over the Act. And all across America, countless property owners have fallen victim to the menace of radicals who use the ESA to pillage property.
“How many more lives must be ruined before Congress finally stops cowering before the radical green lobby?” asked DeWeese. “Congress should not reauthorize the ESA unless complete and total property rights protections are given to landowners.”
In a 2003 critique of the ESA, Congressman Pombo wrote: “It is no secret the ESA has been used by extremists to restrict, seize and devalue property rights, as well as halt important government projects. In fact, this is what most ‘green’ obstructionists groups relish most about the Act.”
DeWeese charged that the Endangered Species Act has nothing to do with saving species and everything to do with indiscriminately stealing property and ruining the lives of countless Americans.
“The ESA was bad legislation in 1973 and it’s been a bad law for over 30 years,” said DeWeese. “It is far past time for Congress to end the ESA’s reign of terror and restore the Fifth Amendment.”
The American Policy Center is a grassroots think tank located in Warrenton, Virginia.
June 21, 2005
By Henry Lamb
For years, Jesse James Hardy tried valiantly to avoid the day when the State of Florida would take his 160-acre “patch of heaven,” 30 miles east of Naples. He spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in engineering studies and legal fees trying to convince the state that his land was not necessary to the Everglades Restoration Project. The state disagreed.
The court ordered one final mediation session between Jesse and the state to see if Jesse would become a “willing seller,” rather than another victim of eminent domain. The courts had already taken the land of nearly 17,000 other landowners. Jesse was the last holdout in a 55,000-acre parcel that lies 50 miles from the Everglades.
Jesse was accompanied by two attorneys, one of whom had filed an extensive lawsuit on Jesse’s behalf, alleging a variety of illegal actions on the part of state and federal agencies. The other attorney was an eminent-domain specialist.
“We can win this, Jesse, if you can just hang on,” one attorney advised. Of course, there was no guarantee that Jesse would win, and the case, filed in federal court, could take years. Jesse’s only income, besides a small disability check he receives from the military, was the sale of dirt from the excavation of what he planned to be four 20-acre fishing lakes he was building on his property.
Collier County approved the four-lake plan three years ago, but after the state declared it wanted the land, the state asked the county to withdraw the permit. The county complied and refused to renew Jesse’s permit, leaving him with no source of income or any hope of completing his dream.
There was no way Jesse could “hang on” for the years it would take for a final decision on his lawsuit.
The state had offered Jesse as much as $27,500 per acre for his land. But when Jesse looked around the area for comparable land, prices ranged from $50,000 to $100,000 per acre. He could not replace his land for the price the state offered.
The other attorney pointed out to Jesse that there was no doubt the court would take the land. The only question was the amount of “just compensation” the court would pay, and that decision would be made by a jury – not of Jesse’s peers, but jurors selected from affluent retirees.
For years, local media have portrayed Jesse as a stubborn hermit, living in a shack in a wilderness, who is blocking the all-important Everglades Restoration Project. A jury would not likely be sympathetic with Jesse’s values.
The marathon negotiating session lasted until 10:30 p.m., when Jesse finally became a “willing seller”: He agreed to accept $4.95 million, about $31,000 per acre. He has to vacate the property by Dec. 1.
The money was not paid to Jesse, but to the court, to ensure that all outstanding claims against Jesse would be paid. Claims are being filed that Jesse says he does not owe. The money is tied up, and the judge has scheduled a hearing for June 26. In the meantime, Jesse has no resources to arrange for another place to live. He doesn’t even know how much will be left or when it will be available.
Prior to the settlement, the county would not allow Jesse to sell the dirt from his excavations after his permit expired last year. Now, however, by arrangement with the state, the county is allowing a contractor to haul away the dirt.
Jesse is angry. He watched the county, state and federal governments conspire to deprive him of his home and his dreams for the future. The price at which he became a “willing seller” is well below replacement costs, but above the amount he would likely have gotten from a jury or a court decree.
