Land Grab Act (S. 975)- Senate MEETS IN SECRET!!

To: KentuckyWoman

What sexual animals these 'Secret' Congress Members must be - imagine the possibilities of not being incumbered with a Backbone ?? !! ??

21 posted on 05/08/2002 10:35:32 PM PDT by Alabama_Wild_Man

You know, if people would just refuse to play, and if juries would nullify the government's attempts to incarcerate the People for ignoring these unlawful edicts, eventually, those lunatics in the District of Criminals would all get mad and go away (don't I wish).

For all the good it will do, both socialist senators from the state of Washington will shortly learn that voting for, or otherwise supporting this nonsence will cost them at least one vote a piece (not that I've ever before knowingly voted for a socialist).

22 posted on 05/08/2002 11:41:27 PM PDT by Washington_minuteman

23 posted on 05/09/2002 1:20:33 AM PDT by hammerdown

NOW will you start indexing this kind of stuff? 'Pod

24 posted on 05/09/2002 3:44:23 AM PDT by sauropod

To: HAMMERDOWN; countrydummy

Good to see ya Tim. I posted 4 articles over the weekend concerning the New River Gorge situation. Check 'em out. 'Pod

25 posted on 05/09/2002 3:45:55 AM PDT by sauropod

Here are my thoughts on this subject.

The Democrats and the two RINO's on this commitee knew full well this was a bad law and they knew that the public knew it was a bad law and that's why there was so much opposition to it and that's why they resorted to all the dishonorable and unethical tatics that they did.

This is not the way to earn respect from your constituents. It's quite obvious the Demorats and RINO's on this commitee are more interested in doing as much enormous harm as they can then they are in earning respect from their constituents. I thank you know who that Chaffee, Spector, and Jeffords are not my representatives in the Senate. If I lived in Vermont, R.I. or Pennsylvania, they would not be my true representatives, they would be SHAM representatives. No true representative would pull this stuff on his or her constituents.

I would urge everyone to call their congressmen or women and oppose this disgraceful proposal, S. 975. We will find out with this vote which of these congresspeople are true representatives to their constituents and which of them are SHAM representatives.
Regards.

26 posted on 05/09/2002 3:53:18 AM PDT by E.G.C.

To: sauropod; Fish out of Water

See post #10, 'pod. Fish out of Water is the *Landgrab bump indexer. I was doing *West_Virginia.

- peace bro'.

27 posted on 05/09/2002 5:02:20 AM PDT by RFP

To: Glasser; Dan from Michigan, all

Wow Glasser, thanks for the map! Now here's the bill, 'cept I only count eight (8) sniveling spineless RINO-Rats (CHAFEE, BENNETT, JEFFORDS, LEVIN, SPECTER, BINGAMAN, CLELAND, LIEBERMAN) - who's the ninth?:

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           New Bills Search
Prev Hit        Back              HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Help
                Doc Contents

	GPO's PDF version of this bill	References to this bill in the Congressional Record	Link to the Bill Summary & Status file.	Full Display - 14,984 bytes.[Help]

Community Character Act of 2001 (Introduced in the Senate)

S 975 IS

107th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 975

To improve environmental policy by providing assistance for State and tribal land use planning, to promote improved quality of life, regionalism, and sustainable economic development, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

May 25, 2001

Mr. CHAFEE (for himself, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. CLELAND, and Mr. LIEBERMAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

A BILL

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Community Character Act of 2001'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds that--

(1) inadequate land use planning at the State and tribal levels contributes to--

(A) increased public and private capital costs for public works infrastructure development;

(B) environmental degradation;

(D) loss of community character;

(2) land use planning is rightfully within the jurisdiction of State, tribal, and local governments;

(3) comprehensive land use planning and community development should be supported by Federal, State, and tribal governments;

(4) States and tribal governments should provide a proper climate and context through legislation in order for comprehensive land use planning, community development, and environmental protection to occur;

(5)(A) many States and tribal governments have outmoded land use planning legislation; and

(B) many States and tribal governments are undertaking efforts to update and reform land use planning legislation;

(6) the Federal Government and States should support the efforts of tribal governments to develop and implement land use plans to improve environmental protection, housing opportunities, and socioeconomic conditions for Indian tribes; and

(7) the coordination of use of State and tribal resources with local land use plans requires additional planning at the State and tribal levels.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) LAND USE PLAN- The term `land use plan' means a plan for development of an area that recognizes the physical, environmental, economic, social, political, aesthetic, and related factors of the area.

