Tag Archives: Federal agencies

Lee Bright…The Next Closet Progressive?

I guess the best replacement for Lindsey Graham should be a guy who wants more government intrusion in your life. A quick look at his site is all it takes to see how much he supports bigger government intrusion into the lives of Americans.

Reading from his site “There are many alternatives that have proven to be successful such as charter schools, real school choice that supports private schools and home-schooling as well as programs where private and public schools work together.
South Carolina needs to attract the type of businesses that will strengthen the state’s economy and in turn improve communities.  This type of economic goal requires nothing short of a school system that produces a competitive workforce.”

Translation, Bright is for government control of private and home schooling as well as public schools. He has tried to introduce legislation (S 0279) to promote tax credits for private schools. Sounds good until you realize a tax credit is the same as receiving money from the government which the Supreme Court has said gives the government control. This would open the door for Common Core in ALL education.

But what is more interesting was his attempt to make the office of State Superintendent of Education an appointed office and remove the people’s right to elect same. That seems to be another goal of Senator Bright, to make several elected offices appointed positions, mainly judges. He has introduced bills, S 0197 & S 0200, that takes the choice of Administrative Law court judges, Supreme Court justices, Appeals court judges and Circuit Court judges out of the hands of the people and make them appointed offices. How better to remove power from the people.

In his bio Bright is listed as a member of the Board of Director for Palmetto Family Council, an offshoot of James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, a front group for Federal take over of private education. In an article “Behind The Conservative Curtain” (See link below) we read,

Charter Schools:  Same Old Goals 2000

Charter Schools, and Choice (vouchers & tuition tax credits) have been  incorporated into the GOALS 2000 legislation:


Public Law 103-227GOALS  2000: Educate America Act [1994] SEC. 308 State Use of [GOALS 2000] Funding-(b)  Each state that receives an allotment under this title shall(2) use the  remainder of the assistance…to implement the State improvement plan, [for  activities] such as …(I) promoting… public charter schools and other  mechanisms for increasing choice among public schools…(J) supporting  activities [where] schools contract with private management organizations to  reform a school.

It is  important to note that the above sub-section (J) suggests a plan to move public  schools under “private management.”

In my article “South Carolina’s Fed Gun Grab Enabling Bill…S 115 “Constitutional Carry” Act.”  I have shown how Bright has tried to introduce legislation that would enable  Federal agents, as well as officers from other states, free range in SC. He has no problem with pro-gun legislation because he wants to enable the feds to take your guns.

Then there was S 0185 which would put everyone on the government dole. Known as the “Fair Tax” we are seeing Cloward/Piven  rear it’s ugly head. Forget the welfare rolls, let’s get everyone on board with the tax rolls.

Links for better understanding of what is being supported by Lee Bright:


Charter Schools, Character Education & the Eugenics Internationale
Behind the Conservative Curtain:
Pseudo Grassroots Organizations Front
for Corporate/Government Takeover

The Intelligent Student’s Guide to the New World Order

When I wrote this article I used a link on Bright’s website that
linked to the SC Legislation site to see what bills he sponsored. That link, http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sponsorsearch.php ,
has since disappeared. Does he have something to hide? I also discovered that
the Mace Group designed his
website. Curious.

Update:    I have recently discovered, according to his statement of economic interest with the SC State Ethics Commission, that Bright attended an ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) conference and received travel expenses from Mulikin Law Firm, the state corporate co-chair of ALEC in SC. For those unaware, ALEC is a non-profit where legislators and corporations come together to write model legislation for the legislators to come home and introduce. I also learned ALEC has model legislation in support of TTIP & TTP. Included in these treaties is the investor-to-state dispute settlement (ITSDS). This is where corporations in a state can call for arbitration if any laws are passed that they believe will cost them future revenue. This gets into the billions of dollars.

Well,  Bright has introduced S 82 (120th Congress)  which lowers the corporate tax base in an attempt to get companies to come to SC, economic developement if you will, which sounds great except for the looming ITSDS that ALEC is pushing. It also begs the question, where does the missing revenue for the state come from? What if no new business comes to town? Why not rid the homeowners of the burden of keeping up infrastructure that sits empty or puts the real strain on infrastructure if occupied? Will these companies or their new employees pay your property taxes if you can’t? Why not look out for all the people of the state, the job he is supposed to do, instead of a select few?  And who gets to pick up the tab if the state loses arbitration?

