Showing posts with label Charlotte Iserbyt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charlotte Iserbyt. Show all posts

Thursday, February 28, 2008

The "C" word that nobody uses...

Here's a perfect example of why so few Americans know what communitarianism is. The dialectic between capitalism and communism is still a great way to keep Americans behind the times. The International communists merged in a perfect Hegelian synthesis with the Christian-Judaic capitalists over 20 years ago.

The patriotic "Christian right" loves to lead us back to focusing on the 1950s Cold War and the communist/socialist left so that 1) Opponents can be easily labeled and discounted as "red baiters" and "McCarthyists" and 2) Opponents will never address the 21st century laws and programs by their real names (which ensures they will never have the ability to stop it or challenge it in an American court of law).

Communitarianism is the perfect blend of all ideas and theories. It's the final stage of human social evolution as prescribed by the theorists who brought us every modern conflict, including capitalism versus communism. The left finds an easy target in the Christian Right (who often openly support the Zionist Radical Middle).

Charlotte Iserbyt knows what communitarianism is, but you'd never know that from her most recent article on regionalization and the NAU. Charlotte thinks we should all start calling commmunitarianism "communism."

The plans and structure for globalization is not called "communist law" in the academic or international legal community. It's called "communitarian law." Regionalization is emerging legislated under trade agreements that include the "Supremacy of Communitarian Law" clause. The EU Court is called the Communitarian Court of Justice. Hundreds of European and Latin American colleges offer Ph.D.s in Communitarian Law.

Barack Obamba and Hillary Clinton are openly identified in the American press as communitarian, not communist. But yeah okay, let's all start asking them about their "communist" beliefs so they can discount us as McCarthyists and minimalize any damage they might suffer by being asked REAL Qs.

I've had a lot of respect for Iserbyt since I beagn my research, and I've often tooted her horn in my articles, but come on Charlotte, who's deliberately dumbing down who?
From: norgesen, Sent: Feb 27, 2008 9:54 AM
To: Global_Police_State@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Conspiracy> The North American 'Soviet' Union

Regionalism is communism no matter how you slice it. The sooner Americans get that unpleasant fact permanently entered into their brains, and process that information into appropriate action, the sooner we will be able to escape what Orwell described so well in his novel 1984


THE NORTH AMERICAN 'SOVIET' UNION

By Charlotte Iserbyt

February 27, 2007

There is one common thread running through all articles and speeches by elected officials, well-known writers, and commentators in opposition to the merging of the United States into a political and economic regional arrangement known as the North American Union. To my knowledge, not one of them has chosen to use the “C” word (communism) when warning Americans of the dangers of this unconstitutional merger about to be foisted upon us without proper hearings in Congress. Excellent speeches and articles are being given and written warning us of all sorts of bad things related to this merger, including the fact that we will lose our sovereignty, but we are not being told that all these bad things are necessary for the full implementation of The North American Soviet Union (communistic/regional system). Isn’t the “C” word the one and only word which might shock Americans out of their state of conditioned apathy, thereby bringing about citizen activism which might result in killing this “regional” monster?

Morris Zeitlin, a communist writer for the Communist Party’s Daily World said in an article entitled “Planning is Socialism’s Trademark,” November 8, 1975: “We (USA) have no regional government and no comprehensive regional planning to speak of. Regional government and planning remain concepts our urban scholars and planners have long advocated in vain…In socialist countries, metropolitan regions enjoy metropolitan regional government and comprehensive planning. The economic and functional efficiencies and the social benefits that comprehensive national, regional and city planning make possible in socialist society explain the Soviet Union’s enormous and rapid economic social progress…”

Of interest regarding Zeitlin’s comment about “the Soviet Union’s enormous and rapid economic social progress…” is the following admission made by former President Gorbachev at the 2005 National School Board Association conference that “half the world’s population and two-thirds of Russia’s lives in poverty.”

The United States Government, at all levels, has since 1975 accepted wholeheartedly Zeitlin’s advice, to the extent that our country is, believe it or not, almost 100 percent socialist in its political, economic, social and environmental (sustainable development) policies. For documentation please read “Walks Like a Duck, Talks Like a Duck.”

The regionalization (consolidation) of the world is quite similar to the three-stage plan outlined by Stalin at the 1936 Communist International. At that meeting, the official program proclaimed:

“Dictatorship can be established only by a victory of socialism in different countries or groups of countries, after which there would be federal unions of the various groupings of these socialist countries, and the third stage would be an amalgamation of these regional federal unions into a world union of socialist nations.” (Ed note: The third stage is taking place right now as we in the United States of America become part of a federal union, the North American Union, which will in the near future become part of a world union of socialist nations.)

Former President of the Soviet Union Gorbachev on March 23, 2000, in London, referred to the European Union (EU) as "the New European Soviet.” If he refers to the EU in that way, it only stands to reason that he would refer to the North American Union (NAU) as the “New American Soviet,” since the NAU is modeled on the EU. Gorbachev also said in his speech to the Soviet Central Committee on November 2, 1987, published by Novosti Press Agency Publishing House:

“We are moving toward a new world, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.”

How is it possible that if American citizens or United States officials involved in putting us under the North American Union were aware of Gorbachev’s statements, they would not be very concerned regarding our nation becoming part of a communist world? Have we forgotten the many hundreds of millions of innocent people tortured, starved, murdered and incarcerated by communist regimes around the world? Authorities say “over 20 million people suffered in purges under Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin -- and that more than 10 million died before Stalin's death in 1953. Some put the number even higher.” [Read]

Do we really believe the communists have changed or gone away?

United States government officials, elected and unelected, with enormous financial assistance from the tax-exempt foundations, have for many years been working to implement unconstitutional regional planning at the local, state, national and international level, all of this required for full implementation of a One World Socialist Government. For the 3000-page transcript of 1953 Congressional (Reece and Cox Committee) Hearings to Investigate the Tax-Exempt Foundations and for superb research on the history of regional government, go to americandeception.com and type the following into its search engine: Reece Committee, Don Bell Reports, Maureen Heaton, the Mantooth Report, and The Emerging North American Union.

One very important government official in the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations, Under Secretary of State George W. Ball, spelled out very clearly what the Insiders were planning for our nation in The New York Times, 1/24/88: “…If we could internationalize by using the United Nations in conjunction with the Soviet Union, because we now no longer have to fear in most cases a Soviet veto, then we could begin to transform the shape of the world and might get the UN back doing something useful. …Sooner or later we’re going to have to face restructuring our institutions so that they’re not confined merely to the nation states. Start first on a regional, and ultimately you can move to a world, basis.” (emphasis added).

Has our education system so successfully conditioned and dumbed down Americans that they no longer are able to apply logic to the above quotes? Are they no longer capable of transferring that knowledge, processing it into new knowledge and conclusions which might help them understand and oppose the present destruction of our Constitutional Republic?

Since all regional groupings being set up around the world are based on the communistic Free Trade “redistribute the wealth” philosophy, why is it that the adjective “Communist” is never used when discussing GATT, NAFTA, CAFTA and the NAU? Those patriotic writers could at least describe those agreements as “Communism LITE,” couldn’t they?

For those Americans who recall the days of elected officials, not unelected, appointed task forces and “councils” (soviets, according to most dictionaries), running our towns, schools, counties, states, nation and world, recognizing this change in our form of government should not be too difficult.

However, for those younger Americans denied an education in American history and government due to the activities of the tax-exempt foundations, especially the Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie Foundations, the loss of elected officials through regionalism does not seem to bother them. Go to americandeception.com and type into search engine “Kenny Hignite” and you will see a most astonishing six-page 1954 “Test on the United States Constitution” on which Hignite received a grade of 99 – “Excellent!” There is absolutely no way that Kenny Hignite, now 66 years old, having received such an excellent education on the U.S. Constitution in a public school in Central California in 1954, would not be questioning the present deliberate destruction of our representative form of government through the implementation of communistic regional government!

Those Americans under fifty years old, and too often those over 50 years old (!), will ask you “What’s wrong with members of the community or faceless state bureaucrats being appointed to assist our elected officials in their work which has become increasingly complicated?” The simple answer is “If you don’t approve of what those unelected officials are doing, you can’t get rid of them at the polls.”

Uneducated Americans will also ask you:

“What’s wrong with consolidation of school districts, services, the merging of individual school and town budgets to “save taxpayers money?” (Ed note: In Maine our Senate Education Committee is about to approve Governor Baldacci’s proposal to slash school districts by proposing 26 regional school units statewide with 26 superintendents, compared to the existing 152 superintendents and 290 school units!);

“What’s wrong with merging 16 towns under one county council as was recently proposed in Cumberland County, Maine, thereby eliminating representative government?”;

“What’s wrong with getting rid of local school boards and having our schools run by city Mayors, or contracting education out to private organizations connected with the corporations?”;

“What possible objection could you have to public school morals and values education even if those programs are forbidden to teach ‘absolute’ morals and values based on the Ten Commandments?”;

“What’s wrong with publicly-funded charter schools which have no elected school boards?”;

“What’s wrong with Cuban-style school-to-work job training replacing a K-12 liberal arts curriculum? Even if my child can’t read, I sure want him/her to be able to get a job.”;

“What’s wrong with public/private partnerships?”

“What’s wrong with the federal government mandating mental health screening for my child?”;

“What’s wrong with members of the community assisting the local police in monitoring citizen activities and/or the police handing out awards to citizens who do good deeds, as is the case with the Community-Oriented Policing System (COPS) in Maine?”;

“What’s wrong with putting the UN’s lifelong learning agenda, all community services (birth through death), under the umbrella of the school district? (Go to americandeception.com and type “Feld” into search engine for a remarkable research paper on the history of Community Education)

“What’s wrong with a National I.D. card reportedly designed by two Russian ex-KGB Chiefs?”;

“What’s wrong with students being required to perform community service in order to graduate?”;

“What’s wrong with federal funding of religious organizations (faith-based initiative)?”;

“What’s wrong with federally-funded school choice proposals?”;

“What’s wrong with dropping borders between states?” as is in the offing.

And, the subject of this article: “What’s wrong with regional government?” And many more “What’s Wrong With?” questions from good Americans who have, over many years, through no fault of their own, been deliberately dumbed down and didn’t receive the public education which required the likes of Kenny Hignite to know their Constitution and form of government.

How many Americans realize that almost all the programs mentioned in the above “What’s Wrong With” section have already been implemented in our schools, communities, and states and that they are based on communist/socialist collectivist philosophy? The planners are waiting only for the full implementation of the North American Union (final nail in coffin) which will allow them to write and approve, as was done in Europe, the North American Union’s Constitution (Communist Manifesto) which will include all the above “What’s Wrong With?” programs. That will be the infamous day when the U.S. Constitution is formally relegated to history’s trash bin. And, as with the EU Constitution, or the Communist Manifesto, the practice of Christianity will be outlawed… a thing of the past. All religions will be considered equal and inevitably superior to Christianity. Go to americandeception.com and type into search engine “Religion and Governance” an important position paper by Harlan Cleveland, notorious supporter of global government, long-time member of the internationalist Aspen Institute, and first U.S. Ambassador to the Common Market (1960), and Marc Luycx, a Belgian change agent bureaucrat. This paper was prepared by the Foreward Study Group of the European Commission and was undoubtedly used by those drafting the EU Constitution. It will give you a picture of the non-role of Christianity in world region constitutions.

Our elected officials in Congress, who have sworn to uphold the Constitution, should not be immune to multi-million dollar lawsuits for injuries sustained by the citizens of this country. Is not the loss of our freedoms due to elected officials’ malpractice (lying to us in regard to putting us under the communistic regional North American Union and not holding hearings on the subject) even more important than the death of one patient due to a doctor’s malpractice, the scalding of a woman who spilled her “too-hot” coffee at a McDonald’s takeout, or the death from cancer of a woman who smoked too many cigarettes? How can we ignore the fact that 651,008 Americans have died in battle to protect and defend the constitutional freedoms which will vanish under this new international regional arrangement? Is there really no penalty to be exacted of these highly-paid Congressional traitors other than voting them out of office, which it seems is impossible to do due to both political parties having the same agenda, controlled media, manipulated political conventions, and election fraud?

Americans have been conditioned to NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, since the days of McCarthyism and the phony fall of communism, mention the “C” word. The word must, as George Orwell might have said, be removed from the dictionaries of all languages, especially English. Otherwise, we might wise up and tackle this treason with all our might and brains since we surely don't want our children and grandchildren living under any “ism” form of government, much less “communism.” The Insiders know that “communism” is the one and only word that must be banished from use. They are not concerned over excellent anti-North American Union rantings and ravings as long as the “C” word is NOT used.

The Insiders, most if not all of whom are corporate communists, have no fear of the coming totalitarian system since they have been assured they will be sitting in the catbird seat, having eliminated all economic competition and self-government (elected officials), and will have the world as their playground. The majority of the world’s population, the Insiders’ “human resources”, will be their highly trained and conditioned serfs, lifelong.

One might ask, how can this be? It is a well-known and documented fact that Wall Street funded the Bolshevik Revolution and the corporate communists and our government have been supporting the communist regime in Russia since 1917. Extensive exchange agreements covering political, municipal, cultural, economic, legal, law enforcement, education, science, sports, medicine, etc. have been signed since 1958 between the USSR and the USA, including of special importance the 1985 education agreements signed by Presidents Reagan and Gorbachev which merged our two education systems and caused to be implemented the Soviet polytechnical work force/job quota system and the Pavlovian outcomes-based method of conditioning/training. Go to americandeception.com for full text of “Agreement between U.S.A. and USSR.”

Regionalism is communism no matter how you slice it. The sooner Americans get that unpleasant fact permanently entered into their brains, and process that information into appropriate action, the sooner we will be able to escape what Orwell described so well in his novel 1984:

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on the human face--forever...and remember, that is forever."

Forward this article to your friends and to your elected officials at the local, state, and national level. Of equal importance restore the "C" word to your vocabulary and use it often.

© 2007 Charlotte T. Iserbyt - All Rights Reserved

Charlotte Iserbyt is the consummate whistleblower! Iserbyt served as Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first Reagan Administration, where she first blew the whistle on a major technology initiative which would control curriculum in America's classrooms. Iserbyt is a former school board director in Camden, Maine and was co-founder and research analyst of Guardians of Education for Maine (GEM) from 1978 to 2000. She has also served in the American Red Cross on Guam and Japan during the Korean War, and in the United States Foreign Service in Belgium and in the Republic of South Africa.

Iserbyt is a speaker and writer, best known for her 1985 booklet Back to Basics Reform or OBE: Skinnerian International Curriculum and her 1989 pamphlet Soviets in the Classroom: America's Latest Education Fad which covered the details of the U.S.-Soviet and Carnegie-Soviet Education Agreements which remain in effect to this day. She is a freelance writer and has had articles published in Human Events, The Washington Times, The Bangor Daily News, and included in the record of Congressional hearings.

