Massisve EPA propsed land grab underway, rigged and corrupt

Don’t think for one moment that Obama’s other minions are not marching forward with the agenda. This is to be one of the  most egregious. Any land owner would be wise to pay heed to this little number that the EPA’s Gina McCarty has in store for us. Total control of our land if we have even just a smidgen of water on it. Gina is going to stack the so called “Review Board” with her cronies, and make her land grab. Here we go:

What happens when Washington’s top environmental policymaker packs a government advisory board with federal grant recipients so she can regulate virtually every acre in the United States of America?

For one thing, two powerful members of Congress angrily take notice and demand in a news release to know why “EPA Skirts the Law to Expand Regulatory Authority.”

If approved, the new rule would give EPA unprecedented power over private property across the nation, gobbling up everything near seasonal streams, isolated wetlands, prairie potholes, and almost anything that occasionally gets wet.

Smith and Stewart are outraged by a proposed EPA rule – the “Water Body Connectivity Report” – that would remove the limiting word “navigable” from “navigable waters of the United States” and replace it with “connectivity of streams and wetlands to downstream waters” as the test for Clean Water Act regulatory authority.

Smith and Stewart accuse EPA of “pushing through a rule with vast economic and regulatory implications before the agency’s Science Advisory Board has had an opportunity to review the underlying science.”

EPA says its rule-making will be based on the final version of the SAB’s scientific assessment

Catch 22: The SAB is paid to verify whether the EPA report is technically accurate but the panel has not yet been provided with the proposed rule, even though the Office of Management and Budget has it.

McCarthy took no chances with letting hard-headed state or local water officials in, despite nominees from the Arizona Department of Water Resources, Missouri Dept. of Conservation, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Ventura County Watershed Protection District, Susquehanna River Basin Commission, New York City Dept of Environmental Protection, and the State of Wyoming.

But here’s the worst part of it: Half of McCarthy’s choices received EPA grants in the last 10 years!

See also: EPA McCarthy will ‘go after’ critics who question agency | BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

Meet Gina McCarthy. Here to destroy the last vestiges of all landowner’s freedoms.

H/T: Washington Examiner

 

Advertisements

Obama Puts Agenda 21 On Steroids

I am pleased to offer this guest post from Jim over at Asylum Watch– “Because it’s a crazy world out there and we have to live in it”.  It is an important post. Agenda 21 is a sleeper, and we need to stay on top of it. Jim does great research and thought-provoking commentary. Be sure and visit him.

President Obama mentioned recently that he is preparing to tell all federal agencies for the first time that they should consider the impact on climate change before approving major projects, from pipelines to highways. It should have. I highly doubt he will implement his plan via a bill that congress must approve. He is much more like to do it through an executive order.

Stanley Kurtz at National Review Online tells about Obama’s next steps toward stacking you and packing you in high density urban centers (Agenda 21).

Last Friday’s headlines focused on President Obama’s address at Argonne National Laboratory, where he proposed to spend $2 billion on an energy-security trust fund for renewable fuel research. Obama boldly pledged “to shift our cars entirely . . . off oil.”

…on the day of Obama’s Argonne speech, the Department of Energy released a series of coordinated reportscalled “Transportation Energy Futures” (developed in cooperation with Argonne). This DOE project explores a variety of strategies designed to curb America’s greenhouse gas emissions up to 80 percent by about 2050.

I don’t know about you, but I didn’t hear about these DOE reports. I guess the MSM didn’t think they were very important. So, what is the DOE up to? Kurtz explains:

Arguably the most controversial of those reports covers the “effects of the built environment on transportation.” To put it plainly, the “built environment” report lays out strategies the federal government can use to force development away from suburbs and into cities, supposedly for the sake of reducing carbon dioxide emissions given off by all those suburban commuters. The Obama administration wants to force so-called smart growth policies on the country: get out of your car, stay out of the suburbs, move into small, tightly-packed urban apartment complexes, and walk or take public transportation instead of driving. (Bold added)

You can see what is coming, can’t you? The only projects that will get approval will be those in the cities. A developer wants to build a new subdivision in a suburb will find the permits denied or delayed indefinitely while the impact on climate change is reviewed and reviewed again. Need to add roads or schools to a suburb? Sorry! It would produce too much green house gases. The idea will be to make too expensive to live in the suburbs.

And, of course, there are all those federal grants that local politicians can’t turn down.

Kurtz has some thoughts on how to fight back:

How can these changes be fought? Publicity helps. Controversial policies like “smart growth” often operate under the public’s radar. Obama wants the energy debate to focus on benign-sounding research plans, while his administration’s interest in placing the massive power of federal funding behind urban densification strategies goes unnoticed.

The other way to block Obama’s plans is to have Congress cut funding for the Sustainable Communities Initiative. In particular, future funding for the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program ought to be eliminated. Although the cost of these planning grants is small, their potential impact is large, especially if the administration follows through with the built environment report’s option of conditioning a wide range of federal aid on local adherence to so-called smart-growth planning. (I described these troubling “sustainability” grants in “Obama’s Plan for Ohio.”)

Yours truly is not very optimistic that the House Republicans will use their power over the purse. All indications are that once again there will be no budget passed on the 27th of this month. That means there will be another Continuing Resolution passed to fund the government through September. The House Republicans could include no funding for “climate change reviews”. They could eliminate funds for those pesky government grants. They could cut funding for the DOE programs. And, of course, the Democrats could say no and shut down the government and blame it on the Republicans, in which case, the Republicans will fold in a heart beat.

So, the ultimate in central planning, Agenda 21, marches on.

%d bloggers like this: