May 6, 2004
Long-time GOA activists will remember
CARA, known by gun owners and
other opponents as the Condemnation and Relocation [of
Hunting and
Shooting Lands] Act.
Well, CARA is back... but under a new
name.
The new bill is being dubbed the Get Outdoors
(GO) Act, H.R. 4100,
although it is more accurately dubbed the "Get Out
of Rural America
Act." See also: Return
of the CARA Monster, by Tom DeWeese
What does H.R. 4100 do?
It would allocate $3.125 billion annually -- much of it
for government
bureaucrats to acquire private lands that have been historically
used
for hunting and fishing.
But once the land is under government control, there is
no guarantee
that such lands would continue to be used for such sporting
purposes.
When rural land disappears, opportunities for recreation
-- especially plinking and hunting -- tend to disappear
as well.
|
|
Don Young (R) -
AK
|
George Miller (D)
- CA
|
Republican Representatives Don Young (AK)
and George Miller (CA)
are the chief sponsors of this legislation. What is their
reason for
offering this legislation, when there is very limited
constitutional
authority for the federal government to own land?
"Obesity is a public health crisis
of the first order," Miller said.
"And the Get Outdoors Act is a sensible way to help
mitigate that
public health crisis."
No, that is not a joke. The ostensible
reason for the "GO Act" is to
help slim Americans' waistlines by providing more opportunities
to
hike around the woods.
Obesity is costing Americans $100 billion
annually because of
health-related problems. So the $3.125 billion annually
they propose
to spend under the "GO Act" is, in their way
of thinking, a bargain.
The Land Rights Network, which opposes
this bill, points out that
instead of using the money to steal people's land, they
could "buy
15 million really good treadmills for that kind of money
and really
help folks fighting obesity."
LRN is just poking fun, of course, because
it knows (and so do we)
that there is no authority in the Constitution for setting
up a "fat
police."
The real truth is that the land-grabbing
radicals are feverishly
trying to use any argument to justify their agenda. In
2001, they
tried to justify CARA in the name of helping sportsmen.
Last year, when they tried to attach CARA
to an energy bill, the
implication was that CARA was good for preserving our
natural
resources.
Now they're back... but this time it's
being done in the name of
reducing obesity. A weighty reason to be sure. But not
at the
expense of private hunting lands!
Make no mistake and don't be fooled by
what the politicians tell you.
True conservationists want resources protected for the
future USE of
sportsmen. Radical preservationists, on the other hand,
want to ban
human activity.
H.R. 4100 would give future administrations,
working in concert with
environmentalist extremists and even the United Nations,
automatic
access to literally billions of tax dollars. The money
would
ostensibly be used to preserve lands that would benefit
plants and
animals or "conserve open space ... or have historic
or cultural
value" -- a blanket authorization that could apply
to just about any
land in the United States. As these preservationists are
more than
generally unfriendly towards hunting and shooting, the
lands could
then be closed to those activities.
Even if you buy the hollow promise of
the authors of H.R. 4100 that
recreational use will be considered in these ongoing land
grabs, there
is still the fact that the federal government is swallowing
up more
and more private property.
Rep. Richard Pombo (R-CA) has been an
ardent opponent of CARA and its
recent emanations.
"I believe the federal government
owns too much land now," he said.
"If the government wants to buy more land, they should
sell some and
use the proceeds to buy more."
Well said.
ACTION: Please contact your Representative
and urge him or her to
oppose H.R. 4100. You can use the pre-written message
below and send
it as an e-mail by visiting the GOA Legislative Action
Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm
(where phone and fax numbers are
also available).
Or call the capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121
and ask for the representative
from your state.
----- Pre-written letter
-----
Dear Representative:
As an avid sportsman and defender of the right to keep
and bear arms,
I cannot support H.R. 4100, the Get Outdoors Act.
The sponsors of this legislation say they want to reduce
obesity in
this nation. But let's be serious. There is no constitutional
authority for the federal government to act as the "fat
police" or to
spend billions of dollars to buy up private lands in the
name of
getting more people outdoors.
Letting government bureaucrats grab more
land is never the avenue to
achieving more freedom. The history of government-controlled
land has
been one of betrayal to gun owners and sportsmen. The
trend has been
to close off more and more government-controlled lands
to anyone but
unarmed hikers.
Please let me know your views on this
legislation. Thank you.
Sincerely,
|