Posted on 04/25/2005 3:55:59 PM PDT by SmithL
SAN FRANCISCO - Sierra Club members Monday flatly rejected a change in the group's policies that would have advocated reducing immigration to the United States as a way to protect the environment.
The proposal was defeated by nearly 84 percent of the 122,308 members who voted, the club announced. About 16 percent of the club's more than 750,000 members cast ballots during voting that began in early March.
Members also elected five new members to the 15-member board of directors, which sets club policy and oversees the San Francisco-based organization's $100 million annual budget.
Sierrans for U.S. Population Stabilization, a network of club activists seeking stricter immigration limits, backed a "yes" vote and five of its own candidates; none won a board seat.
Advocates of stricter immigration said the U.S. population, now about 300 million, is expected to more than double this century if nothing is done to slow growth. They said overpopulation has led to a variety of environmental problems, including exploitation of resources, the erosion of wilderness areas and species extinction.
"I think there's a lack of understanding of the sheer magnitude of the problem," Dick Schneider, a supporter of the immigration proposal, said after its defeat. "The connection between population and environmental degradation is so clear-cut that it's a natural issue for the Sierra Club to be involved in."
Opponents, including many current and former club leaders, argued that wading into the politics of immigration would alienate allies such as labor unions and civil rights groups, and will not slow population growth worldwide.
"Our members have once again displayed great wisdom and made their views perfectly clear," Sierra Club president Larry Fahn said in a statement. "Now we can put our focus back where it is needed most, into strengthening communities and building alliances to protect our environment for our families and our future."
The vote against the immigration question was 102,455 to 18,998. Some members voted for directors but did not cast votes on the proposal.
The club, founded by famed conservationist John Muir in 1892, has debated its position on immigration for years and in 1998 voted to remain neutral.
I'm VERY interested in that 18,000 that didn't vote with the Useful Idiots.
Wonder if we can help create a new Conservative group with them.... Thoughts, anyone?
bttt
It also shows that they really aren't interested in solutions, but in perpetuation of the problems.
Again the Sierra Club has put political correctness ahead of the eviorment and national security. :(
The leopard reveals its spots.
"Now we can put our focus back where it is needed most, into strengthening communities and building alliances to protect our environment for our families and our future."
So their reasons for rejecting it were NOT to spare the U.S. environment, and in the next breath said we need to protect our environment for our families, who presumably live in the U.S.
Anyone else but me see a contradiction here? You'd think they'd do anything to protect the environment anywhere, including here in America but they're allowing their alliances with other political groups take precedence.
Do you need any more proof that caring for the environment is nothing more than a cover?
The internet is going to eventually extinguish that avenue of membership and reveal the Sierra Club for what it really is ~ a small clique of people who think they own the public lands in this country while believing you don't.
"Now we can put our focus back where it is needed most, into strengthening communities and building alliances to protect our environment for our families and our future."
So their reasons for rejecting it were NOT to spare the U.S. environment, and in the next breath said we need to protect our environment for our families, who presumably live in the U.S.
Anyone else but me see a contradiction here? You'd think they'd do anything to protect the environment anywhere, including here in America but they're allowing their alliances with other political groups take precedence.
Do you need any more proof that caring for the environment is nothing more than a cover?
What a bunch of phonies.
.
The "sierra club" is nothing more than a COMMUNIST front organization. It is Anti-American to the core!
I think you summed it up nicely.
ping
Are we surprised? They are leftists first, environmentalists second.
Just like NOW, which only stands up for a raped woman if the rapist was a Republican, or the ACLU, which only defends your freedom of speech if you are pro-abort.
They ran around for years condemning large families, screaming about overpopulation, environmental damage, blah blah. You couldn't open a newspaper without reading about it. Nixon mentioned overpopulation in a speech in 1969, and then appointed a commission on population chaired by Nelson Rockefeller. The conclusion? "The nation has no further need of population growth".
All of this pushed by the Sierra Club.
If it isn't obvious to everyone now that this organization is merely a leftist front organization, well, dunno what it would take...the only people they ever thought the country was overpopulated with was Americans.
Nearly all of the alphabet orgs. EPA, CDC, etc. and groups like the S. Club have been infiltrated by the commies. Notice their "public interest" slant, (phoney) and constantly running to court over anything they can think of.
Any questions about these swine? No, ok let's never speak about them again.
It would be better if you worked to support a conservative group among the elected Republicans, although probably harder to accomplish.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.