Regional Governance Is Here

enterstageright.com ^ | March 1, 2004 | Henry Lamb

[farmfriend]

Consider yourself added. If you ever change your mind, this can be a high volume list, just let me know.

[B4Ranch]

We can't just say no, we need to stand up and say NO! You are the government and you work for the people, we do not work for YOU.

So mister, get your ass out of that chair and stand up when "the people" come into their Office.

Very few politicians have been told what to do by the people. Worse yet very few people have told their politicians what to do. The people have forgotten just who is the boss in the country.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Within 5 years, we'll be governed by the UN.

And in 6 years we will be in total revolt.

[marsh2]

Regional government is here in the form of multi-county Habiat Conservation Plans under the ESA.

5C - the "Five County Plan" was hatched by NOAA fisheries and the State to get 5 northern CA coho counties to agree through MOA or MOU to do certain things. It started out with a road manual to be adopted by the Counties for their own maintenance or county roads, culverts and bridges. Now it is moving on to a push to adopt model ordinances to implement the federal ESA - such as road grading and water use ordinances. They also want a fish element adopted into the County Gneral Plan so the County planning dept,. can implement the ESA through mitigations imposed on planning permits.

Although we are one of the counties, I believe we convinced the Supervisors some years back to remove our signature from the MOA.

In my mind, it would be turning over the independent primary planning authority of elected County representatives for land and resource use on private lands to a federal agency for its purposes. Not a smart move, but everyone seems to be doing it. (Riverside and others just passed a joint HCP agreement.)

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!

[templar]

What's missing is having American law enforcement and courts implementing UN decrees directly.

I think that the implementation will always be indirect in America (recommendations, in some of these cases, are actually the result of treaties).

Direct implementation would meet too much resistance. Look at how the UN controls Africa, it always has the surface appearance of being 'assistance' of some type to local authority (even in Africa where it wouldn't make a bit of difference to the people and where local 'authority' is a questionable term). It's the same here in the US in the relation of the Federals to the States: The Federal authority controls the States completely although the compliance is, theoretically, 'voluntary' and is implemented by the States with it's own police and courts in the guise of State law.

In a way, I wish the UN would get involved directly in controlling the US domestically, it would generate a resistance to their control that all but is non exist ant now.

[Happy2BMe]

BUMPING FOR REFERENCE.

[inquest]

recommendations, in some of these cases, are actually the result of treaties

Do the treaties actually require us to comply with these recommendations? If not, then they're still just recommendations.

Look at how the UN controls Africa, it always has the surface appearance of being 'assistance' of some type to local authority (even in Africa where it wouldn't make a bit of difference to the people and where local 'authority' is a questionable term). It's the same here in the US in the relation of the Federals to the States: The Federal authority controls the States completely although the compliance is, theoretically, 'voluntary' and is implemented by the States with it's own police and courts in the guise of State law.

In order for the UN to exercise that type of control over us we'd have to financially dependent on it. It's hard to imagine that happening in our lifetime without the UN getting some kind of independent fundraising authority.

[B4Ranch]

ping