Things You Should Know –
Governmental authority, and the power that flows from it, begins either at the top or flows from the bottom up – there is no third choice. In a legitimate outworking of the American governmental system, power flows from the people – or more specifically, from counties to the States and then on to the central government.
KNRC’s Show Us the Law and Courts Don’t Make Law philosophy, combined with the Article X legitimacy principals and Article 1 Section 8 enumerated Federal powers, provides the platform for evaluation of Major Federal Actions, projects and Rules. Because the President has been propagating cultural law through the Executive Privilege and Agencies utilize Court Orders as directives to justify Rules they wish to impose, the KNRC Show Us the Law process provides a powerful tool for States and counties to distinguish what constitutes a legitimate regulatory burden.
Collaborative restoration of bottom-up decision-making, with a long-term view toward relegating federal agencies to their rightful position of servitude, requires vision, commitment, long-term resolve, and a sound, constitutionally-based Plan. KNRC is in the process of developing Strategic and Implementation-Plan templates, – an apparatus that is expandable, easily translated, and which works toward the goal of restoring voice and natural-resource decision-making to local governments across the nation.
Because the landscape of federal decision-making is, at best, unhealthy – or at worst inept, and counties have been conditioned against managing natural-resource issues themselves, the restoration process requires intense collaboration between State Legislatures and elected local governments. Similarly, because the current culture in Federal agencies leads them to espouse authorities that often don’t exist in Statute, intense collaboration and unity is required to overcome likely tensions – especially as States and counties define limits, establish authoritarian bright-lines, and direct Congressional delegations toward a common vision.
The KNRC Strategic Plan seeks to balance natural-resource needs with existing geopolitical boundaries, State and local prerogatives, historic common-law principals, private property rights and with deference to the economic and current culture of the region. Since agriculture, ranching, farming, mining, energy-extraction, timber production, textile manufacturing and general heavy-industry are directly encouraged by Environmental Law, the KNRC approach gives deference to building, strengthening and balancing those prosperity-generating human activities.
Strategic Plan Summary –
I. Maps & Geopolitical Boundaries:
- Federal agencies proposing NEPA-defined, Major Federal Action shall publish in the Federal Register a professionally land surveyed Boundary Map with a legal description of all areas proposed to be regulated, for which resources may be managed, habitats identified, or natural resources impacted. All Boundary Maps for which Federal regulations may be imposed shall identify private lands, properties and resource holdings.
- All proposed Federal natural-resource plans, rules, or projects shall utilize, maintain and respect established State Geopolitical boundaries, and all natural-resource or environment proposals are recognized as subordinate to sovereign State geopolitical boundaries.
ii. Congressional Appropriations
- Restructuring of Federal Programs shall include reassignment of Congressional Appropriations from Agencies to counties and States responsible for natural resource regulation, permitting, enforcement and management. Restructuring will transition the philosophical culture of federal agencies from command/control to an advisory status, with funding being allocated from the bottom-up, based upon performance.
- The scope of the restructured Federal role has agencies acting as technical brokers and performing a mediatory, technical function consistent with Interstate Commerce needs.
- With funding and decision-making for natural-resource issues having been transferred to State and local governments, the need and level of political interaction between Federal Agencies and the Congress becomes significantly reduced or eliminated.
iii. Environmental Permits, Review and 3rd Party Lawsuits
- The term “Permit” implies jurisdiction, ownership, interest or legitimate authority to control. A significant question exists as to the level of statutory prerogative Federal agencies have to regulate natural resources on, above, or in relation to private property. Fundamental bright lines need to be established as to what constitutes a legitimate limit of authority, which in turn yields whether jurisdiction can be claimed over private property for Permitting or regulatory purposes.
- Persons, companies or entities seeking an environmentally-related Permit have a rightful expectation of the limits, constraints, requirements and time durations for a response on permit-related requests. Federal permitting activities shall be time-limited in duration, meaning agencies have set time duration to determine the adequacy of an application, and a second time constraint for making a decision on that application.
- Third-party lawsuits shall be limited to locally-affected persons or entities who have suffered direct, measurable harm.