It’s not likely you have heard of H.R. 1505, The National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act (NSFLPA). This outline of what’s in HR 1505 will tell you why the media is keeping a lid on this bill.
NSFLPA will free our Homeland Security Department Border Patrol agents from short sighted and phony environmental laws that keep our borders porous and uncontrollable.
This 180-degree-turn in America’s approach to stemming the tide of illegal aliens sneaking into our country was introduced by Republican Congressman Rob Bishop of Utah. NSFLPA will wave enforcement of a litany of unnecessary and counterproductive liberal laws that have been destroying true conservation efforts for decades.
Under Bishop’s tough enforcement bill, the Department of Homeland Security’s work to protect our borders and coastlines within 100 miles of our borders would no longer be impeded by extraneous laws. In many states Border Patrols would be totally free to protect Americans from border to border. Freeing DHS officers to pursue illegal aliens into protected wildlife and forest areas can be accomplished by suspending enforcement of multiple laws.
H.R. 1505 would provide waivers of these laws:
- Endangered Species Act of 1973
- Federal Water Pollution Control Act
- National Historic Preservation Act
- Migratory Bird Treaty Act
- Clean Air Act, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act
- Safe Drinking Water Act
- Noise Control Act of 1972
- Solid Waste Disposal Act
- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
- Antiquities Act of 1906, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
- Farmland Protection Policy Act
- Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
- Wilderness Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976
- National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966
- Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956
- Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Administrative Procedure Act
- Otay Mountain Wilderness Act of 1999, California Desert Protection Act of 1994
- National Park Service Organic Act, sections of the National Parks and Recreation Act
- Arizona Desert Wilderness Act of 1990
- Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974
- Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960
The only thing better than passing HR 1505 would be wiping these laws off the books for the whole country, but this is a good start.
To contact your Congressional representative use this link: http://www.contactingthecongress.org/
To check these numbers use this link:
http://www.dirigoblue.com/tag/Homeland%20Security
This article originally appeared on CoachIsRight.com and is reprinted with permission.
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
Every one needs to email their congressmen and senators to support this bill. It is a step needed to pull some teeth from some of these fed. groups in Washington and make the govt. start to ENFORCE immigration laws, along with allowing America to develope our natural energy sorces.
Everything odummer has done needs to be undone by the next president, but in the mean time we need to keep him from doing anything else, and fight where we can to correct what we can!
Do you mean “enforce” immigration laws, or “create” immigration laws? There is quite the difference.
Just because one harbors an intense conviction that something is so does not mean there exists a law to justify that conviction.
Good Lord look at all those crazy laws passed and I am sure that is just a tiny fraction of all the crazy laws the gov’t has been passing all these years while the rest of us weren’t paying attention. Time to start getting rid of all these laws!
Why would anyone want to do away with the Water Pollution Act, and I’m totally against suspending the Endangered Species Act. There are a lot on this list that are good, not all for sure. But to gut all of them………..come on now!! They do not need to do this to apprehend illegal aliens.
What they need to do is ENFORCE the laws on already on the books regarding illegal immigration, which they are NOT doing. In fact, it appears that the government has been and maybe still is involved with gun running………ie “Fast and Furious”.
This article is a ridiculous suggestion!!!
Read the article closely,the waivers are only for the DHS to pursue illegal aliens into what are sanctuaries for these criminals.Persons crossing the border illegally ARE criminals.
None of these laws will matter soon. Obama is trying to destroy this country and he is going to do it by starting another war. All this will be history before long. He is letting criminals out of jail, killers not small time criminals, letting muslims have authority here, it’s almost over, so the heck with a few laws that should never have been made.
Do you honestly believe those things? That the President is freeing murderers from jail? Is this a joke? Am I reading these things too literally?
And, I mean, what do you suppose the point is of alleging these fantastic claims without cite or source? Do you suppose you’ll convince someone that you are, in fact correct, and that President Obama wantonly and arbitrarily releases convicted killers from prison?
Do you not suppose that your assertion, in support of his alleged failings as a leader, that Obama is “allowing Muslims to have authority in this country” is damaging to your credibility as a commenter? Do you care?
And, lastly, and of least concern: All of those laws shouldn’t have been passed? Say what you will about a law waiving restricted access (as provided for by some of the listed laws) in the name of immigration prevention, but the content of the law itself if largely, if not entirely, irrelevant.
Really just some useless and unintelligent commentary, and commentary I would imagine level-headed Republicans would seek to avoid and distance themselves from with an election looming.
I’ll refrain from much political input, but I wonder at this article’s snide observation that the bill in question is not the focus of much media scrutiny. Some questions to consider before succumbing to one’s own convictions:
A. If this is putatively a controversial bill that liberals would decry, and if the media is a liberal construct, why wouldn’t the media focus on this issue?
B. Are you upset that this bill has not received much media attention? Do you feel that media attention would be a good thing with regard to the bill’s chances of passage?
C. Referring to (B): Are you so convinced that the country so overwhelmingly agrees with your position on this bill that you believe media attention would aid the bill’s passage, a conviction that would explain a putatively liberal media’s failure to focus on the bill?
Just some constructive criticism, in no way political: Beginning a blog post (especially one of a distinct political bent) with a rhetorical cliche does little to expand one’s audience, most notably when the content of the blog itself goes on to discredit the cliche’s foundation.