Agenda 21 Bill Rejected In Montana

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

An Agen­da 21 bill in Mon­tana was reject­ed by law­mak­ers ear­li­er this week. The bill was report­ed­ly designed to pro­tect prop­er­ty rights and states rights from the dic­tates and reg­u­la­tions in the non-bind­ing Unit­ed Nations plan.

The Mon­tana Agen­da 21 bill was spon­sored by Sun Riv­er Repub­li­can Randy Pinoc­ci. House Bill 583 failed by just a slight mar­gin with a vote of 59 to 41. Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Pinoc­ci report­ed­ly feels that the anti-Agen­da 21 bill would have pro­tect­ed Mon­tana res­i­dents’ prop­er­ty rights while reject­ing the Unit­ed Nations sus­tain­able devel­op­ment initiative.

Those who vot­ed in oppo­si­tion to the Agen­da 21 bill in Mon­tana large­ly felt that the U.N. sus­tain­able devel­op­ment plan is mere­ly a “list of rec­om­men­da­tions regard­ing smart growth” and added that no cit­i­zens have yet come for­ward to com­plain that the plan has been pushed upon them or caused them prob­lems at the local level.

As pre­vi­ous­ly report­ed by the Inquisitr, Agen­da 21 is a vol­un­tary Unit­ed Nations project billed as a sus­tain­able devel­op­ment action plan. Adopt­ed by 178 coun­tries in 1992, the plan is based on a pro­gram to abol­ish pover­ty and pro­tect “frag­ile envi­ron­ments” by “prop­er­ly” man­ag­ing cities. Some charge the pro­gram wants to push all cit­i­zens into cities. Amer­i­ca is a “sig­na­to­ry” coun­try to Agen­da 21.

Agenda 21 Biodiversity Map.

Agen­da 21 Bio­di­ver­si­ty Map.

Because the Unit­ed Nations Agen­da 21 plan is a non-bind­ing state­ment and not a treaty, a vote on the mat­ter was deemed unnec­es­sary. In the Unit­ed States, more than 500 cities are mem­bers of an inter­na­tion­al sus­tain­abil­i­ty orga­ni­za­tion that report­ed­ly sup­ports the imple­men­ta­tion of the Unit­ed Nations bio­di­ver­si­ty program.

Iowa’s first female Sen­a­tor, Joni Ernst, had this to say about the Unit­ed Nations Agen­da 21 plan while on the cam­paign trail.

The Unit­ed Nations has imposed this upon us, and as a U.S. Sen­a­tor, I would say no more. No more Agen­da 21. All of us agreed that Agen­da 21 is a hor­ri­ble idea, and I’m sure most of you have fol­lowed that. One of the impli­ca­tions to Amer­i­cans, again, going back to what did it do to the indi­vid­ual fam­i­ly here in the state of Iowa, and what I’ve seen, the impli­ca­tions that it has here is mov­ing peo­ple off of their agri­cul­tur­al land and con­sol­i­dat­ing them into city sec­tors and then telling them, ‘You don’t have prop­er­ty rights any­more. These are all things that the UN is behind, and it’s bad for the Unit­ed States, it’s bad for fam­i­lies here in the state of Iowa.”

Recent­ly, the Okla­homa House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives mem­bers vot­ed over­whelm­ing­ly to sup­port a sim­i­lar anti-Agen­da 21 bill. The Okla­homa Com­mu­ni­ty Pro­tec­tion Act, if passed by the full state leg­isla­tive body, would nul­li­fy any Agen­da 21 “attacks” on prop­er­ty rights in the state. The HB 2807 bill has now moved on to the Okla­homa Sen­ate for review.

A sim­i­lar Agen­da 21 bill pend­ing in Mis­souri would pre­vent any polit­i­cal sub­di­vi­sion from pass­ing or imple­ment­ing pol­i­cy rec­om­men­da­tions that “delib­er­ate­ly or inad­ver­tent­ly infringe or restrict pri­vate prop­er­ty rights” with­out due process.