Sorry, but if it walks like a duck , quacks like a duck and takes money from Bank of America like a duck….



Federal Agencies; The Real Funding Behind Agenda 21

Livability means being able to take your kids to school, go to work, see a doctor, drop by the grocery or Post Office, go out to dinner and a movie, and play with your kids at the park – all without having to get in your car” – Ray LaHood.

This  statement appears on the front page of the US Department of Transportation’s DOT Livability website. The site further goes on to say,

U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has identified livability as a key priority for transportation. The Secretary’s vision is “transportation policies that focus on people and communities who use the transportation system.” A major way DOT helps communities pursue these aims is by issuing grants to eligible recipients for planning, vehicle purchases, facility construction, operations, and other purposes. DOT administers this financial assistance according to authorization, SAFETEA-LU [Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act], which was signed into law in August 2005. There are a large number of programs and grants within the Department of Transportation that support projects that enhance or relate to livability.”

Here we have the Federal Government providing the funding for Agenda 21 written into Federal law. A list of these programs can be found at the DOT Livability site.

The term “livability” is interchangeable with the term “sustainability”. This can be seen on the page titled “Livability 101” where we find the term “Partnership for Sustainable Communities”. This particular article goes on to point out

in June 2009, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Department of Transportation, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency joined together to form the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, an unprecedented agreement to coordinate federal housing, transportation and environmental investments, protect public health and the environment, promote equitable development, and help address the challenges of climate change. The three agencies are working together more closely than ever before to meet President Obama’s challenge to coordinate federal policies, programs, and resources to help urban, suburban, and rural areas and regions build more sustainable communities and make those communities the leading style of development in the United States. The agencies are working together to identify opportunities to build more sustainable communities and to remove policy or other barriers that have kept Americans from doing so.”

Moving on we go to the DOT Federal Transit Administration website. Here we are introduced to Transit-Oriented Development where Public-Private partnerships can be found. (For some interesting reading check out the list of the council members of the National Council of Public-Private Partnerships.)A PPP is just another way for multinational corporations to get control of public held infrastructure. This is private held corporations getting their hands on your tax dollars. One way this works against the public is in these corporations being offered incentives to come into a community. These same incentives are rarely, if ever, offered to small independent businesses. The public is paying all the taxes and the multinationals are reaping the rewards.

We find more tax dollars going in grants at the Federal governments Sustainable Communities website where the DOT, EPA and HUD have formed a partnership. And even FEMA gets on board with the PPP agenda.

The US Dept. of Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation has the WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow) program. In a pdf entitled “DOI WaterSMART Strategic Implementation Plan” we read,

Collaborative partnerships that go beyond political and institutional jurisdictions must be developed to ensure that the Nation’s limited water resources are used efficiently…

WaterSMART will work with states, tribes, local governments and non-governmental organizations…”

And there are grants to fund this as well as the rewilding projects with The US Fish and Wildlife Service. Releasing wild animals into areas with human populations like the Eastern Cougar whose site has a link to The Cougar Rewilding Foundation whose stated goal is to

Promote recovery of breeding populations of cougars through natural recolonization and mandated restorations to the central, southeastern and eastern United States…Promote full legal protection of all cougars living wild east of the Rockies, regardless of origin.”

and gray wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains. There is a blatant disregard for the lives of people or live stock with these programs.

A quick trip to the FEMA.gov website brings up a program called FEMA 365. This is tied into rebuilding after a natural disaster. Subtitled “Rebuilding for a More Sustainable Future” with “FEDERAL RESOURSES for technical assistance and FUNDING.” They have sustainable community workshops for disaster areas. The Disaster Mitigation Act of  2000 requires that states use FEMA funding to “…finalize interim requirements for the acquisition of property for open space with mitigation funds…”

And even ICLEI receives Federal funding as shown in an audit report from 2007 in which they received $1,774,346. ICLEI (Intrnational Council for Local Environmental Incentives) receives membership and consultation fees from local governments as well. It is an International entity and should not receive our Federal dollars.