Website: www.deliberatedumbingdown.com

E-Mail: dumbdown00@yahoo.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/iserbyt/iserbyt36.htm

==

  • Former USSR Premier/ex KGB Head To Work for Homeland Security! 4-23-03

  • Community/ Communist Oriented Policing 2-13-03

  • New Spectator Sport for Americans...Watch it Play Out! 2-1-03

  • Kissinger out of the Closet

  • Cold War Myth: An Exercise in the Use of the Dialectic

  • Death Sentence for Private and Home Education, Courtesy of Supreme Court

  • No American Left Alone!



  • Regionalism is communitarianism no matter how you slice it. But why learn the real terms of the present or the future when you can comfortably languish in the past?

    Saturday, February 2, 2008

    Joe McCarthy, Communism and Fellow Travelers

    I watched the movie, Good night and Good Luck, and noticed it when Ed Murrow said McCarthy accused people of being either communists or "fellow travelers." I'd never heard this used in reference to McCarthy, but when I went to look it up I found it was used by McCarthy. Isn't fellow traveler also the "secret" codeword for Freemasons?

    An article by Ronald Radash tempers the fact that "McCarthy did identify some Communists who escaped the net" with the fact that he also began investigating some others who were not. This reminds me of one of the responses to Alan Stang's article on MLK Day, where one crticic asserted that MLK's plagiarizing (1/3 to 1/2 of) his doctoral thesis is no big deal in light of all the "good work" he did. Who were the Communists who escaped? Where did they escape to? What did they do after that? Is there a list of these people? I bet there is.

    From George Mason University's History News Network:

    Ronald Radosh: Is the new biography of Joe McCarthy trustworthy?

    Source:
    National Review Online (12-17-07)
    http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/46544.html

    "While McCarthy did identify some Communists who managed to escape the net, he also began to investigate and pillory many who were in no way connected with the Soviets as agents, spies, or couriers. He often failed to distinguish between actual Communists, fellow-travelers, and anti-Communist liberals and social-democrats. It was enough for him to know that they were critical of his methods and tactics: That made them as good as Communists. Many of these people were indeed Communists, fellow-travelers, or dupes. But they were not engaged in any activity except that of public pronouncements that could be accepted or rejected on their merits. Nothing in the area of their work made them a security risk."

    I'm tending toward the belief (because we can never really know who any of these players were.. can we?) that McCarthy was just a little too perfect for the dialectic. Look at the necessary role he fulfilled; he took the spotlight off other extremely credible Congressional investigations and became the perfect target for the opposition. After the Senate censured him the communist agents had ZERO official opposition. Look at what happened after that to anyone who suggested investigations of communist subversives. And when I first recognized the communist language used by city planning officials in Seattle, Democrat Nancy Rising warned me I needed to stop sounding so much like McCarthy.

    Throughout my entire lifetime, calling someone (in the USA) a communist was returned with an accusation of "red baiting" or worse. So what happened to the OTHER accusation McCarthy made. What exactly did he mean by "either a communist or a fellow traveler?" Doesn't the either/or question imply they're two different things?

    Here's a few places using the term "fellow traveler":

    This first one is an amazing letter directed at Communism and Freemasonry:

    An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, By His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, 12. Comrades and Fellow-Travellers
    http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Society_of_Saint_Pius_X/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-12.htm


    Ron Paul War Room
    http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=3435

    9th MasonicDistrict of Ohio Forums-Fellow Travelers:
    http://9thdistrict.ohiofreemason.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewforum&f=3

    The Masonic Traveler blog:
    http://masonictraveler.blogspot.com/2006/04/marketing-freemasonry.html

    The Masonic Traveler has an article on Oprah's endorsement of The Secret:
    http://masonictraveler.blogspot.com/2007/02/oprah-and-secret-of-secret.html

    I've spent my whole life hearing about the poor innocents who were wrongly investigated by McCarthy, but I never heard of the Reese Committee until I started doing ACL research. I just went to find Iserbyt's links to the Reese transcripts and guess what????? Her book is now downloadable for FREE online! http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/

