National Chairman's Letter
Platform - Natural
Resources
November 2003
Dear Independent American friends,
I want to comment on the Natural Resources section of our IAP National
Platform. The eighth belief point of the Introduction section of our Platform
says:
8. [Natural Resources] We believe protection
of the environment should be a state responsibility; that there must be a
dynamic balance between energy development and conservation; and that there
are safe and inexpensive alternative energy sources that should be
developed.
One theme that is prevalent throughout this Platform and the IAP philosophy,
is to leave matters to the states (where the voices of the people can be heard)
rather than the federal government, unless so delegated to the national
government by the Constitution. Another theme is to promote individual ingenuity
and free enterprise rather than government for new ideas and development.
The Natural Resources, or eighth numbered section of our Platform,
includes the subtopics Environment and Energy, and begins:
8. NATURAL RESOURCES
Environment.
We favor the dynamic balance
between energy development and conservation. We assert that areas mined or
explored should be restored to their original condition or better. We favor
the preservation of our forests by replanting, healthy management, and the use
and development of alternative materials.
Recent examples of federal abuse and mismanagement include Klamath Falls,
Oregon where federal government cut off the water supply to farmers and ranchers
to preserve the "endangered" sucker fish; and the Rodeo-Chedisky
forest fire in Arizona, where the federal government refused to fight the fire
near several towns, and even cut off the water supply of local fire fighters.
We deem protection of the environment as a function and responsibility
falling under state jurisdiction, rather than national or global
organizations. Therefore, we favor the elimination of the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Wilderness Act, the federal Endangered Species Act,
federal wetland legislation, and all federal government and international
interference in state environmental and land matters.
Rarely does government do a better job at managing things than the private
sector. And the contrast increases at the federal and international levels.
Individuals and businesses have a strong self-interest to preserve the value of
their property. Bureaucrats do not share that incentive. The EPA and other
environmental agencies have an agenda that is foreign to the interests of
property owners.
For example, environmental consultant Dr. Michael Coffman [in a 1997 New
American article], described the Wildlands Project as "a grandiose
design to transform at least half the land area of the continental United States
into an immense 'eco-park' cleansed of modern industry and private property.
We oppose federal ownership or management of any properties not specified
in the Constitution. We call for the repeal of all executive orders and
treaties allowing U.N. control or governance over U.S. natural resources.
The first plank of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto calls for the
"abolition of Private Property and the application of all rent to the
public purpose." We see the fulfilling of this in part though Bureau of
Land Management policies and UN bio-preserves in America. The federal government
already owns one-third of the land in America, and is still planning more land
grabs in the name of "conservation." The use of land that is still
privately owned is often greatly restricted under the guise of environmental
protection.
Energy.
We favor the development of safe and
inexpensive alternative energy sources, such as wind, fuel cells and solar
power. We support the prudent and efficient use of other natural resources
such as coal, shale oil, oil sands, and agricultural products, for the
production of power and synthetic fuels.
We favor abolishing the wasteful and unconstitutional U.S. Department of
Energy. We favor the following: Advancement of technologies that would
decrease air pollution; incentives for scientific advancement, rather than
pollution penalties imposed upon the technology-dependent public; decreasing
the demand on foreign oil, through the use of our own reservoirs, capped
wells, and sources yet untapped; and state and local incentives to advance
alternatives superior to oil and gas.
Environmental engineer W. Ed Parker, author of "Manufacturing Meltdown
in America," wrote:
"In World War II, America utilized all of its energy resources to win
the greatest war in history; and to make itself the greatest, most powerful
nation in the history of the world. Since that time, corporate greed and
government 'energy planners' have combined to control all energy resources, not
for the benefit of our people, but for the benefit of government regulators and
the maximization of Multinational Corporate Profits.
"Two major government agencies are directly tied to OPEC, and they are
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE).
These two agencies, supported by radical environmentalists in industry, as well
as tax-free foundations, The Communications Oligarchy, and "Wave the
Earth" type groups, have worked hand-in-hand with OPEC.
"From a peoples point of view, DOE is not a creditable agency. According
to Congressman Todd Tiahrt in Insight Magazine, 5/11/97, DOE no longer serves a
core energy-related mission; Doe is a failed cabinet agency unable to meet its
most basic obligations; DOE has devolved into a feeding trough for the
corporate-welfare recipients; and DOE wastes billions of taxpayer dollars
annually."
God makes it clear in the scriptures (Genesis 1:26-28) that the earth was
created for the glory of God and the benefit of man; that man was given dominion
over the earth and commanded to subdue it. We favor balance in the environment,
but not at the expense of mankind.
For God, Family and Country!
Bruce Bangerter
IAP National Chairman
