Skip to comments.The Back Room Deal to Destroy America:
Posted on 06/03/2002 12:24:59 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
A group of U.S. Senators have conspired to destroy local zoning throughout the United States of America. They are trying to do it in secret. They don't want to hear from someone saying they are betraying the Constitution they swore to uphold.
Americans should take note of the names of these Senators: Former Republican turncoat Jim Jeffords; Republican Arlen Specter; Democrat Max Baucus; Democrat Harry Ried; Democrat Bob Graham; Democrat Joseph Lieberman; Democrat Barbara Boxer; Democrat Ron Wyden; Democrat Thomas Casper; Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton; and Democrat Jon Corzine.
These U.S. Senators, members of the Senate Environment Committee, hold American liberty in such disdain that they conspired behind closed doors to railroad through a bill that would put faceless bureaucrats in Washington, DC, in charge of decisions that have always been made at the community level. The bill, S.975, also known as the "Community Character Act," authorizes the use of federal money so that un-elected environmentalists can advance their extreme-left political agenda.
Secrecy was needed because opposition has been growing as the harsh realities of S-975 are being revealed by property rights advocates. The Jeffords-led cabal knew fast action was required if the bill was to sneak past. S.975, and it's counterpart in the House (H.R. 1433) will turn all of Bill Clinton's land-grabbing Executive Orders into legislation. The Community Character Act will officially make the environmental goal of "sustainable development" the law of the land.
What is "sustainable development"? Imagine an America in which a single ruling principle is created to decide proper societal conduct for every citizen. That principle would be used to determine everything you eat, what you wear, the kind of home in which you live, the way you get to work, the way you dispose of waste, the number of children you may have, even your education and employment decisions. Imagine, too, that all of these decisions are called "voluntary" while the federal government uses its full power to induce-coerce--what it deems "correct behavior."
On June 29, 1993, former President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order #12852 to create the President's Council on Sustainable Development. Sustainable development calls for changing the concept of private property, protected by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, to nothing short of a national zoning system. Under such a system, the federal government, backed by an army of private, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) like the Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, and the National Education Association will influence, if not dictate, property and other policies to the States and to local communities.
Locally elected officials will no longer be the single driving force in making decisions for their communities. Most decisions will be arrived at behind the scenes by non-elected "sustainability councils" armed with truckloads of federal regulations, guidelines and money. The power of citizen's votes would be nullified. This system is already in place with regard to the nation's education system, controlled entirely from Washington, DC. It is comparable to the Communist system of the former Soviet Russia. The Community Character Act (S.975), and its counterpart in the House of Representatives (H.R.1433), is legislation that will legalize enforcement of "sustainable development" in every community in the nation. The bill requires local governments to implement land-management plans using guidelines outlined in a federal document called the "Smart Growth Legislative Guidebook." This publication was developed with $2 million provided by the Clinton Administration to "guide" counties, cities and towns on how to "update their local zoning."
The Community Character Act offers grants to communities that will pay up to 90% of the costs for localities to update their zoning, but only if they do it the way the federal government wants it done. Among other goals, the guide requires localities to "promote social equity." Communities will be required to establish social programs that will be paid for with new or increased taxes on businesses and industry. What better way to discourage business growth?
The Community Character Act requires localities to "conserve historic, scenic, natural and cultural resources." These are euphemisms that mean more land grabs and fewer places where humans can freely go about their daily lives. It means planned economies, restricted housing, diminished use of cars, and government control of property.
The Community Character Act demands that communities "integrate local land- use plans with Federal land-use plans." That means local needs, local problems, and local culture will be ignored as the entire nation is homogenized into one, unhappy, colorless, controlled Big Brotherhood.
The bill contains not a single mention of private-property rights protection. The federal government and states now own forty percent of the entire landmass of the nation. Under the Community Character Act, money would be provided to render more land unavailable for any development or use. This legislation must be stopped. If not, America will be unrecognizable to future generations. It is time for the Republicans in Congress to decide if they truly believe in the concept of limited government under which individual Americans are free to determine their destinies and achieve their dreams and goals, without intrusion and dictates. Under "sustainable development" there are no individual decisions, rights or actions. Virtually everything will come under the scrutiny of a Washington-sanctioned federal bureaucrat.
Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott and House Speaker Dennis Hastert must unite their party to stop this attack on one of the fundamental principles of the Constitution. If enacted, it will not "sustain" development. It will end it. It will destroy the machine that maintains our economy and insures its growth. A secret, backroom deal has set this in motion.
Either that or I just reminded them of something they forgot, and they'll bribe the states to change their laws.
The bill authorizes $50 million per year for 5 years for a grant program aimed at state and local planning.
HUD is the administrative agency for the grant program.
Individual grants of up to $1 million for states and $200,000 for Tribal Governments are available.
A minimum local match of 10 percent is required.
The purpose of grant program is to assist in the development or revision of state planning legislation, promote the implementation of planning in states with updated statutes, or planning for multistate regions.
The development or revision of state planning legislation is designated as the first priority for grants.
