Free Liberty.com Email Alerts! 
Vote No for House 337 & Senate Bill SB567 - Public-Private Partnerships
Message Preview
From: Your Name <you@example.com>
To: Seth.McKeel@myfloridahouse.gov, Debbie.Mayfield@myfloridahouse.gov, Jeff.Clemens@myfloridahouse.gov, Joseph.Abruzzo@myfloridahouse.gov, Leonard.Bembry@myfloridahouse.gov, Rachel.Burgin@myfloridahouse.gov, Steve.Crisafulli@myfloridahouse.gov, Clay.Ford@myfloridahouse.gov, Rick.Kriseman@myfloridahouse.gov, Jimmy.Patronis@myfloridahouse.gov, Keith.Perry@myfloridahouse.gov, Scott.Plakon@myfloridahouse.gov, Elizabeth.Porter@myfloridahouse.gov, Dwayne.Taylor@myfloridahouse.gov, Alan.Williams@myfloridahouse.gov, Trudi.Williams@myfloridahouse.gov, Diana.Young@myfloridahouse.gov,shrrysmrt@yahoocom
Subject: Vote No for House 337 & Senate Bill SB567 - Public-Private Partnerships
Dear Representative,
While in the course of living the busy life of a working Florida citizen, the above-noted item of legislation has been brought to my attention. Please understand that ordinary citizens are trying to do a better job of staying abreast of what OUR government is doing (i.e. YOU, OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES). More often than not, we are appalled. This is certainly one of those instances.
While the name Public Private Partnership may have a nice ring to it, to those of us who are opening our eyes to the consequences of and underlying motivations in such legislation, it sounds more like a death knell.
If by Public Private Partnership you had in mind a public entity buying goods and services from private companies in a competitive market atmosphere, you would have us on your side. Common sense, historical precedent and legal justification would also be on your side. If you used your legislative authority as you should to secure the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for people and the businesses they create, you would certainly not seek to take control of either their lives or businesses.
So, to clarify our position, we are opposed to the passage of these two bills and/or any other similar legislation for the following reasons:
1. Because of the motives of the originators. Public Private Partnerships is not an original idea from the Florida House and Senate in 2012. It is the concept of people such as Maurice Strong and his ilk as expressed in the United Nation conferences in Sweden (1972), Rio de Janerio (1992) and Kyoto , Japan (2001) and embodied more fully in the U.N. formalAgenda 21. In so many words, they fully believe that the Western lifestyle (i.e. American lifestyle) is the major problem in the world. They believe the way to elevate the rest of the world is to take from us and give to them. Public Private Partnerships were not conceived as a way to enhance private business, but as a means to control private business for public purposes. This is not an American ideal. This is reason #1 to not adopt the Public-Private Partnership bill.
2. Because of the expansion of government control. We are not under any illusions that the purpose of Public-Private Partnerships is so that government can help private business do a better job. The only possible rationale would be to give government greater control over business. When GM became Government Motors, I do not recall the president of GM telling President Obama how he intended to run the company. I do remember President Obama firing the head of GM and replacing him with someone who would do the Presidents bidding. I do not remember investors returns growing. I do remember investors in GM bonds having their holdings confiscated. I remember the government deciding which dealerships would stay open and which would be closed. Because of governments tendency to want to control anything it touches, Public-Private Partnerships are a bad idea. This is a second reason not to adopt the Public Private Partnership bill.
3. Because of concern over national sovereignty. We are a nation founded, intentionally founded, to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature entitled us. We are the United States of America . We are a separate and individual nation. We are 50 individual, independent states in a cooperative union of mutual benefit. We pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the Union for which it stands, One Nation" When we begin to adopt legislation such as Public-Private Partnerships and Sustainable Development laws to name a few, we are giving more force to the dictates of Agenda 21 of the U.N. than we are our own U.S. Constitution and that of Florida . We know that there is a strong move to produce a New World Order. It is not the stuff of conspiracy theorists or crazies any more. It is common knowledge and normal fare in the news. We want none of this. We do not want one ounce of our national or state sovereignty given away, but your passage of these bills establishing the legality of Public-Private Partnerships in Florida does just that. This is yet another reason to abandon this Public-Private Partnership legislation.