    Here's Charlotte's site with a wealth of references from the 20s, 30s and 40s (when communism was still a topic considered politically correct and appropriate for national discussions):
    http://www.americandeception.com/

    What an interesting day this is becoming. I just got an email about a bill introduced in 1992 in the U.S. Congress regarding adopting Agenda 21 goals in the U.S. I couldn't find the right link so I did a search for it. Nothing came back for Agenda 21, but this one came in as closely related:

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.RES.873
    :


    109th CONGRESS
    2d Session

    H. RES. 873

    Recognizing the continued importance of the transatlantic partnership between the United States and the European Union by expressing support for the success of the forthcoming US-EU Summit in Vienna, Austria, on June 21, 2006.

    H. RES. 873 tells a LOT about how closely we're tied to to E.U. Let us not forget the E.U. was established under the Supremacy of Communitarian Law clause.

      Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
        (1) reaffirms the importance of the transatlantic relationship between the United States and the European Union;
        (2) recognizes that both the United States and Europe face multiple and common challenges at home and abroad and to deal effectively with many of these challenges the United States and the European Union must continue to adapt the transatlantic partnership which has served both so well;
        (3) acknowledges that the relationship between the United States and the European Union should continue to be strengthened through regular and intensive consultations;
        (4) expresses its support for the success of the forthcoming US-EU Summit on June 21, 2006, in Vienna, Austria, and encourages agreements on issues such as the continued support for global freedom, democracy, and human rights, a successful conclusion of the World Trade Organization Doha Development Agenda, and a workable transatlantic energy security strategy; and
        (5) joins with the European Parliament in agreeing to continue to strengthen the transatlantic partnership by enhancing the dialogue and collaboration between the United States Congress and the European Parliament through the framework of the Transatlantic Legislators Dialogue and other legislative exchanges.
    Anyone who doesn't believe there's an integration into an emerging global parliament should go here: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/intcoop/tld/default_en.htm

    "The economic relationship between the European Union and the United States is perhaps the most defining feature of the global economy. The integration is broader and deeper than between any two other political regions in the world. The EU and US account for 35 percent of global merchandise trade, 45% of world trade in services and produce 57% of world GDP. The partnership is also the single most important driver of global economic growth, trade, and prosperity. And bilateral economic ties are increasing every year."

    Does it matter to Americans that the E.U. economy is governed by communitarians? Weren't the two "competing" theories called capitalism and communism? Is communitariansm the blend?

    Okay she emailed me the correct link. This was PASSED by the House:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c102:H.CON.RES.353:

    102d CONGRESS
    2d Session

    H. CON. RES. 353

    CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States should assume a strong leadership role in implementing the decisions made at the Earth Summit by developing a national strategy to implement Agenda 21 and other Earth Summit agreements through domestic policy and foreign policy, by cooperating with all countries to identify and initiate further agreements to protect the global environment, and by supporting and participating in a high-level United Nations Sustainable Development Commission.

    HCON 353 EH

    102d CONGRESS
    2d Session

    H. CON. RES. 353


    CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Whereas the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (hereinafter in this preamble referred to as `UNCED'), known as the Earth Summit, assembled in June of 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the largest summit of heads of state in history and outlined a comprehensive action plan for environmentally sustainable development, known as Agenda 21;

    Whereas the United States has a strong national interest in the environmental sustainability of global economic development, and many pressing environmental and economic problems are inherently transboundary and not susceptible to resolution by the actions of any single nation acting alone;

    Whereas Agenda 21, a plan of national and international actions to integrate environment and development, negotiated and adopted by the United States and 177 other countries, offers a significant starting point for continuing progress in avoiding environmental degradation and social and economic disintegration in the 21st century;

    Whereas the role of the United States, as a major economic force and a country that has long been in the forefront of environmental protection activities nationally and internationally, should be one of leadership and positive action in the implementation process of Agenda 21 and all decisions of UNCED;