(2) LAND USE PLANNING LEGISLATION- The term `land use planning legislation' means a statute, regulation, executive order, or other action taken by a State or tribal government to guide, regulate, or assist in the planning, regulation, and management of--

(A) environmental resources;

(B) public works infrastructure;

(D) current and future development practices; and

(E) other activities related to the pattern and scope of future land use.

(3) SECRETARY- The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development.

(4) STATE- The term `State' means a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

(5) TRIBAL GOVERNMENT- The term `tribal government' means the tribal government of an Indian tribe (as defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)).

SEC. 4. GRANTS TO STATES AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS TO UPDATE LAND USE PLANNING LEGISLATION.

(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall establish a program to award grants to States and tribal governments eligible for funding under subsection (b) to promote comprehensive land use planning at the State, tribal, and local levels.

(2) GRANT APPLICATIONS-

(A) SUBMISSION- A State or tribal government may submit to the Secretary, in such form as the Secretary may require, an application for a grant under this section to be used for 1 or more of the types of projects authorized by subsection (c).

(B) APPROVAL- The Secretary shall--

(i) not less often than annually, complete a review of the applications for grants that are received under this section; and

(ii) award grants to States and tribal governments that the Secretary determines rank the highest using the ranking criteria specified in paragraph (3).

(3) RANKING CRITERIA- In evaluating applications for grants from eligible States and tribal governments under this section, the Secretary shall consider the following criteria:

(A) As a fundamental priority, the extent to which a State or tribal government has in effect inadequate or outmoded land use planning legislation.

(B) The extent to which a grant will facilitate development or revision of land use plans consistent with updated land use planning legislation.

(D) The extent to which the area under the jurisdiction of a State or tribal government is experiencing significant growth.

(E) The extent to which the project to be funded using a grant will protect the environment and promote economic development.

(F) The extent to which a State or tribal government has committed financial resources to comprehensive land use planning.

(b) ELIGIBILITY- A State or tribal government shall be eligible to receive a grant under subsection (a) if the State or tribal government demonstrates that the project, or the goal of the project, to be funded by the grant promotes land use planning activities that--

(1) are comprehensive in nature and, to the maximum extent practicable--

(A) promote environmental protection (including air and water quality);

(B) take into consideration--

(i) public works infrastructure in existence at the time at which the grant is to be made; and

(ii) future infrastructure needs, such as needs identified in--

(I) the needs assessments required under sections 516(2) and 518(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1375(2), 1377(b)) and subsections (h) and (i)(4) of section 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300j-12); and

(II) the State long-range transportation plan developed under section 135(e) of title 23, United States Code;

(D) enhance community character;

(E) conserve historic, scenic, natural, and cultural resources; and

(F) provide for a range of affordable housing options;

(2) promote land use plans that contain an implementation element that--

(A) includes a timetable for action and a definition of the respective roles and responsibilities of agencies, local governments, and other stakeholders;

(B) is consistent with the capital budget objectives of the State or tribal government; and

(C) provides a framework for decisions relating to the siting of infrastructure development, including development of utilities and utility distribution systems;

(3) result in multijurisdictional governmental cooperation, to the maximum extent practicable, particularly in the case of land use plans based on watershed boundaries;

(4) encourage the participation of the public in the development, adoption, and updating of land use plans;

(5) provide for the periodic updating of land use plans; and

(6) include approaches to land use planning that are consistent with established professional land use planning standards.

(c) USE OF GRANT FUNDS- Grant funds received by a State or tribal government under subsection (a) may be used for a project--

(1) to carry out, or obtain technical assistance with which to carry out--

(A) development or revision of land use planning legislation;

(B) research and development relating to land use plans, and other activities relating to the development of State, tribal, or local land use plans, that result in long-term policy guidelines for growth and development;

(C) workshops, education of and consultation with policymakers, and participation of the public in the land use planning process; and

(D) integration of State, regional, tribal, or local land use plans with Federal land use plans;

(2) to provide funding to units of general purpose local government to carry out land use planning activities consistent with land use planning legislation; or

(3) to acquire equipment or information technology to facilitate State, tribal, or local land use planning.

(d) PILOT PROJECTS FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS- A State may include in its application for a grant under this section a request for additional grant funds with which to assist units of general purpose local government in carrying out pilot projects to carry out land use planning activities consistent with land use planning legislation.

(e) AMOUNT OF GRANTS-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (2), the amount of a grant to a State or tribal government under subsection (a) shall not exceed $1,000,000.

