0 votes

Ron Paul : Environmental Protection or Destruction?

June 5, 2000
CARA: Environmental Protection or Destruction?

When the House of Representatives recently passed the "Conservation and Reinvestment Act", better known as CARA, it took a big step in the wrong direction. This legislation allows the federal government to get further involved in the real estate business by owning more property.

I believe the federal government should be selling off many of its real property holdings. Efficient land use, as well as constitutional government, would suggest the federal government already owns far too much real property.

Still, some of the most radical environmentalists remain convinced that the only way to protect green space is for government, particularly the federal government, to own more and more land. This is an ironic point of view, because countries that have had the most government regulation of property, such as the former Soviet bloc nations, have had the absolute worst records of environmental quality.

In the CARA legislation, some non-tax revenues, such as those from oil drilling leases, would be used to mitigate problems resulting from the drilling. However, areas without any such damages were still expressly earmarked for pork-barrel spending projects.

These funds are being separately dedicated and taken off budget so Congress will not have to do annual appropriations with them. This scheme is bad for two reasons. First, it allows the Executive Branch to have powers that are Constitutionally directed to Congress. So this bill not only diminishes private property, it also erodes the Constitutional separation of powers. Furthermore, this off-budget scheme will not amount to anything approaching a true trust fund. Time and again, we have seen government raid trust funds to pay for spending measures for which those funds were never intended. The most glaring example of this is the raiding of the Social Security trust fund. However, highway funds, airport funds and others are also regularly raided to pay for foreign aid giveaways and other pork.

CARA not only necessitates the creation of a trust fund to engage in activities which are not authorized by the Constitution, it also promises to have a negative impact on property rights in general and on the environment Congress is claiming to protect. If we are truly interested in providing better land management and environmental stewardship, we should get the federal government out of the land management business. As the recent uncontrolled burns of Los Alamos show, there is literally no end to the possible ways the federal government can mismanage environmentally sensitive lands.

I have introduced legislation to take a project in my district out of federal hands and place it with agencies in Texas. Of course, the executive branch has stalled it every step of the way. When the federal government begins to micro-manage affairs that belong at the state and local levels, it is nearly impossible to stop. Unfortunately, this CARA bill will give federal agencies much more control over real property. Once people see the folly of this bill, it will be too late because the federal bureaucracy will be in control. Now I can only hope that my colleagues in the Senate will stop this terrible legislation from becoming law.

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2000/tst060500.htm
via - http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=151



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

JPMorgan Chase Profits from Destruction in Appalachia

Remember the bank bailouts? The billions of tax dollars that went to those behemoth institutions? Jamie Dimon, Chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, said recently that his investment bank may have had its "finest year ever." What he didn't highlight was that
JPMorgan Chase's success is based, in part, on being the largest underwriter of coal companies that engage in mountaintop removal coal mining.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gloria-reuben/jpmorgan-chase-p...

"Targeted areas of trees are cleared -- a process that itself has led to the leveling of over one million acres of hardwood forest between 1992 and 2002 -- and then mountaintops are blasted apart in order to expose underlying coal seams for extraction.

In the past two decades alone, mountaintop removal coal mining has destroyed roughly 470 mountains in the region. The debris from these blasts is dumped into surrounding valleys, destroying what were once serene and lush hollows. Or it's dumped into local rivers and streams, literally burying 1,200 miles of waterways."

I believe Obama has authorized over 263 more mountains to be decapitated.

We must reign in the super preditor beast blind rhino; he is very clumsy.

And never forget, “Humans, despite our artistic pretensions, our sophistication and many accomplishments, owe the fact of our existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains.”

The lands make the finest of bribes.

I like to think of myself as a tree hugger and land use has always been the number one topic. Not necessarily the ownership of it, but the use of it. This issue is very important, and I get personal enjoyment in preserving the word "pristine".
Beauty is pristine.
I love that word . . . pristine . . . and the vision I get in my mind. Just say it to yourself . . .
beautiful, pristine.

And never forget, “Humans, despite our artistic pretensions, our sophistication and many accomplishments, owe the fact of our existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains.”

I, too, love land, and we, my husband and I,

always wanted unpesticided, unherbicided land, that was natural, and after being married 30 years, we got our dream, and are building a house, and live in it, and are growing organic gardens, and using permaculture. But our land is also mostly treed, and is now being affected by beetle kill. Although our land was pristine, and the same as when the Oregon Trail settlers came through it, we are forced to manage the forest, or lose ALL of our beautiful ponderosa pine trees. However, the trees have a good chance if we remove all of the affected trees, and thin out the others so they won't be so weak from the drought we are in, and then they can fight off the beetles. We sometimes get grief from people because we cut trees for cordwood, as we heat and cook with wood, but we only cut the inferior trees, and the crowded ones, and of course now the dying trees from the beetle kill. We won't, of course, use pesticides on the trees. Pristine is nice, but 40 acres of dead trees would be terrible.

I once made a living cutting marked trees in N. Calif

We trucked chords down to town in the early afternoon and people stayed warm at night.

And never forget, “Humans, despite our artistic pretensions, our sophistication and many accomplishments, owe the fact of our existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains.”

You did a good service

to the environment by preventing fires.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

reedr3v's picture

bump

.