California's Anti-Global Warming Laws as Smokescreen to Blockade Growth of Red Counties

The Pasadena Pundit ^ | April 5, 2007 | Wayne Lusvardi

[WayneLusvardi]

California's Anti-Global Warming Laws as Smokescreen to Blockade the Growth of Red Counties

The Pasadena Pundit - Arpil 5, 2007

Preface: California's inland counties, mostly comprised of Republican strongholds, are growing rapidly and now are siphoning even immigrants from their landing zones in central Los Angeles. What can Democratic blue counties do to impede the gradual Republicanization of the state? Well, they could come up with a scheme that says that high-density housing, infill housing development shorter commutes, and mandating that people walk or bike to work is necessary to "save the planet" from global warming.

Just think about it. High density housing will mean more, not fewer, impacts on the environment because emissions and congestion will be concentrated in the coastal basins rather than diffused throughout the region.

The only way to impede or blockade the growth of inland counties is to regulate every aspect of our lives: where we live, what car we can own, what job we can take, whether we can own a car in the first place, how much we will have to pay for pricey luxury green electricity.

This is environmental totalitarianism with a political agenda. This comes right out of Soviet style central planning with 10-year Plans.

Democracy hardly exists anymore with gerrymandering, legal circunvention of Open Meeting laws under "legal confidentialty" rules, trick ballots and ballot wording that cancels out votes, tax laws which excuse low income people from paying taxes and thus having a stake in the political system by voting, revolving door politicians that circumvent term limits, fusion politics which dilutes the two-party system, courts which now run our jails, hospitals, and now indirectly electricity prices and what kind of car we can own.

Now the political party that calls itself Democrat wants to take the only freedom of choice we have left away from us - the right to vote with our feet. With that in mind read the excerpt below from NewTimes San Luis Obispo:

One gaseous goal

The state wants locals to help plan paths away from global warming but it's not saying how

BY PATRICK HOWE - NewTimes San Luis Obispo

Excerpt: California's ambitious new plan to shoehorn the state's lug-soled boot of a carbon footprint into a slimming strappy little number depends in part on getting local governments to radically change the way communities develop and grow.

Trouble is, nobody's yet told the planners how to craft the sort of strategies that would meet the goals, there's no money to pay for any changes yet, and so far there's no way to tell even if they do meet the targets.

Broadly, that means they want communities to zone for high-density housing, allow more infill development, encourage shorter commutes, demand green and energy-efficient buildings, and change their general plans to look for ways people can walk or bike to work.

...planning for climate change also means acknowledging that "the creek will rise, so where we used to build with a fair amount of confidence may not be where we'd want to build in the future."

Read the full article here: http://www.newtimesslo.com/index.php?p=showarticle&id=2382

[Issaquahking]

Not to worry my FRiend, we're here from the u.n., and, we are here to help you...If you think that whacko albore is alone in his BS, guess again...



Here is the article that goes with it...

[sergeantdave]

A short background -

The Bio-diversity treaty, spawned by the UN and which would give control of every inch of American land to unelected fascist bureaucrats, was rejected by the US Senate in 1994.

Clinton said, no problem. He would illegally implement the treaty via federal bureaucracy rules and executive orders. So under the President’s Council on Sustainable Development and other federal natural resource dpartments, he did so.

All these rules, laws and orders restricting the use of private property and creating de facto federal nature preserves on private property via executive seizure, without a penny in compensation, of course, are measures being used to implement the rejected bio-diversity treaty. And it’s illegal.

Furthermore, the judges who are ruling in favor of these illegal land seizures are committing sedition.

Clinton and the executive bureaucracy are in every way, manner and definition a criminal fascist syndicate. And they have declared war against rural America.