(2) ADDITIONAL AMOUNT- The Secretary may award a State up to an additional $100,000 to fund pilot projects under subsection (d).

(f) COST SHARING-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Federal share of the cost of a project funded with a grant under subsection (a) shall not exceed 90 percent.

(2) GRANTS TO TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS- The Secretary may increase the Federal share in the case of a grant to a tribal government if the Secretary determines that the tribal government does not have sufficient funds to pay the non-Federal share of the cost of the project.

(g) AUDITS-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Inspector General of the Department of Commerce may conduct an audit of a portion of the grants awarded under this section to ensure that the grant funds are used for the purposes specified in this section.

(2) USE OF AUDIT RESULTS- The results of an audit conducted under paragraph (1) and any recommendations made in connection with the audit shall be taken into consideration in awarding any future grant under this section to a State or tribal government.

(3) REPORT TO CONGRESS- Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of the Department of Commerce shall submit to Congress a report that provides a description of the management of the program established under this section (including a description of the allocation of grant funds awarded under this section).

(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS-

(1) IN GENERAL- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

(2) AVAILABILITY FOR TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS- Of the amount made available under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year, not less than 5 percent shall be available to make grants to tribal governments to the extent that there are sufficient tribal governments that are eligible for funding under subsection (b) and that submit applications.

SEC. 5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

(a) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may develop voluntary educational and informational programs for the use of State, tribal, and local land use planning and zoning officials.

(b) TYPES OF PROGRAMS- Programs developed under subsection (a) may include--

(1) exchange of technical land use planning information;

(2) electronic databases containing data relevant to land use planning;

(3) other technical land use planning assistance to facilitate access to, and use of, techniques and principles of land use planning; and

(4) such other types of programs as the Secretary determines to be appropriate.

(1) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency;

(2) the Secretary of Transportation;

(3) the Secretary of Agriculture;

(4) the heads of other Federal agencies;

(5) State, tribal, and local governments; and

(6) nonprofit organizations that promote land use planning at the State, tribal, and local levels.

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           New Bills Search
Prev Hit        Back              HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Help
                Doc Contents

28 posted on 05/09/2002 5:12:29 AM PDT by RFP

Fill in the blanks:


FOR:
1) LEVIN (RAT - MI)
2) BINGAMAN (RAT - NM)
3) CLELAND (RAT - GA)
4) LIEBERMAN (RAT - CT)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9) JEFFORDS (TURNCOAT - VT)
10) BENNETT (RINO - UT)
11) CHAFEE (RINO - RI)
12) SPECTER (RINO - PA)

AGAINST:
13)  (R)
14)  (R)
15)  (R)
16)  (R)
17)  (R)
18)  (R)
19)  (R)

29 posted on 05/09/2002 5:24:04 AM PDT by RFP

From the American Association of Small Property Owners:
/http://www.smallpropertyowner.com

As the vote came to a close, Sen. Robert C. Smith, New Hampshire Republican and an imposing figure in the small room said, "You didn`t call my name, and I am the ranking member," as Republicans whispered to one another to keep the vote public, but they failed.

Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican, said Republicans were told that the committee would vote after the two Senate votes and urged that the committee vote remain open.

"Some of our members wish to be recorded," said Sen. John W. Warner, Virginia Republican.

Voting in favor were
Mr. Chafee, fellow Republican Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania, and Democrats Max Baucus of Montana, Harry Reid of Nevada, Bob Graham of Florida, Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, Barbara Boxer of California, Ron Wyden of Oregon, Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Jon Corzine of New Jersey and and Mr. Jeffords.

Voting against the bill were Republican Sens. Michael D. Crapo of Idaho, Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, Christopher Bond of Missouri, George Voinovich of Ohio, Mr. Smith, Mr. Inhofe and Mr. Warner.

Republican senators, asked about the room change, said the decision was out of their control, as Democrats run the committee.

Mr. Inhofe was the only senator who asked for his written objections to be entered into record. "I am opposing this legislation we are about to railroad through," he said.

"We tried to be as accomodating as possible," said committee spokesman Erik Smulson. "The meeting was open to the media and to anyone who had a form of identification the Capitol Hill police would let in."

The Capitol remains under rigid security since the September 11 terrorist attacks. Even before then, however, the President`s Room was restricted to staff and media.

"I need to get press credentials," said Bob Harrison, director of public policy for Defenders of Property Rights. "Whatever protection they can give the bill in committee, they will not be able to give when the bill is on the floor."