The bill establishes eligibility guidelines for receiving grants. The guidelines state that the basic goals of planning legislation / reform be consistent with the following principles:
citizen participation, multijurisdictional cooperation, implementation elements, comprehensive planning (which is further defined in the bill), regular updating, and professional standards. Grants may be use for the purposes of drafting legislation, R&D for planning programs or legislation, workshops and public meetings, and coordination with regional and federal land use planning.
The Senate version attempts to clarify some legislative language and intent.
It authorizes $25 million per year for 5 years, plus an additional $1 million per year for an educational and informational grant program for planning / zoning officials.
The administrative agency for the program would be the Economic Development Administration.
In addition to the primary state grant program, the bill creates a local pilot project grant for local governments. This was done in an effort to clarify that grants could be used for local activities.
The bill creates ranking criteria for evaluation of grant applications. Six elements are set up as criteria:
outdated legislation, facilitate development of plans consistent w/ reform legislation, facilitate regionalism, experiencing significant growth, protect environment and promote economic development, and state financial commitment. The reform of outdated legislation is designated as the "fundamental priority."
The bill maintains the House bill's "eligibility criteria" but adds a stronger focus on environmental protection and public infrastructure.
The bill explicitly states that grants can be used by local governments for implementation of planning and to acquire new technologies for planning.
"No state in the nation is immune from the effect of rapid unplanned development. Suburbanization is expensive, costing state and local taxpayers dearly for extending roads and infrastructure and building new schools. Even states considered more rural are now facing rapid alterations in land use and quality of life. Federal grants under this act would help states promote citizen participation in the developing of plans, encourage sustainable economic development, coordinate transportation and other infrastructure development, conserve historic, scenic resources and the environment, and sustainably manage natural resources."
Sen. Lincoln Chafee
July 27, 2000
in the United States Senate
I'm pro-environment protection, and see a problem with these laws. In Massachusetts, an option to add a small amount to property tax, to be matched by the state, could be voted on locally. The problem is that the money that was supposed to be used to buy land for conservation has one nasty little addition...it can be used to subsidize low income housing! (That's REAL GOOD for the environment, huh?)
for links, tools, & instructions about how to contact a pile of different people, and how to send a link to this story right here ( or anywhere else ) to a "mass email" using Outlook Express.
Do be advised that since I increased my volume of mass emails to letters to editors I have gotten return volleys of virus attacks- my ISP filters them out before the get to my PC, but if yours does not, take appropriate precautions to guard your PC.
I take this as a positive- my emails are simply links with no editorial content; so the other side must fear & loath the information even reaching the public.
The name alone was enough to send chills up my spine.
Some chilling excerpts from the summary:
And this , which to me is one of the scarriest provisions:
Check it out.
They don't bribe the states they hold our tax money hostage with their so called fedral matching funds. If a state doesn't meet the fed's requirment on a range of issues and that is everything from low income housing to enviromental laws they keep the money they take from us. This bill will just add more money for enforcement and line the pockets of the ecofreak NGO's.I keep wondering what the hell happend to the 10th amendment?
Ta-dah! More warnings not heeded! It'll pass too.
NOUN: 1. A systematic plan of action: Did you ever carry out your scheme of writing a series of sonnets embodying all the great epochs of art? (Edith Wharton, That Good May Come 1894). 2. A secret or devious plan; a plot. See synonyms at plan. 3. An orderly combination of related parts: an irrigation scheme with dams, reservoirs, and channels. 4. A chart, diagram, or outline of a system or object.
VERB: Inflected forms: schemed, schem·ing, schemes
TRANSITIVE VERB: 1. To plot: scheming their revenge. 2. To contrive a plan or scheme for.
INTRANSITIVE VERB: To make plans, especially secret or devious ones.
ETYMOLOGY: Latin schma, figure, from Greek skhma. See segh- in Appendix I.
OTHER FORMS: schemer NOUN
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by the Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
We suffer a lot of schemes and projets in Canada; that's one of the 'benefits' of bilingualism.
They're not good ideas in any language.
So much more...
Sort of like telling liberals you're a Freeper.
I have noted a big shift in the last year among talk show hosts and their callers-- both seem to be drawing very heavily on the web for news and information.
The result has been a real acceleration of the speed of these kinds of stories getting to the public's attention. Indeed, in the past "deals" like this one relied on keeping the public uninformed and misinformed for as long as possible.
That is no longer possible with the web & talk radio covering things.
I would not go so far as to say things have turned around, but rather they are in the process of turning around- in other words, we aren't there yet, but we are headed in the right direction.
Sounds like communists to me. Yup, definately communists.
That is no longer possible with the web & talk radio covering things.
Thank GOD for the internet and talk radio!!!! I agree with ya....back room deals are getting harder and harder to accomplish. Good!!!
Thank God for the internet and for Freerepublic.com. Really, how many of these issues would go unnoticed if not for our ability to connect the dots right here.
There is some hope that we can turn this ship around. But, in the meantime, keep your powder dry. :^)