This is our enemy in America and it should be treated as an enemy, in thought, word and action.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

Environmental protection laws, in particular the ESA are a huge threat to our legal tradition of private property ownership. Also, economic studies show that zoning laws hurt the poor the most. Houston has NO zoning laws and housing costs there are extremely low. Affordable housing is available there. Zoning restricts the use of property and drives up property development costs. Zoning designed to limit global warming is just another element that will drive up home ownership costs, and infringe on private property rights.

[Nathan Zachary]

And this Koyoto/ global warming scam is just front these global governance ultra-Marxists are using to mask implimenting their one world unelected elite government and all the policies they have written up over the years.

It’s alarming stuff if anyone takes the time to look deeply into what has been going on at the UN over the years, the empire building (through NGO’s) done by the powerful(and dangerous) elite lunatics behind it all.

[kabar]

California is sinking under a tide of legal and illegal immigrants who are flooding the state. State policies encourage more illegals to come. Using the 2000 Census figures, the poulation of California was 33,871,648 up 4 million from the 29,760,021 in 1990.

The Hispanic/Latino population increased from 7,687,938 to 10,966,556. The number of Foreign-born residents increased from 6,417,052 to 8,817,243, an increase of 2.4 million. The number of Mexican-born residents increased from 2,434,652 to 3,889,695 or an increase of almost 1.5 million. As a result, about one in every three Californians is Hispanic/Latino, one in every four is foreign-born, and one in every eight is Mexican-born. And since these are Census figures, the numbers are probably understated since illegals are less likely to submit the data.

The demographics are pushing much of these policies. The need for infrastructure i.e., roads, schools, sewage treatment plants, energy, etc., is growing almost exponentially. Where is the money going to come from to support this population growth? I don't doubt that some of this has to do with politics, but there are other reasons related to costs. It is far easier and less costly to increase urban density than to have urban sprawl.

In the long term, California is going to continue go downhill if the immigration problem, legal and illegal, is not solved. The illegals will continue to flow in forcing the affluent and middle class from the cities and eventually out of state along with many of the businesses, which will be taxed to support the burgeoning population. It is already happening.

[sergeantdave]

Quite correct, GeorgefromGeorgia.

Zoning is defacto soviet socialism, where decisions on private property are decided by unelected regional planning commissions to carry out the goals of the state, as defined by the state.

Recently, my state passed the Zoning Enabling Act. Under ZEA, unelected bureaucrats on zoning commissions have been given the power to seize homes and businesses not in compliance with arbitrary zoning ordinances.

This home seizure has been pushed by the American Planning Association (APA), a collection of Marxists disguised as urban planners.

The APA has been dropping off a cookie cutter zoning plan to all state legislatures, urging them to pass it.

The idiot legislators do not read the laws they’re passing. When we confronted our moron state rep on why he voted for it, he said the governor wanted it. He also admitted he didn’t read it.

[goldstategop]

The Democrats want to choke of the growth of the exurbs. The way to accomplish it is through environmental protection regulations, of course. They will affect relatively few voters in Blue urban counties but virtually every voter in Red rural and exurban counties will be burdened. So this creeping soft totalitarianism will affect Republicans more than Democrats.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[calcowgirl]

Ping!

This scheme is not limited to the blue democrats. It has been promoted by those masquerading with “Rs” next to their name. A certain liberal(R) Governor comes to mind.

[SierraWasp]

This is the "Rural Cleansing" I keep yellin about!!!

It's never let up since the Warren court's "Cows Don't Vote," or "One Man, One Vote" jury-rigging of both the state's and the US Constitutions!!!

It's bogus and creates the very rip-off of rural representation that lead to the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution in the first place!!!

It is indeed "Taxation without (equal) representation!"

My county shares one state senator with 13 other counties. LA County is represented by 13 state senators!!!

The "One Man, One Vote" thing was and is taken care of in each state's lower house!!!

But hay! I'm just one little FReeper cryin out in the wilderness of apathy!!!

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

BUMP

[Inyo-Mono]

And here’s more on the subject:

http://access-advocates.org/issues.htm