Is Local Government A Bigger Threat To Freedom Than Federal?

The current resurgence of conservatism and the Tea Party movement which we've seen over the last two years was a reaction to, what many of us saw as the drastic over-reach and intrusion  of the federal government. What began under George W. Bush with the Patriot Act, a huge expansion of Medicare, and the T.A.R.P. bailout of the banks; was then ratcheted up under Barack Obama through the stimulus bill, the health care takeover, and an expansion of federal power through the E.P.A., the D.O.L., and various other government agencies. Basically, the federal government taking greater control of our lives and wasting more of our money; all, of course, for our own good. After all, highly educated intellectuals from universities like Harvard and Columbia could surely make better decisions than the uneducated, working peasants. The problem is; this isn't The Soviet Union. Americans don't like being told what to do or having our money stolen to fund a socialist ideology. So a lot of us started organizing to put a stop to it. I believe, however, that we've become so focused on Washington, that we've missed a more serious and immediate threat right in our backyards. The City of Houston government has, for many years, pursued an agenda that increasingly restricts personal freedom and private property rights and borders on socialism or Marxism. It didn't start with Annise Parker but, like Obama, she's put her foot on the accelerator. Parker and the current city council are squandering our tax dollars on policies of redistribution of wealth, collective control of property, and globalization; while slashing the budgets of the police and fire departments. Earlier this week, I posted a letter that I sent to the mayor and city council, which details the wasteful spending in the current budget. Now, let's take a look at the motivation behind this spending.


The word "globalization" is used a lot these days. According to "Wikipedia", "it refers to the increasing unification of the world's economic order". It's something the U.N. has been working on for over forty years; basically, worldwide redistribution of wealth. The problem with redistribution is you have to first take the wealth from the people who earned it. The only way to do this on a global scale is to have a global government. The U.N. position on individual freedom and private property rights is no mystery; they've put it in writing. The following statement is from a 1976 U.N. Conference on Human Settlements.

"Land… cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole."

This information came from a June 14, 2011 story on The Blaze. Give it a read to learn more about Agenda 21, which is the U.N. plan for implementing "sustainable development" worldwide. Last month, Obama signed an executive order that provides for the enforcement of Agenda 21 through government regulation and federal funding. About three weeks later, he said he might not have enough money to mail out Social Security checks. Earlier this year, Annise Parker appropriated $ 2 million for her newly created "Community Sustainability Commission". Then, earlier this week, news came out that the use of police helicopters had been reduced by 75%, due to budget cuts. While Agenda 21 has had bipartisan support from every President since George H.W. Bush in 1992, the primary implementation is being accomplished through local city governments. The International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) was established in 1995 and has since worked their way into over 600 American cities, including Houston, which is home of the southern regional headquarters for ICLEI. Click here to visit their website. Earlier this month, the mayor and city council approved "Historic District" designations for three new neighborhoods. This was done despite the fact that many of the residents of one neighborhood (Glenbrook Valley) claimed they were mislead about the "historic" designation, had retracted their signatures from the petition, and there were allegations that the signatures of many homeowners had been forged. What the designation means for these homeowners is that their homes can NEVER be demolished and that all renovations or alterations, including minor things like replacing the front door, must go through a lengthy, bureaucratic application process and comply with the historic district code. Keep in mind, these aren't deed restrictions that were known to the residents when they bought their homes. These are new restrictions on what they can do with private property that they've been paying for, in some cases, for twenty or thirty years. Also note; Glenbrook Valley is a fifty year old neighborhood with ranch style homes. It's a nice area, but it's not St. Charles Ave. in New Orleans. Does this sound like the America that you and I grew up in? Our way of life is under attack from a few arrogant, pompous jackasses, that believe they know whats best for everyone. They exist at every level of government and we better start watching the ones that are right under our noses. Annise Parker is wasting our money to push her elitist view of what society should be and taking away our rights and freedoms in the process. It's time to fire her sorry butt, along with most of city council. I hope you'll follow some of the links in this post and ask yourself a few questions.

• Why does the City of Houston take $ 47 million a year out of the local economy for building permit and inspection fees? Are buildings in the city constructed any better or safer than those in outlying Harris County, where there are no inspections?
• Why has the city seized $ 16 million a year from the economy through red light cameras that cause MORE accidents at intersections where they're installed. 
• Why is $ 60 million a year spent on a parks that are used by less than 20% of the taxpayers?
• Why does the parks dept. spend $ 10 million a year on meals and recreational programs, that benefit less than 10% of the citizens?
• Why is the city spending $ 8 million a year to tell taxpayers what they can do with the property they paid for with their hard earned money?
• Can a city government of less than twenty people do a better job of planning the lives of 4 million people than those people could have done on their own?

Think about it, THEN LET"S FIRE ANNISE PARKER IN NOVEMBER!