CONGRESS IN 2003: LIBERTY'S SCORECARD
By Peyton Knight
H.R. 1146: The American Sovereignty Restoration Act
On July 15, 2003, the U.S. House of Representatives once again considered the weighty issue of whether or not the U.S.A. should continue to be a member of the United Nations. When word came that Congress would vote on adding Representative Ron Paul’s H.R. 1146 as an amendment to the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, advocates of national sovereignty and American liberty sprang into action. Phone calls were made to Representatives, urging them to finally rid the U.S.A. of its most entangling alliance. In the end, however, far too many Representatives refused to listen to the pleas of their fellow Americans. The amendment was voted down, 350-74, However, progress was made. Twelve more members of the House voted to get the U.S.A. out of the U.N., twelve more than in the previous year! So while we’re gaining ground, we still have a long way to go. LOSE.
H.R. 1427: National Heritage Areas Policy Act
This land rights disaster, sponsored by Representative Joel Hefley (R-CO), would officially create a National Heritage Areas (NHA) program. If passed, it would only be a short matter of time before every county in the U.S.A. is a National Heritage Area. Greens, or political environmentalists, in Congress have been trying unsuccessfully to pass this bill in one form or another for almost a decade. Property rights advocates have thwarted these environmental extremists year after year, though the land use Nazis continue to gain ground. Although there has only been a House version of H.R. 1427 up to now, that could very well change in 2004, as the Senate takes up the issue.
Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY) seems to be taking up the Greens’ pet cause. As Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on National Parks, he’s requested the General Accounting Office (a federal investigative bureau) to gather information on Heritage Areas and issue a report. In a letter he wrote to the Director of the National Park Service, he said, “The National Heritage Areas program is here to stay. By working together, we can define the overall purpose of the program -- where it is today and where we hope to see it going through the end of this decade.” Well, Chairman Thomas. Allow us to answer your questions:
In 2003, the Heritage Areas debate grew more contentious than ever. The anti-property rights crowd is going to make a SERIOUS push to get the NHA Policy Act passed in 2004. We must remain vigilant and prepared to act. DRAW.
H.R. 280: To establish four new Heritage Areas and one National Historic Site
This massive land grab would devour property in several states by creating: The National Aviation Heritage Area in Ohio; The Arabia Mountain National Heritage Area in Georgia; The Oil Region National Heritage Area in Pennsylvania; The Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area in Massachusetts and Connecticut; and The Steel Industry National Historic Site in Pennsylvania.
This massive land and power grab would put affected counties under the control of the National Park Service and extremist Green groups. Heritage Areas are, in effect, federal zoning. Federal money for Heritage Areas is administered through the National Park Service to radical preservation groups that are directed to preserve everything within the boundaries of the Heritage Area. In other words, the Park Service teams up with local Greens to take away property rights and to influence local zoning laws. Local citizens lose their influence over the land use decisions in their county.
Unfortunately, property rights advocates were unsuccessful in stopping this horrendous bill in the House of Representatives. However, we were successful in stopping it in the Senate -- for now. As soon as the 2004 congressional session convenes, there promises to be a major battle over H.R. 280. Grassroots activists across the nation, especially those in the affected states, must make their voices heard! DRAW.
S. 139: The Climate Stewardship Act
2003 was perhaps the worst year for the global warming scaremongers in recent history. The Kyoto Protocol is all but dead, the final nail in the coffin delivered by the Russian Federation, which backed out of its original promise to ratify the treaty. It seems more and more politicos are reviewing sound science and realizing that there is no convincing evidence that the global climate is even warming, let alone warming at the hand of mankind. Even the data of the UN’s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a pseudo-scientific organization that exists solely to further the UN’s global warming agenda, shows that the Kyoto Protocol would not be worth the destruction it would wreak on the world’s economy.
Unfortunately, publicity-hounds John McCain and Joseph Lieberman continue to use the global warming issue to court the reliably hysterical media. They introduced S. 139 in 2003 and forced a full Senate vote on the issue. S. 139 would absolutely destroy the US economy by enacting “Kyoto” here in the U.S.A. It mandates that America reduce its “Greenhouse gas emissions” to year 2000 levels by 2010. The Senate rejected the Climate Stewardship Act by a count of 55 to 43. Though 43 votes in favor of such lunacy would normally be cause for serious alarm, it is important to note that the majority of those voting in favor of S. 139 likely did so because they knew the bill would not pass and therefore it was an opportunity to score cheap political points with the extremist Green lobby.
After S. 139 was defeated, Senator McCain vowed vengeance: “I want to assure my colleagues we will be back.” However, one of the Senate’s true heroes, Jim Inhofe (R-OK) had a more rational take on the vote: “A majority of the Senate today told the American people that mandatory carbon dioxide reductions are unacceptable, and rightly so. The science underlying this bill has been repudiated, the economic costs are far too high, and the environmental benefits are nonexistent.” Senator Inhofe has always been a consistent voice of reason on the global warming issue. We could use more Senators like him. WIN.
H.R. 2671: Clear Law Enforcement and Criminal Alien Removal Act (CLEAR Act)
There is perhaps no other current issue that is more infuriating and frustrating to Americans than the condition of our nation’s borders and our government’s schizophrenic immigration policy. Illegal immigration is, well, illegal, yet our federal government refuses to enforce the laws on the books. In fact, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, would give criminal aliens blanket amnesty.
Enter Representative Charlie Norwood (R-GA) and his CLEAR Act. This bill directs state law enforcement entities to enforce federal immigration laws governing illegal aliens, or lose federal funding. Very simple. Investigate, arrest, detain, and remove illegal aliens or go hungry. Though only introduced in July of 2003, the CLEAR Act already has 112 cosponsors! Every single American who is concerned about the security and integrity of our nation must urge their Representatives to support and pass this bill. DRAW.
