New bill to hand over ALL water sources to federal gov?

Another measure to keep a very close eye on people. It appears that this has the potential, through amendments, and sneaky language, to hand over ALL waterways and sources, including people's OWN PROPERTIES, to big brother. I don't know about you, but I for one can certainly see the danger involved with such a move, particularly with the totalitarian direction we seem to be headed in recent times...Do you want to hand over ALL water supplies and natural resources to Big Brother? I certainly don't...



Recent submission to rense (please read the actual info, and don't just dismiss because it was submitted to rense):

Feingold Bill Gives ALL
US Water To The Feds!
5-7-9

In April, 2009, Senator Feingold introduced (and gathered 24 co-sponsors already) legislation, S. 787, to fundamentally change the definition of "water" under control of the federal government:
thomas.loc.gov...:S787:


SEC. 4. DEFINITION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1362) is amended--

(1) by striking paragraph (7);

(2) by redesignating paragraphs (8) through (25) as paragraphs (7) through (24), respectively; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

`(25) WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES- The term `waters of the United States' means all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or activities affecting these waters, are subject to the legislative power of Congress under the Constitution.'.

Continued:

www.rense.com...




[edit on 8-5-2009 by DimensionalDetective]

The only water sources not mentioned in (25) are mudholes and temporary puddles.

I am not in favor of the feds controlling much of anything. However, this is much better than a private company controlling the water. Much better. When I first bought my house in California, the county managed the water. Not more than a year later, a private company took it over. It was the worst thing that could have happened to water. Anything that'll put those crooks out of business is not all that bad. I've been hoping the county would take back control, but the feds will do. As long as, the private water company goes out of business, I do not care.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by tamusan]

Great thread. There is nothing more important to discuss than this subject here. This is true evil, because Uncle Sam can't be that thirsty. Also, these waterways are being sold out to international corporations so it'll be like this: Nestle can bottle their WalMart bottled water at the river, but yourself cannot approach or draw water from it because they have full ownership of the rights.

Corps in other lands have the right to take our water. Welcome to the global economy. But further, I am guessing a scorch and burn philosophy would mean that the authority might even end up polluting the waterways lest anyone use them without permission? I am saying it wouldn't be unique in history for such a thing to happen, particularly if the populace becomes unruly or decides they don't like this law and decides to take their water back?

I can only refer to what has been written before:

wikiquote.org/wiki/Dune

Author Frank Herbert says:

* When I was writing Dune there was no room in my mind for concerns about the book's success or failure. I was concerned only with the writing. Six years of research had preceded the day I sat down to put the story together, and the interweaving of the many plot layers I had planned required a degree of concentration I had never before experienced.
It was to be a story exploring the myth of the Messiah.
It was to produce another view of a human-occupied planet as an energy machine.
It was to penetrate the interlocked workings of politics and economics.
It was to be an examination of absolute prediction and its pitfalls.
It was to have an awareness drug in it and tell what could happen through dependence on such a substance.
Potable water was to be an analog for oil and for water itself, a substance whose supply diminishes each day.
It was to be an ecological novel, then, with many overtones, as well as a story about people and their human concerns with human values, and I had to monitor each of these levels at every stage in the book.

You have got to be kidding me.

This is bill about water POLLUTION.

All rense has pasted is the definitions of the term `waters of the United States'

What does that prove?

Did you read the rest of the bill? Or did you automatically assume since rense posted it, it must be something bad?

SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

The purposes of this Act are--

(1) to reaffirm the original intent of Congress in enacting the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500; 86 Stat. 816) to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States;

(2) to clearly define the waters of the United States that are subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.); and

(3) to provide protection to the waters of the United States to the maximum extent of the legislative authority of Congress under the Constitution.

Also:

(13)(A) as set forth in section 6, nothing in this Act modifies or otherwise affects the amendments made by the Clean Water Act of 1977 (Public Law 95-217; 91 Stat. 1566) to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act that exempted certain activities, such as farming, silviculture, and ranching activities, as well as agricultural stormwater discharges and return flows from oil, gas, and mining operations and irrigated agriculture, from particular permitting requirements;

[edit on 8/5/09 by Chadwickus]

That's the thinking gov for you. When tax revenue is low of course the perfect plan is to take even more land water away from people that they could be paying state property tax on.

Oh well, just less revenue for them I guess. I don't pay property tax on property I don't own. Oh well when the state budget goes boom I guess the feds can just print more money and bail them out. Yay!

Do I want the fed gov to own the water? I don't want the fed to own anything. They buy it all up with funny money and when the printing presses can't keep up they just steal it.

What I really really want to do is instead of paying my taxes I just want to send them an LOLcat that says, NO U KANT HAZ! And the same goes for the waterways.

[edit on 8-5-2009 by tinfoilman]