    Whereas Agenda 21 urges all governments to adopt national strategies for sustainable development;

    Whereas Agenda 21 urges all countries to `make significant progress' in incorporating environmental costs into economic decisions, to undertake research or sustainable production methods and consumption patterns, and to undertake other actions to make their economies more environmentally sustainable;

    Whereas Agenda 21 calls for a `supportive international climate for achieving environment and development goals,' by `providing adequate financial resources to developing countries and dealing with international debt,' and calls for `the reallocation of resources presently committed to military purposes' to support United States policies and the efforts of developing countries to implement Agenda 21;

    Whereas UNCED recommended that a high-level United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (hereinafter in this preamble referred to as the `Commission') be established by the 47th United Nations General Assembly to provide a vital forum in which the member states of the United Nations may review progress made by considering reports from national governments, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations;

    Whereas the United States was an active and positive participant in UNCED negotiations regarding the Commission, and will play a major role in the decisions of the 47th United Nations General Assembly regarding the specific modalities and effectiveness of the Commission;

    Whereas the agreements adopted at UNCED are milestones toward the achievement of environmentally sustainable economic development and for holding governments accountable for progress toward integrating environment and development;

    Whereas many opportunities for agreements concerning more extensive actions on critical issues remained unresolved at UNCED and will require further attention by the nations of the world; and

    Whereas the ultimate success of achieving sustainable development and a healthy environment at the national and international levels depends upon actions taken at the State and local community levels, and on actions by schools, public offices, businesses, and citizens: Now, therefore, be it

      Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that--
        (1) effective follow-up to achieve the many goals of the agreements reached at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (hereinafter in this resolution referred to as `UNCED') will depend on the following actions by the President and the United States Government:
          (A) The United States should adopt a national strategy for environmentally sustainable development, based on an extensive process of nationwide consultations with all interested organizations and individuals, including State and local governments, nongovernmental organization, businesses, and labor groups.
          (B) The United States Government should encourage and facilitate, at all levels of community and sectors of society, appropriate means for adopting individual Agenda 21 plans of action, including the establishment of local, county, State, business, and other boards and commissions for achieving sustainable development. Each member of the Congress should help initiate this process within their States or districts.
          (C) The President should establish an effective mechanism to plan, initiate, and coordinate United States policy for implementing Agenda 21. Responsibility should be vested in a duly constituted office, headed by an appropriate high level official, and the necessary staff support structure should be provided.
          (D) Policies should be formulated for foreign policy and foreign assistance in order to help developing countries, and for domestic actions in order to assure appropriate action by the United States to implement Agenda 21;
        (2) in order to contribute to a transition to a sustainable United States economy, the research and policy initiatives urged in Agenda 21 should be pursued, including research on sustainable consumption and production patterns, creation of a policy framework for sustainable consumption patterns, identification of a strategy to eliminate or reduce subsidies for unsustainable natural resource exploitation, and to improve pricing policies;
        (3) the Congress should adopt a plan to reallocate an appropriate amount of savings from reduced defense spending in order to achieve its goals of global environmental protection and sustainable development over the next decade;
        (4) the President should urge and actively participate in new and existing multilateral efforts aimed at creating a more favorable international economic climate for developing countries to practice sustainable development, and such efforts should include international consultations regarding reduction in developing country debt linked with environmental policy reforms, and increased loans and concessional assistance upon development and implementation of national sustainable development strategies in developing countries;
        (5) the United States should actively support, at the 47th United Nations General Assembly, the effective establishment of a high-level United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (hereinafter in this resolution referred to as the `Commission'), including the establishment of provisions for meaningful participation by organizations of the United Nations system, international financial institutions, and other relevant intergovernmental organizations and nongovernmental organizations recommended by UNCED;
        (6) the President should affirm strong United States commitment to the Commission by appointing a high-level representative from the United States to the Commission, and by encouraging the United Nations Secretary General to appoint an Under Secretary General for Sustainable Development to coordinate the implementation of Agenda 21 in the United Nations system and to head the secretariat support structure for the Commission;
        (7) the President should submit a national report to the Commission on activities the United States has undertaken to implement Agenda 21, both domestically and internationally, on progress made toward fulfilling other commitments undertaken at UNCED, and on other environmental and developmental issues that the United States finds relevant, and should strongly encourage all United Nations members to submit national reports;
        (8) the United States should encourage the Commission to call for periodic international meetings to continue the process toward developing and advancing international agreement to facilitate sustainable economic development for the protection of the global environment and the promotion of human dignity of current and future generations; and
        (9) the President should submit an annual report to the Congress on the steps taken by the United States to implement Agenda 21 and the recommendations made by this resolution, and should make information regarding such steps available to members of the Congress upon their request.