H.R. 7: Charitable Giving Act (“Faith-Based Initiative”)
The American Policy Center has long warned that the so-called “Faith-based initiative” (H.R. 7) is nothing but a federal Trojan Horse designed to allow government into the private practices of faith-based institutions. H.R. 7, however well intentioned, will spell disaster for private charities that accept federal money. These institutions will lose a great deal of their autonomy to a myriad of federal rules.
Liberal, non-faith-based groups are also trying to use H.R. 7 to score goodies for themselves. The Senate version of the “Charitable Giving Act” includes a provision that would allow wealthy land trusts and federal agencies to offer a 25% capital gains tax break to those who sell land to them. This tax break would not apply to any other land sales. This nasty provision would allow Green groups to corner the market on land sales, as no one else would be able to compete with them. Property values would plummet and more and more land would be locked up in Green and government hands.
Thankfully, the House version of the Charitable Giving Act includes no such provision for the multibillion-dollar land trusts. For this, thanks is due in large part to Congressmen Roy Blunt (R-MO) and Wally Herger (R-CA), who have stood up to the slick Green lobby. The battle over this unfair tax favoritism for land trusts is sure to heat up early in 2004, as the House and Senate try and put forward a single bill. We were successful in keeping this horrid provision out of the House bill, and have even defied odds by making it a major point of contention between the two houses of Congress. The Senate provision for land trusts must NEVER pass. If it does, private property will be swallowed in gigantic swaths. DRAW.
Continuity of Government (COG) Amendment Versus Continuity in Representation Act
Worried about what might happen should terrorists wipe out a substantial number of Representatives, some constitutionally clueless members of Congress have devised a scheme called the Continuity of Government Amendment (COG) and appointed a commission to look into its viability. Such an amendment to the United States Constitution would be a danger to elected representation as we know it. COG proposes that, if a substantial number of members of Congress are either killed or incapacitated, then either the Congress or state governors should be permitted to appoint people to fill vacancies!
The House of Representatives is the “People’s House.” Never in our nation’s history -- not once -- has a non-elected House Member taken the oath of office. Our Founding Fathers specifically mandated replacement of deceased members by election -- in order to maintain direct ties with the people.
Thankfully, Representative James Sensenbrenner has a more constitutional, level-headed solution. Rep. Sensenbrenner has proposed H.R. 2844, the "Continuity in Representation Act.” This bill “requires States to hold special elections to fill vacancies in the House of Representatives not later than 21 days after the vacancy is announced by the Speaker of the House of Representatives in extraordinary circumstances.” In other words: H.R. 2844 ensures that the “People’s House” remains just that!
Proponents of the COG Amendment had hoped to vote on it sometime around the symbolic date of September 11th of 2003. However, we were successful in beating them back for the time being. Nevertheless, 2004 will likely see a resurgence of the issue. It is therefore important that all concerned patriots let Congress know that the COG Amendment stinks, and “The Continuity in Representation Act” is the way to preserve constitutional order. DRAW.
The United Nations & Its Agencies
Energy, Environment, & Natural Resources
Government & the Economy
Liberals, Statists, Socialists, & Other Leftists
Immigration & Illegal Aliens
Terrorism & Homeland Security
Africa: Black Africa *
Africa: North Africa *
American Government 1
American Government 2 * American Government 3 * American Government 4
American Government 5 * American Politics * Anglosphere * Arabs
Arms Control & WMD * Aztlan Separatists * Big Government
Black Africa * Bureaucracy * Canada * China * Civil Liberties * Communism
Congress, U.S. * Conservative Groups * Conservative vs. Liberal
Constitutional Law * Counterterrorism * Criminal Justice * Disloyalty * Economy
Education * Elections, U.S. * Eminent Domain * Energy & Environment
English-Speaking World * Ethnicity & Race * Europe * Europe: Jews
Family Values * Far East * Fiscal Policy, U.S. * Foreign Aid, U.S. * France
Hispanic Separatism * Hispanic Treason * Human Health * Immigration
Infrastructure, U.S. * Intelligence, U.S. * Iran * Iraq * Islamic North Africa
Islamic Threat * Islamism * Israeli vs. Arabs * Jews & Anti-Semitism
Jihad & Jihadism * Jihad Manifesto I * Jihad Manifesto II * Judges, U.S. Federal
Judicial Appointments * Judiciary, American * Latin America * Latino Separatism
Latino Treason * Lebanon * Leftists/Liberals * Legal Issues
Local Government, U.S. * Marriage & Family * Media Political Bias
Middle East: Arabs * Middle East: Iran * Middle East: Iraq * Middle East: Israel
Middle East: Lebanon * Middle East: Syria * Middle East: Tunisia
Middle East: Turkey * Militant Islam * Military Defense * Military Justice
Military Weaponry * Modern Welfare State * Morality & Decency
National Identity * National Security * Natural Resources * News Media Bias
North Africa * Patriot Act, USA * Patriotism * Political Culture * Political Ideologies
Political Parties * Political Philosophy * Politics, American * Presidency, U.S.
Private Property * Property Rights * Public Assistance * Radical Islam
Religion & America * Rogue States & WMD * Russia * Science & Ethics
Sedition & Treason * Senate, U.S. * Social Welfare Policy * South Africa
State Government, U.S. * Subsaharan Africa * Subversion * Syria * Terrorism 1
Terrorism 2 * Treason & Sedition * Tunisia * Turkey * Ukraine
UnAmerican Activity * UN & Its Agencies * USA Patriot Act * U.S. Foreign Aid
U.S. Infrastructure * U.S. Intelligence * U.S. Senate * War & Peace
Welfare Policy * WMD & Arms Control