Origins of Regionalism and Sustainable Development in America.

Agency Tyranny Page | 16

The US House of Representative never approved Agenda 2118 nor did the US Senate ratify the UN Biodiversity Treaty. That, however, did not protect American property owners from the movement away from private property rights. The UN’s agenda continued, albeit a bit more slowly, through executive actions.

UN’s Marxist Ideals Codified in US Regulatory Law

One year after the Rio Earth Summit, President Bill Clinton, exasperated at the refusal of Congress to approve the UN’s programs, decided to go it alone. In 1993, he formed the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). Its purpose was to advance the ideas of Agenda 21 and the Biodiversity Treaty and gain buy-in from stakeholders who would later implement the UN’s version of Sustainable Development in the United States. To assure continuity with the UN’s program, the President formed a committee that seated the very people who wrote Agenda 21, at the same table with Federal Agency employees. EPA, HUD and the Department of Commerce members served side-by-side with directors of international groups like the World Resources Institute, Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council.21 Together, the committee created a 10-point list of National Goals that matched the anti-private property objectives of Agenda 21.

Agency Tyranny Page | 17

The PCSD reported its progress to the United Nations.23

It was not long before the committee’s ideas made their way into regulatory law. By 1998, the UN’s Sustainable Development goals from the 1992 Earth Summit were codified in the Federal Register and had become the law of the land.24 The EPA’s Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program included the goals of advancing Agenda 21 and the ideas of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development.

The formerly rejected “Wildlands Project,” designed to migrate Americans into controlled regions; and the Vancouver Action Plan’s goal to increase government’s control over private property, were jointly transformed into America’s “Regional Sustainable Development” movement. (Read this paragraph again!)

Throughout the next decade sustainability, regionalism and Smart Growth planning flourished in every state. In 2002 HUD partially funded the American Planning Association to

create boilerplate Smart Growth legislation that reflected the government’s plans.

The “Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook” recommended governments use ‘takings’ legislation to confiscate the property of individuals who failed to change their property to conform to government schemes. Planners consider the “amortization of non-conforming uses” clause an option that localities may or may not use. But, all of the options in the guidebook restrict rather than expand private property rights. Agency Tyranny Page | 18

http://sustainablefreedomlab.us11.list-manage.com/track/ click?u=ec7f192a872c6e5829dbbc97e&id=2c865c1a5b&e=49a2c9e532