Jesse is just another victim of government’s relentless quest to acquire private property. There are similar cases in progress in virtually every state, which do not get the publicity Jesse has generated. Once government gets private property in its crosshairs, few people have the money, the time or the expertise to mount a defense. The entire saga of Jesse’s years-long battle is recorded at his website.
Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization and chairman of Sovereignty International.
June 18, 2005
Action Alert!
The next two weeks are crucial. We MUST put the heat on Congress NOW to remove all so-called “Invasive Species” language from the transportation bill.
Both the House and the Senate are currently conferencing to work out the differences between each of their versions of the transportation bill. The House version contains NO Invasive Species language. That’s good! HOWEVER, the Senate version contains a DISASTROUS provision that would initiate the process of documenting, listing, and regulating so-called Invasive Species. This is what we HAVE TO STOP!
The disastrous provision in the Senate version of the transportation bill is Section 166. It calls for the documentation and regulation of “non-native” and invasive species. Invasive Species regulation is the Endangered Species Act on steroids. It is a property rights nightmare and it must be stopped.
We have little time! Act NOW!
* Action to Take *
1. Call Sen. James Inhofe and tell him that section 166 of the Senate transportation bill MUST BE REMOVED! Senator Inhofe is chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee and holds sway over this issue. He needs to hear from you! Call him at (202) 224-6176. Or send him a fax at (202) 225-5167. You can also send Sen. Inhofe an email by going to: http://inhofe.senate.gov/contactus.htm
2. Call Rep. Don Young and tell him to MAKE CERTAIN that section 166 of the Senate version of the transportation bill is stripped out! Rep. Young is Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Call him at (202) 225-9446. Or fax him at (202) 225-6782. You may email Rep. Young by going to: http://donyoung.house.gov/opinions.htm
3. Call both of your Senators and tell them that section 166 of the Senate transportation bill MUST GO! Senate switchboard: (202) 224-3121. Simply ask for your Senators by name.
4. Call your Representative and tell him or her to do everything in their power to have section 166 of the Senate version of the transportation bill removed. House switchboard: (202) 225-3121. Just ask for your Representative by name.
Section 166 of the Highway bill is titled, “Control of invasive plant species and establishment of native species.” This section gives the federal government control over which plant species can be planted along highways. Make no mistake. This is the camel’s nose under the tent. A MAJOR new radical environmental land-use/land grab agenda will become LAW. Section 166 MUST BE TAKEN OUT OF THE SENATE HIGHWAY BILL!
Imagine the Endangered Species Act on steroids. Now multiply its devastating effect on property rights one-hundred fold. That should give you a pretty good idea of what Invasive Species legislation will mean for property owners in every state, county, and city in this nation.
Invasive Species is the radical greens’ key to controlling every square inch of land in the United States. And the Senate Highway bill is the just the beginning.
This nightmare all began when Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 13112 in 1999, creating an “Invasive Species Council” to monitor and control “alien species.” What are alien species? According to Clinton’s Order: “Alien species means, with respect to a particular ecosystem, any species, including seeds, eggs, spores, or other biological material capable of propagating that species, that is not native to that ecosystem.”
Most agricultural crops and animal species clearly fall within the definition of “alien.” Domesticated pets, many houseplants, and Kentucky bluegrass used in most lawns and golf courses are already defined as alien species. Indeed, this is all the greens and their allies in the federal government need to control all land in the U.S.
***PLEASE SEND THIS URGENT ALERT TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE***
June 7, 2005
By Tom DeWeese
We’ve all seen the bumper stickers, “Think Globally – Act Locally.” It’s a creation of those who seek to impose international guidelines, rules and regulations on how we all live. Americans are about to find that it’s not just an empty slogan.
From June 1 through 5, 2005, the city of San Francisco was the site of an international conference called “World Environment Day.” But the agenda of this conference was much bigger than just another hippy dance in the park. This meeting of the global elite had a specific target and an agenda with teeth. The goal was the full implementation of the UN’s Agenda 21 policy called Sustainable Development, a ruling principle for top-down control of every aspect of our lives – from food, to health care, to community development, and beyond. This time, the target audience is our nation’s mayors. The UN’s new tactic, on full display at this conference, is to ignore federal and state governments and go straight to the roots of American society. Think globally – act locally.
As part of their participation in the conference, mayors were pressed to commit their communities to specific legislative and policy goals by signing a slate of United Nations accords. Two documents were presented for the mayors’ signature.
The first document is called the “Green Cities Declaration,” a statement of principles which set the agenda for the mayors’ assigned task. It says, in part, “Believing as Mayors of cities around the globe, we have a unique opportunity to provide leadership to develop truly sustainable urban centers based on culturally and economically appropriate local actions…” The Declaration is amazingly bold in that it details exactly how the UN intends to implement a very specific agenda in every town and city in the nation. The document includes lots of rhetoric about the need to curtail greenhouse gases and preserve resources. But the final line of the Green Cities Declaration was the point of the whole affair: “Signatory cities shall work to implement the following Urban Environment Accords. Each year cities shall pick three actions to adopt as policies or laws.”
The raw meat of the agenda is outlined in detail in the second document, called the “Urban Environment Accords.” The Accords include exactly 21 specific actions (as in Agenda 21) for the mayors to take, controlled by a time table for implementation.
Here’s a quick look at a few of the 21 agenda actions called for. Under the topic of energy, action item number one calls for mayors to implement a policy to increase the use of “renewable” energy by 10% within seven years. Renewable energy includes solar and wind power.
Not stated in the UN documents is the fact that in order to meet the goal, a community would have to reserve thousands of acres of land to set up expensive solar panels or even more land for wind mills. Consider that it takes a current 50 megawatt gas-fired generating plant about 2-5 acres of land to produce its power. Yet to create that same amount of power through the use of solar panels would require at least 1,000 acres. Using wind mills to generate 50 megawatts would require over 4,000 acres of land, while chopping up birds and creating a deafening roar. The cost of such “alternative” energy to the community would be vastly prohibitive. Yet, such unworkable ideas are the environmentally-correct orders of the days that the mayors are being urged to follow.
Energy Actions two and three deal with the issue of reducing energy consumption. Both of these are backdoor sneak attacks by the UN to enforce the discredited Kyoto Global Warming Treaty, which President Bush has refused to implement. Kyoto would force the United States to reduce its energy consumption by at least 30 percent, forcing energy shortages and severely damaging the nation’s economy. Kyoto is the centerpiece of the UN’s drive to control the world economy and redistribute wealth to Third World nations. It would do nothing to help the environment. Yet, the mayors are being pushed to help implement this destructive treaty city-by-city.
Perhaps the most egregious action offered in the Urban Environmental Accords deals with the topic of water. Action number twenty calls for adoption and implementation of a policy to reduce individual water consumption by 10% by 2020. Interestingly, UN begins by stating: “Cities with potable water consumption greater than 100 liters per capita per day will adopt and implement policies to reduce consumption by 10 percent by 2015.”
There is no basis for the 100 liter figure other than employing a very clever use of numbers to lower the bar and control the debate. One must be aware that 100 liters equals about 26 gallons per person, per day. According to the UN, each person should only have 10% less than 26 gallons each day to drink, bathe, flush toilets, wash clothes, water lawns, wash dishes, cook, and more.
According to the U.S. Geological Survey, Americans need about 100 GALLONS per day to perform these basic functions. Consider also that there is no specific water shortage in the United States. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, annual water withdrawal across the nation is about 407 billion gallons, while consumption (including evaporation and plant use, is about 94 billion gallons. Such restrictions, as outlined in the Urban Environment Accords, are really nothing more than a major campaign by the UN to control water consumption. Yet the nation’s mayors are being pushed to impose policies to take away our free use of water.