Under the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, H.R. 3200, even the CDC becomes involved with the Community Transformation Grants Program. “These awards are distributed among state and local government agencies, tribes and territories, and state and local non-profit organizations …” Another $103 million for Agenda 21.

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) is the non-profit NGO that brings LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) program whose membership list includes a who’s who of Governmental agencies. Just go to Membership category and choose Federal Government and under Country choose USA.  There is also a list of Public policies adopting or referencing LEED.  In order to obtain LEED certification administrative fees have to be paid. The EPA’s LABs21 is based on the LEED system. It consists of public and private partners.

From Arne Duncan, the U.S. Secretary of education we get the following,

Reducing disease, developing renewable sources of energy, curbing pollution, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions are no longer challenges that stop at our borders. America simply cannot meet any of these challenges without collaborating with other countries. And those partnerships will require U.S. students to develop better critical thinking, a deeper understanding of science and sustainability, and a greater awareness of ecosystems and energy efficiency.”

And if you wish to help the U.N. Steal U.S. Property through Agenda 21 and the environmental scare the EPA has a grant for you. Want to become a citizen scientist? You can receive between $12,500 and $25,000. There’s the Environmental Justice Small Grants Program  with 100’s of projects and grants divided equally over the 10 U.S. Regions ranging from $10,000 to $25,000.

Of course the EPA is also interested in Wetlands, which by their definition could mean any land that ever gets wet. “Wetlands are areas where water covers the soil, or is present either at or near the surface of the soil all year or forvarying periods of time during the year, including during the growing season.” And there are grants for the wetlands too.  With the safe Drinking water Act we find that they are not only going to protect us from man-made contaminates but “naturally occurring” ones too. At a whim they could decide any natural occurring element is a contaminate and prohibit the use of any ground water anywhere. There is the 5 Star restoration program which

brings together students, conservation corps, other youth groups, citizen groups, corporations, landowners and government agencies to provide environmental education and training through projects that restore wetlands and streams. The program provides challenge grants, technical support and opportunities for information exchange to enable community-based restoration projects. Funding levels are modest, from $5,000 to $20,000, with $10,000 as the average amount awarded per project. However, when combined with the contributions of partners, projects that make a meaningful contribution to communities become possible. At the completion of Five Star projects, each partnership will have experience and a demonstrated record of accomplishment, and will be well-positioned to take on other projects. Aggregating over time and space, these grassroots efforts will make a significant contribution to our environmental landscape and to the understanding of the importance of healthy wetlands and streams in our communities.”

The department of Interior through the national Park Service has brought us the National heritage Corridors. Here in S.C. Alone the area covers 17 counties. The feasibility studies omit the catch phrases of Agenda 21 when proposed to the public but are used throughout other publications. Congress creates these heritage ares and the Park Service provides the funding. Again we have PPP’s with NGO’s and private corporations being involved.

There is a new bill, HR 4099, The National Heritage Act of 2012 being put before congress which states

Sec 2 (a) (3) Local initiatives based on community and regional visions, involving public/private partnerships, are critical to conserving, enhancing, and interpreting natural, historic, scenic, and cultural resources related to our American heritage. These initiatives should be encouraged and supported by the Federal Government with the concurrence of the relevant Federal land management agencies and tribal governments by providing financial and technical assistance.”

The first heritage area was signed into Law in 1984 by then President Ronald Reagan. This was the first of 49 NHAs.

One could spend days, if not years,  looking into all the programs, legislation and Executive orders that are in place to bring Agenda 21 about. I was told by my congressman and others that we need to stop this at the local level, which to a point is true, and that all they could do in Washington was defund it. The more I looked into it the more I found references in almost all, if not all, bills that pass through congress. It appears Washington has no intention of defunding it but appears they are working night and day to fund it and regulate us into it through all Federal agencies. Most of the local funding comes through Federal funding and PPPs. And even the most benign legislation can become the worst cancer on our rights.

Note. I had to update one of the links (National Council of Public-Private Partnerships.) because it seems when they know you have linked to them they move the offending pages. Please contact me or comment if any links do not work and I will do my best to fix them.

%d bloggers like this: