Sierra Club rejects immigration measure

AP ^ | 4/25/5 | KIM CURTIS

[SmithL]

SAN FRANCISCO - Sierra Club members Monday flatly rejected a change in the group's policies that would have advocated reducing immigration to the United States as a way to protect the environment.

The proposal was defeated by nearly 84 percent of the 122,308 members who voted, the club announced. About 16 percent of the club's more than 750,000 members cast ballots during voting that began in early March.

Members also elected five new members to the 15-member board of directors, which sets club policy and oversees the San Francisco-based organization's $100 million annual budget.

Sierrans for U.S. Population Stabilization, a network of club activists seeking stricter immigration limits, backed a "yes" vote and five of its own candidates; none won a board seat.

Advocates of stricter immigration said the U.S. population, now about 300 million, is expected to more than double this century if nothing is done to slow growth. They said overpopulation has led to a variety of environmental problems, including exploitation of resources, the erosion of wilderness areas and species extinction.

"I think there's a lack of understanding of the sheer magnitude of the problem," Dick Schneider, a supporter of the immigration proposal, said after its defeat. "The connection between population and environmental degradation is so clear-cut that it's a natural issue for the Sierra Club to be involved in."

Opponents, including many current and former club leaders, argued that wading into the politics of immigration would alienate allies such as labor unions and civil rights groups, and will not slow population growth worldwide.

"Our members have once again displayed great wisdom and made their views perfectly clear," Sierra Club president Larry Fahn said in a statement. "Now we can put our focus back where it is needed most, into strengthening communities and building alliances to protect our environment for our families and our future."

The vote against the immigration question was 102,455 to 18,998. Some members voted for directors but did not cast votes on the proposal.

The club, founded by famed conservationist John Muir in 1892, has debated its position on immigration for years and in 1998 voted to remain neutral.

[SmithL]

Proving that they're not about the environment, but rather promoting a leftist agenda.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

I'm VERY interested in that 18,000 that didn't vote with the Useful Idiots.

Wonder if we can help create a new Conservative group with them.... Thoughts, anyone?

[BenLurkin]

bttt

[TheMightyQuinn]

It also shows that they really aren't interested in solutions, but in perpetuation of the problems.

[undocumentedrat]

Again the Sierra Club has put political correctness ahead of the eviorment and national security. :(

[SpaceBar]

The leopard reveals its spots.

[Lizavetta]

Opponents, including many current and former club leaders, argued that wading into the politics of immigration would alienate allies such as labor unions and civil rights groups, and will not slow population growth worldwide.

"Now we can put our focus back where it is needed most, into strengthening communities and building alliances to protect our environment for our families and our future."

So their reasons for rejecting it were NOT to spare the U.S. environment, and in the next breath said we need to protect our environment for our families, who presumably live in the U.S.

Anyone else but me see a contradiction here? You'd think they'd do anything to protect the environment anywhere, including here in America but they're allowing their alliances with other political groups take precedence.

Do you need any more proof that caring for the environment is nothing more than a cover?

[muawiyah]

84% didn't bother participating in the vote one way or the other. That's because they are in Sierra Club for the magazine.

The internet is going to eventually extinguish that avenue of membership and reveal the Sierra Club for what it really is ~ a small clique of people who think they own the public lands in this country while believing you don't.

[Lizavetta]

Opponents, including many current and former club leaders, argued that wading into the politics of immigration would alienate allies such as labor unions and civil rights groups, and will not slow population growth worldwide.

"Now we can put our focus back where it is needed most, into strengthening communities and building alliances to protect our environment for our families and our future."

So their reasons for rejecting it were NOT to spare the U.S. environment, and in the next breath said we need to protect our environment for our families, who presumably live in the U.S.

Anyone else but me see a contradiction here? You'd think they'd do anything to protect the environment anywhere, including here in America but they're allowing their alliances with other political groups take precedence.

Do you need any more proof that caring for the environment is nothing more than a cover?

[truthkeeper]

What a bunch of phonies.

[GeekDejure]

I'm VERY interested in that 18,000 that didn't vote with the Useful Idiots.
=======

Useful ???

.

[Don Corleone]

The "sierra club" is nothing more than a COMMUNIST front organization. It is Anti-American to the core!

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I think you summed it up nicely.

[Calpernia]

ping

[Cultural Jihad]

Advocates of stricter immigration said the U.S. population, now about 300 million, is expected to more than double this century if nothing is done to slow growth. They said overpopulation has led to a variety of environmental problems, including exploitation of resources, the erosion of wilderness areas and species extinction.

They don't care about so-called "overpopulation." They just care that poor people are able to come here and be productive and become consumers of the wealth they help create. Better that they be malnourished elsewhere than live well here, they claim.

[Cicero]

Are we surprised? They are leftists first, environmentalists second.

Just like NOW, which only stands up for a raped woman if the rapist was a Republican, or the ACLU, which only defends your freedom of speech if you are pro-abort.