The rest of the Accords deal with a variety of subjects including waste reduction, recycling, transportation, health, and nature. Perhaps the most blatant promise of action is Action number sixteen in which the mayors are supposed to agree to: “Every year identify three products, chemicals, or compounds that are used within your city that represents the greatest risk to human health and adopt a law to eliminate their sale and use in the city.”
There you have it. Every year, our nation’s mayors are to promise to ban something! What if there isn’t a “chemical or compound” that poses a risk? Gotta ban something anyway. That’s not an idle threat. In the 1990’s Anchorage, Alaska had some of the most pristine water in the nation. It had no pollution. Yet the federal government ordered the city to meet strict federal clean water standards that required it to remove a certain percentage of pollution. In order to meet those requirements, Anchorage was forced to dump fish parts into its pristine water so that it could then clean out the required quotas. Your city’s mayor may have to ban the ink in your fountain pen to meet his quota – and ban it he will.
And what is the mayor’s reward for destroying private property rights, increasing energy costs on less consumption, and banning something useful every year? He gets green stars. That’s right. According to UN documents, if your mayor can complete 8-11 of the prescribed 21 actions, the town will get a green star and the designation, “Local Sustainable City.” 12-17 actions completed will garner two green stars and the designation, “National Sustainable City.” 15-18 actions completed will bring in three green stars and the title “Regional Sustainable City.” Finally, the energizer bunny mayor who gets 19-21 actions completed will get a full four green stars and the ultimate designation of “Global Sustainable City.” Certainly he or she will also get a plaque and get to sit at the head table at the next UN Sustainable Development conference.
In the San Francisco summit, the mayors were wooed by the elite, from UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to Maurice Strong, to Senator Diane Feinstein, to Hollywood activists Robert Redford and Martin Sheen, to chimp-master Jane Goodall. All the usual suspects were there to press the flesh and push the agenda. Businesses like Mitsubishi, which hope to make huge profits from green industry by using such policy to destroy competition, helped pay for the event. The news media was well represented too, not in a journalistic role to report the news, but as full-fledged sponsors helping to spread their own brand of propaganda. All understood that a new governing elite, elected by no one, answerable to their own set of standards, is being created for the care and feeding of us all. With the right contacts and the proper show of public spirit, there are riches and power to be created. Even for your local mayor.
Sustainable Development is truly stunning in its magnitude to transform the world into feudal-like governance by making nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society. It is a scheme fueled by unsound science and discredited economics that can only lead modern society down the road to a new dark ages. It is a policy of banning goods and regulating and controlling human action. It is systematically implemented through the creation of non-elected visioning boards and planning commissions. There is no place in the Sustainable world for individual thought, private property or free enterprise. It is the exact opposite of the free society envisioned by this nation’s founders.
Even before the San Francisco conference, the UN’s influence over the nation’s mayors has been felt as 132 U.S. mayors have moved to implement the Kyoto Treaty in defiance of the Bush Administration’s rejection of it. Moreover, the treaty is the centerpiece of the agenda for the national meeting of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, slated for Chicago just one week after the San Francisco meeting. Think globally and act locally is no longer just a slogan on the back of a Volvo. It’s a well entrenched national policy bleeding down into your local community, carried there by Judas goats who have been elected by you.
America’s mayors are the elected representatives closest to the people. They are the ones that our founders intended to have the most influence over our daily lives. If the UN succeeds in its efforts to enforce Sustainable Development policy through our mayors, the process will accelerate at an astounding rate and locally-controlled government will cease to exist. But signs, adorned with green stars, will certainly greet us at every city limit line as the inhabitants, stripped of their property rights; buried under huge tax burdens; struggling under reduced energy flow, shuffle on as their proud mayor gleams in the global limelight under the banner “think globally and act locally.”