4. Because of constitutional restraints. Article VII Section 10 of the Florida Constitution says, Neither the state nor any county, school district, municipality, special district, or agency of any of them, shall become a joint owner with, or stockholder of, or give, lend or use its taxing power or credit to aid any corporation, association, partnership or person. Could this be any clearer? If you go to a Thesaurus, you will not find the word business as a synonym for government. There is a reason for this. Government and business have distinct purposes and problems develop when those purposes overlap. It seems to me like a simple reading of this would keep the state of Florida , the county of Sarasota and any other government entity from giving money to business or favoring one business over another. Government has so violated this clause in the constitution that it might as well not even exist. This constitutional conflict should be sufficient reason alone to give up on Public-Private Partnerships.
5. Because of crony capitalism. While we tea party people are big on capitalism and the free market we are very anti-crony capitalism. Crony capitalism, as we understand it, is when business and government form a symbiotic relationship where money flows toward government through lobbyists and favorable legislation is enacted to benefit that particular business or business sector. Of course this is unethical, but it is so common as to be accepted as par for the course. So we have GE where the CEO is a big government advisor, yet the company pays no taxes. We have Solyndra types where companies owned by campaign contributors are awarded huge grants. Public-Private Partnerships are ripe for this type of public irresponsibility, yet another great reason to avoid Public-Private Partnerships.
6. Because of lack of knowledge. This is the scary part. When asked about Agenda 21, most legislators, county and city officials will say they do not support Agenda 21. They will then immediately turn around and enthusiastically pass rules and laws, host seminars, attend conferences and receive awards all based on the contents of Agenda 21. The clueless acceptance of Agenda 21 principles by our elected leaders is disconcerting at best and dangerous at worst. It seems that government officials at all levels feel compelled to pass more and more legislation, whether they understand it or not. Whether it is Obamacare on the national scene, which we know legislators did not read or understand, or this Public-Private Partnership issue and a host of other topics, we would really like for our representatives to really understand the ins and outs and consequences and motivations and issues before they vote to adopt any legislation. So because many of you have publicly said you do not support Agenda 21 and now you are attempting to pass this Public-Private Partnership, this disconnect is another reason to not continue with this legislation.
For these reasons and more, we ask you to kill these bills.
Your Name
Your Organization
123 Your St.
Yousville, YO 12345
Phone: (123)456-7890
Fax: (123)456-7890x123
p.s.
Your Personal Statement
To: Seth.McKeel@myfloridahouse.gov, Debbie.Mayfield@myfloridahouse.gov, Jeff.Clemens@myfloridahouse.gov, Joseph.Abruzzo@myfloridahouse.gov, Leonard.Bembry@myfloridahouse.gov, Rachel.Burgin@myfloridahouse.gov, Steve.Crisafulli@myfloridahouse.gov, Clay.Ford@myfloridahouse.gov, Rick.Kriseman@myfloridahouse.gov, Jimmy.Patronis@myfloridahouse.gov, Keith.Perry@myfloridahouse.gov, Scott.Plakon@myfloridahouse.gov, Elizabeth.Porter@myfloridahouse.gov, Dwayne.Taylor@myfloridahouse.gov, Alan.Williams@myfloridahouse.gov, Trudi.Williams@myfloridahouse.gov, Diana.Young@myfloridahouse.gov,shrrysmrt@yahoocom
Subject: Vote No for House 337 & Senate Bill SB567 - Public-Private Partnerships
Dear Representative,
While in the course of living the busy life of a working Florida citizen, the above-noted item of legislation has been brought to my attention. Please understand that ordinary citizens are trying to do a better job of staying abreast of what OUR government is doing (i.e. YOU, OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES). More often than not, we are appalled. This is certainly one of those instances.
While the name Public Private Partnership may have a nice ring to it, to those of us who are opening our eyes to the consequences of and underlying motivations in such legislation, it sounds more like a death knell.
If by Public Private Partnership you had in mind a public entity buying goods and services from private companies in a competitive market atmosphere, you would have us on your side. Common sense, historical precedent and legal justification would also be on your side. If you used your legislative authority as you should to secure the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for people and the businesses they create, you would certainly not seek to take control of either their lives or businesses.