[Regulator]

For those who don't remember, the Sierra Club was rabidly anti-immigration in the 1960's. I archived their 1966 policy statements a few years ago so that I would still have them when they try to run from them.

They ran around for years condemning large families, screaming about overpopulation, environmental damage, blah blah. You couldn't open a newspaper without reading about it. Nixon mentioned overpopulation in a speech in 1969, and then appointed a commission on population chaired by Nelson Rockefeller. The conclusion? "The nation has no further need of population growth".

All of this pushed by the Sierra Club.

If it isn't obvious to everyone now that this organization is merely a leftist front organization, well, dunno what it would take...the only people they ever thought the country was overpopulated with was Americans.

[Waco]

Nearly all of the alphabet orgs. EPA, CDC, etc. and groups like the S. Club have been infiltrated by the commies. Notice their "public interest" slant, (phoney) and constantly running to court over anything they can think of.

[jmaroneps37]

Any questions about these swine? No, ok let's never speak about them again.

[jeremiah]

It would be better if you worked to support a conservative group among the elected Republicans, although probably harder to accomplish.

[kcvl]

Larry Fahn, President

Larry Fahn is the 50th president of the Sierra Club, America's oldest and largest grassroots environmental organization. Fahn has committed his presidency to educating the American public about the Bush Administration's efforts to dismantle forty years of environmental protection. "We need to develop the most effective voter education campaign we've ever had. We have to use all the tools at our disposal to get the word out about the myriad ways this administration is reversing environmental progress." Fahn goes on to say, "We face the most environmentally hostile federal government in our nation's 227 year history. The Bush cabinet and sub-cabinet are salted with representatives of corporate interests, attorneys and lobbyists for mining, timber, auto and oil companies. Those same interests helped to propel Bush into the Presidency. They are seeking a return on their investment."

Fahn's background has prepared him well for the many challenges the Sierra Club faces. For nearly two decades he has represented a wide array of individual, small businesses, environmental and community groups in his solo law practice. Since 1998 he has also served as the Executive Director of As You Sow, a San Francisco based non-profit organization dedicated to environmental advocacy and consumer activism. One of the most prominent enforcers of California's Proposition 65, As You Sow works to hold corporations accountable for complying with consumer and environmental laws, including Proposition 65, and the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. As You Sow has also pioneered the shareholder resolution process to improve corporate responsibility on environmental and social issues.

A native of Sacramento, California, Fahn joined the Sierra Club as an undergraduate student at UC Davis. For more than 25 years he has held various local, regional and statewide posts with the Sierra Club and has worked on dozens of regional and state-wide initiatives and referenda involving water policy, nuclear power, mountain lion hunting, off-shore oil drilling, toxics enforcement and parkland acquisition, to name a few.

Since he was first elected to the national Board of Directors in May 1999, Fahn has focused on protecting endangered species, developing the Sierra Club's Environmental Justice program and launching a national Corporate Accountability campaign. He was also instrumental in the development of a family of environmentally friendly Sierra Club Mutual Funds. Fahn was re-elected to the Board of Directors in 2002. That same spring he was elected by his fellow board members to serve as the national vice president for conservation. He was elected to the position of president by the Board in May, 2003.

Larry Fahn lives in Mill Valley, California.

[kcvl]

Arianna Huffington, shown with Sierra Club President Larry Fahn.

[nw_arizona_granny]

More proof that only communists support open borders.

[colorado tanker]

Wonder if we can help create a new Conservative group with them.... Thoughts, anyone?

Naw. They are zero population growth wine and cheese liberals. Former Dem Gov Dick Lamm has been prominent among them. They are very pro-abortion and would never ally with conservatives. OTOH, they would not shy away from trying to split conservatives to vote for a Dim candidate by waiving an anti-immigration stance in front of them.

[Let's Roll]

"It also shows that they really aren't interested in solutions, but in perpetuation of the problems."

How else will their management keep their 6 figure jobs?

Really good article a few years ago from the Sac Bee of all sources - they referred to them as Club Sierra comparing the glitzy life style of their execs to Club Med etc.

[kcvl]

Thursday, June 5, 2003

A Conversation with Larry Fahn

snip


You've said that one of your goals is to retake Congress with a pro-environmental majority? Does such a majority exist?

A pro-environmental majority does not currently exist. But if we shift a relative handful of seats from right-wing anti-environmental zealots to pro-environmental people-three or four seats in the Senate, maybe a couple dozen in the House-it's doable. To do this, we need to pinpoint districts around the country where our issues resonate, and where we have a chance of defeating adversaries.

snip

In what other ways do you see the Club's role evolving?

We're going to be pushing the envelope on renewable energy and sustainable, livable communities, and we'll probably be more engaged in issues like genetically modified foods, water privatization, and toxics contamination. We're in the process of developing a more positive vision of what society can be.