    Passed the House of Representatives October 2, 1992.

    Attest:

    Clerk.

    So. now, who voted yes to pass this in 1992? Here's the 62 co-sponsors:

    Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-7] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Andrews, Thomas H. [ME-1] - 8/12/1992
    Rep Atkins, Chester G. [MA-5] - 8/12/1992
    Rep Bacchus, Jim [FL-11] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Beilenson, Anthony C. [CA-23] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Blackwell, Lucien E. [PA-2] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Blaz, Ben G. [GU] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Collins, Cardiss [IL-7] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Cox, John W., Jr. [IL-16] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Dellums, Ronald V. [CA-8] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Dymally, Mervyn M. [CA-31] - 9/21/1992
    Rep Edwards, Don [CA-10] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Evans, Lane [IL-17] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Fascell, Dante B. [FL-19] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Feighan, Edward F. [OH-19] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Flake, Floyd H. [NY-6] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Foglietta, Thomas M. [PA-1] - 9/21/1992
    Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Frost, Martin [TX-24] - 8/12/1992
    Rep Gejdenson, Sam [CT-2] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Gilman, Benjamin A. [NY-22] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Green, S. William [NY-15] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Hertel, Dennis M. [MI-14] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Hochbrueckner, George J. [NY-1] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Horton, Frank J. [NY-29] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Hughes, William J. [NJ-2] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Jefferson, William J. [LA-2] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Johnson, Tim [SD] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Jones, Walter B. [NC-1] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Kleczka, Gerald D. [WI-4] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Klug, Scott L. [WI-2] - 9/21/1992
    Rep Kolter, Joseph P. [PA-4] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Kostmayer, Peter H. [PA-8] - 9/21/1992
    Rep Lantos, Tom [CA-11] - 9/21/1992
    Rep Lehman, William [FL-17] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Machtley, Ronald K. [RI-1] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Markey, Edward J. [MA-7] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Mazzoli, Romano L. [KY-3] - 8/11/1992
    Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Miller, George [CA-7] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Miller, John R. [WA-1] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Morella, Constance A. [MD-8] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Owens, Major R. [NY-12] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Owens, Wayne [UT-2] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Panetta, Leon [CA-16] - 8/12/1992
    Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Pease, Donald J. [OH-13] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Porter, John Edward [IL-10] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-16] - 9/9/1992
    Rep Sanders, Bernard [VT-98] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Scheuer, James H. [NY-8] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Schroeder, Patricia [CO-1] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Schumer, Charles E. [NY-10] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Sikorski, Gerry E. [MN-6] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Studds, Gerry E. [MA-10] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Swett, Dick [NH-2] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Tallon, Robert M. (Robin) [SC-6] - 8/12/1992
    Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-11] - 8/11/1992
    Rep Traxler, Bob [MI-8] - 8/12/1992
    Rep Unsoeld, Jolene [WA-3] - 8/5/1992
    Rep Wolpe, Howard E. [MI-3] - 8/12/1992

    Hmmm. No voting record, it was agreed to under supsension of the rules. WTF does that mean?