Patricia Callahan of the American Association of Small Property Owners, called yesterday`s move a "sneaky bait and switch."

"We are furious about what happened. We`re going to have to put a tracking device on this legislation. It`s harder to find than gold," Miss Callahan said.

30 posted on 05/09/2002 7:40:00 AM PDT by madfly

The USSR in action in Amerika, called RINOs and Democrats. Remember in 1918 Mother Russia took over ALL private property, since that time until recently Russians have not owned any property, sounds like these "elected" officials here are trying to the same to us. LET'S GET RID OF THEM!!!

31 posted on 05/09/2002 7:54:42 AM PDT by tillacum

To: RFP, sauropod, Fish out of Water, E.G.C., HAMMERDOWN, countrydummy, washington_minuteman, galt-jw

Letter from HUD (Mel Martinez) to F. Gary Garczynski,
President, National Association of Home Builders, Washington, D.C.
April 12, 2002

(snip)
Although the recently published American Planning Association (APA) Guidebook suggests ways in which communities implement particular planning techniques and provides model legislation that shows how it can be done,communities must grow as THEY decide.

(Complete letter in a 2-page PDF file at link)

32 posted on 05/09/2002 8:05:59 AM PDT by madfly

Stop the attacks by the wacko, enviro-nazis terrorist's on our Freedoms !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

33 posted on 05/09/2002 9:17:02 AM PDT by blackie

34 posted on 05/09/2002 9:20:17 AM PDT by E.G.C.

Thanks for posting the details on this abomination. What I still don't understand is why Senator Bennett (R-UT) was a sponsor of this horrible bill!?! Why would a Repubbie from the Mormon state ally with traitors such as Jeffords and Lieberman? Anyway, Max Baucus is the only one on the support list for this POS who is up for re-elect this year. Calling Montana FReepers!!

35 posted on 05/09/2002 9:32:51 AM PDT by RFP

To: sauropod;madfly

More back-door slam from these slugs,it never ends...

National Center.org

Kyoto Treaty Language Attached to Senate Energy Bill

DATE: May 8, 2002
BACKGROUND: Before passing its energy bill, the Senate attached an amendment setting up a greenhouse gas database. Participating companies would voluntarily report their reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. If, after five years, less than 60 percent of greenhouse gas emissions are being reported as determined by the Director of the Office of National Climate Change Policy, participation becomes mandatory. Failure to comply with the mandatory reporting could result in fines up to $25,000 per day.
TEN SECOND RESPONSE: This so-called "voluntary" database is just a step toward implementing the Kyoto Treaty the President and Senate rejected because it would devastate the U.S. economy and cost American jobs.
THIRTY SECOND RESPONSE: The Kyoto Protocol was a flawed treaty that was rejected by both the Senate and the President because it would have cost thousands of American jobs to solve a problem many scientists doubt exist. Now the Senate is trying to implement many of its costly requirements in a back-door move.
DISCUSSION: According to projections by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), ratification of the Kyoto Protocol would have a devastating effect on the U.S. economy. EIA estimates gasoline prices would rise 14 to 66 cents per gallon by the year 2010, electricity prices would go up 20 to 86% and compliance with the treaty would cost the U.S. economy $400 billion per year.
A study commissioned by six African-American and Hispanic organizations found that the requirements of the treaty would put 864,000 black Americans and 511,000 Hispanics out of work.
The "National Greenhouse Gas Database" is Title XI of the Energy Policy Act of 2002 (H.R.4) and can be accessed at http://thomas.loc.gov.

For more information on global warming, see: "Global Warming: Charges and Responses" at http://www.nationalcenter.org/Bonn2001.html, "Questions and Answers on Global Warming" at http://www.nationalcenter.org/KyotoQuestionsAnswers.html or visit our global warming page at http://www.nationalcenter.org/Kyoto.html.

by Gretchen Randall, Director
John P. McGovern, MD Center for Environmental and Regulatory Affairs
The National Center for Public Policy Research
Contact the author at: 773-857-5086 or GRandall@nationalcenter.org
The National Center for Public Policy Research, Chicago office
3712 North Broadway - PMB 279
Chicago, IL 60613

36 posted on 05/09/2002 10:12:14 AM PDT by hammerdown

37 posted on 05/09/2002 2:01:43 PM PDT by Fish out of Water

To: Washington_minuteman

Just Bumping by!!:<)

38 posted on 05/09/2002 2:58:50 PM PDT by AuntB

39 posted on 05/09/2002 6:51:39 PM PDT by madfly

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794