If I can jump back in time a bit, what led to your initial interest in the Sierra Club?

I'm a Sacramento native, and I became a Club member in the early '70s when I was an undergrad at U.C. Davis. The issues that concerned me most were clearcut logging in the Sierra Nevada and offshore oil drilling and nuclear power plant construction on the California coast.

I read that you started your Sierra Club career on the U.C. campus debating a PG&E (Pacific Gas & Electric) engineer on the merits of nuclear power. Could you tell me about that?

At the time there was a citizen's initiative to halt the construction of new nuclear plants in California, which I supported. I was doing a double major at Davis in rhetoric and environmental studies-both of which have served me well through the years-and I was taking an environmental studies program, so it was arranged that I would debate a PG&E engineer on the campus quad.

How did it go?

If I may say so, I recall that I kicked ass. The students were much more receptive to my way of thinking on the issue, and the initiative subsequently passed.

And you've continued to be active with the Sierra Club through the years?

Yes. I joined the S.F. Bay Chapter Political Committee in 1984 at the time of the Democratic National Convention, which you'll recall was held in San Francisco, and I subsequently chaired the committee for three or four years. Nineteen ninety-two was one of the most stunning years ever; more than 90 percent of the 60 or so candidates we endorsed-for city council, the state assembly, congress, you name it, won election.

As president, is there a particular message you'd like to communicate to Sierra Club leaders?

I believe environmentalism should be non-partisan. The majority of Republican elected officials have lately lost their way and become captive to corporate special interests like oil companies, mining companies, and right-wing religious fundamentalists. I would very much like to see Republicans find their way back to embracing environmental protection.

One of my goals as president is to reach out to Republicans across the country. The Club's vice-president for conservation, Chuck McGrady, is a Republican, and so are several other national Club leaders. We have moderate Republican environmental champions in Congress, notably Reps. Jim Leach of Iowa, Sherwood Boehlert of New York, and Chris Shays of Connecticut. Leach, in fact, is the chief sponsor of the National Forest Protection Act, which would protect millions of acres of national forest land from logging. And there are a small number of Republican senators who are quite strong on the environment. I don't see any reason why we can't start to bring the Republican Party back into the fold. But it will take work.

We also need to inspire our members, and Americans of all political stripes -- Greens, Independents, students, Libertarians, Democrats, and the disaffected -- who care about our issues, and emphasize that voting can make a difference. The closeness of the 2000 election should be a wake up call to all of us. With a strong grassroots mobilization effort, the Sierra Club can help turn things around.

[Trteamer]

Proving that they're not about the environment, but rather promoting a leftist agenda.

Boy is that the truth. Once I met with the leaders of the local Sierra Club to see if they would help in pressuring Colorado State University to clean up toxic waste buried on it's west campus.

The leader did nothing but bitch and moan about the evils of capitalism and big corporations. They did not lift a finger to help get the toxic mess cleaned up. They only cared about attacking Bush and conservatives. What a useless bunch.

[kcvl]

Contact Us!

Sierra Club
National Headquarters
85 Second Street, 2nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
USA
Phone: 415-977-5500
Fax: 415-977-5799


Sierra Club
Legislative Office
408 C St., N.E.
Washington, DC 20002
USA
Phone: 202-547-1141
Fax: 202-547-6009

Important Email Addresses:

General information: information@sierraclub.org

Membership questions: membership.services@sierraclub.org

Changes of address: address.changes@sierraclub.org

Outdoor Activities: national.outings@sierraclub.org

Online merchandise orders: store@sierraclub.org

Sierra Club Books: books.publishing@sierraclub.org

Sierra Magazine: sierra.magazine@sierraclub.org

Licensing inquiries: licensing@sierraclub.org

Human Resources: hrd@sierraclub.org

[Luke]

Very well said! The Sierra Club has a long history of supporting communist and socialist causes. In my opinion any American who belongs to this organization might as well be classified as a traitor to the Constitution of the United States.

[Redcloak]

Perhaps there's some way of convincing them that Spotted Owl stuffed with Snail Darter is a Mexican delicacy. That would change their minds!

[gaspar]

I can never recall the Sierra Club protesting once the incredible trashing of the Arizona borderlands. Anyone who considers him/herself a conservationist should make the pilgrimage to inspect an area that was once repleat with wildlife and is now a filthy wasteland.

[SpinyNorman]

"More proof that only communists support open borders."

Well, only one way borders. You can invade a free capitalist country, but you can't seem to find the door when you want to leave a Communist country! To wit: the former Iron Curtain, North Korea, Cuba, China (unless you go to America to spy).

[nw_arizona_granny]

"Well, only one way borders. You can invade a free capitalist country,
but you can't seem to find the door when you want to leave a
Communist country! To wit: the former Iron Curtain, North Korea,
Cuba, China (unless you go to America to spy)."

So very true and never more than it is today........