So, to clarify our position, we are opposed to the passage of these two bills and/or any other similar legislation for the following reasons:
1. Because of the motives of the originators. Public Private Partnerships is not an original idea from the Florida House and Senate in 2012. It is the concept of people such as Maurice Strong and his ilk as expressed in the United Nation conferences in Sweden (1972), Rio de Janerio (1992) and Kyoto , Japan (2001) and embodied more fully in the U.N. formalAgenda 21. In so many words, they fully believe that the Western lifestyle (i.e. American lifestyle) is the major problem in the world. They believe the way to elevate the rest of the world is to take from us and give to them. Public Private Partnerships were not conceived as a way to enhance private business, but as a means to control private business for public purposes. This is not an American ideal. This is reason #1 to not adopt the Public-Private Partnership bill.
2. Because of the expansion of government control. We are not under any illusions that the purpose of Public-Private Partnerships is so that government can help private business do a better job. The only possible rationale would be to give government greater control over business. When GM became Government Motors, I do not recall the president of GM telling President Obama how he intended to run the company. I do remember President Obama firing the head of GM and replacing him with someone who would do the Presidents bidding. I do not remember investors returns growing. I do remember investors in GM bonds having their holdings confiscated. I remember the government deciding which dealerships would stay open and which would be closed. Because of governments tendency to want to control anything it touches, Public-Private Partnerships are a bad idea. This is a second reason not to adopt the Public Private Partnership bill.
3. Because of concern over national sovereignty. We are a nation founded, intentionally founded, to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature entitled us. We are the United States of America . We are a separate and individual nation. We are 50 individual, independent states in a cooperative union of mutual benefit. We pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the Union for which it stands, One Nation" When we begin to adopt legislation such as Public-Private Partnerships and Sustainable Development laws to name a few, we are giving more force to the dictates of Agenda 21 of the U.N. than we are our own U.S. Constitution and that of Florida . We know that there is a strong move to produce a New World Order. It is not the stuff of conspiracy theorists or crazies any more. It is common knowledge and normal fare in the news. We want none of this. We do not want one ounce of our national or state sovereignty given away, but your passage of these bills establishing the legality of Public-Private Partnerships in Florida does just that. This is yet another reason to abandon this Public-Private Partnership legislation.
4. Because of constitutional restraints. Article VII Section 10 of the Florida Constitution says, Neither the state nor any county, school district, municipality, special district, or agency of any of them, shall become a joint owner with, or stockholder of, or give, lend or use its taxing power or credit to aid any corporation, association, partnership or person. Could this be any clearer? If you go to a Thesaurus, you will not find the word business as a synonym for government. There is a reason for this. Government and business have distinct purposes and problems develop when those purposes overlap. It seems to me like a simple reading of this would keep the state of Florida , the county of Sarasota and any other government entity from giving money to business or favoring one business over another. Government has so violated this clause in the constitution that it might as well not even exist. This constitutional conflict should be sufficient reason alone to give up on Public-Private Partnerships.
5. Because of crony capitalism. While we tea party people are big on capitalism and the free market we are very anti-crony capitalism. Crony capitalism, as we understand it, is when business and government form a symbiotic relationship where money flows toward government through lobbyists and favorable legislation is enacted to benefit that particular business or business sector. Of course this is unethical, but it is so common as to be accepted as par for the course. So we have GE where the CEO is a big government advisor, yet the company pays no taxes. We have Solyndra types where companies owned by campaign contributors are awarded huge grants. Public-Private Partnerships are ripe for this type of public irresponsibility, yet another great reason to avoid Public-Private Partnerships.
6. Because of lack of knowledge. This is the scary part. When asked about Agenda 21, most legislators, county and city officials will say they do not support Agenda 21. They will then immediately turn around and enthusiastically pass rules and laws, host seminars, attend conferences and receive awards all based on the contents of Agenda 21. The clueless acceptance of Agenda 21 principles by our elected leaders is disconcerting at best and dangerous at worst. It seems that government officials at all levels feel compelled to pass more and more legislation, whether they understand it or not. Whether it is Obamacare on the national scene, which we know legislators did not read or understand, or this Public-Private Partnership issue and a host of other topics, we would really like for our representatives to really understand the ins and outs and consequences and motivations and issues before they vote to adopt any legislation. So because many of you have publicly said you do not support Agenda 21 and now you are attempting to pass this Public-Private Partnership, this disconnect is another reason to not continue with this legislation.
For these reasons and more, we ask you to kill these bills.
Your Name
Your Organization
123 Your St.
Yousville, YO 12345
Phone: (123)456-7890
Fax: (123)456-7890x123
p.s.
Your Personal Statement
