Green Tyranny Unmasked: The NAC Threat to America's Economic Sovereignty

Decoding Degrowth Communism: America Mission's Exposé on Natural Asset Companies and the Looming Economic Peril

Natural Asset Companies: A Threat to Economic Freedom

In an age where "Green New Deal" and "Carbon Offsets" are common buzzwords, the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is pushing a new, less familiar term: Natural Asset Company (NAC). Under the guise of environmental protection and monetization, the NYSE proposes NAC as a legal entity to manage "Natural Assets." But what exactly does this entail, and why should it concern the average citizen?

NACs, as proposed, represent a double-edged sword in the realm of environmental conservation. They aim to 'protect' nature while simultaneously monetizing it. This concept raises several red flags. How exactly does one balance the monetization of nature without causing harm? The idea conjures images of vast, untouched landscapes being exploited for financial gain, leaving behind environmental scars like the World's Largest Man-made Hole in Salt Lake City.

At America Mission, we have delved deep into the intricacies of NACs. Our investigation reveals that while the creation of these entities might set the stage for investor profit, the underlying model doesn't inherently promise a viable or profitable business structure. In essence, the formation of NACs seems to cater more to enriching the wealthy at the expense of the common taxpayer.

The real kicker lies in the financial burden that NACs would place on the public. To establish and maintain these entities, significant funding is required – and this means higher taxes for you and me. The government is inching towards implementing "carbon taxation," a cost that will inevitably trickle down to the everyday consumer. These taxes, under the guise of environmental protection, will disproportionately affect the general population while filling the pockets of those in control.

The concept of NACs ties into a broader, more alarming agenda termed "Degrowth Communism." This model of environmental feudalism allows a select group of stakeholders to dictate the distribution of resources and labor. The valuation of land and resources under NACs is based on hypothetical values derived from the potential wealth generated by not utilizing these resources for traditional purposes like mining or farming. This form of 'ecological accounting' discourages the productive use of land and effectively centralizes control over resource allocation, leading to economic stagnation for the majority while a select few reap profits.

Furthermore, the Biden administration's push for the "30x30" agenda, aiming to conserve 30% of land and water by 2030, is closely intertwined with the promotion of NACs. This initiative, backed by influential entities like the UN, World Economic Forum, and the Rockefeller Foundation, aligns with the sustainable development agenda but poses a significant threat to economic freedom and resource accessibility for the average person.

The danger of NACs as a tool of economic control and environmental exploitation cannot be understated. It's imperative to oppose the establishment of NACs before the SEC gives its approval and investment funds become entangled in this potentially destructive mechanism. Public awareness and commentary are crucial in combating the implementation of NACs and preserving our rights to resource access and economic independence. The fight against NACs is not just about protecting the environment – it's about safeguarding our economic freedoms and preventing the rise of a new form of environmental and economic feudalism.

Key Players in the NAC Framework:

• Rob Leary, Chair of the National Forest Foundation: As a key figure in a major non-governmental organization (NGO), Leary could become a pivotal player in one of the world's largest Carbon Credit systems if S.2991 passes. His position would grant him substantial influence over the selection of NAC winners and losers, essentially controlling who benefits from these new environmental regulations.

• Tom Vilsack, US Department of Agriculture Secretary: Vilsack's role involves acting as a government liaison to the National Forestry Foundation and Rob Leary. The Agriculture and Interior Secretaries are the primary government officials responsible for implementing and organizing the policies outlined in the bill.

• Deb Haaland, US Department of Interior Secretary: Haaland’s role in this system is significant, with the Department of Interior being a key player in several sections of the bill. Her decisions could greatly influence how natural assets and resources are managed and conserved.

• Jennifer Granholm, US Secretary of Energy: Granholm's responsibilities include overseeing aspects of forest product longevity and community tree planting initiatives. Her decisions will impact how energy policies intersect with environmental conservation efforts.

• Randy Moore, Chief of Forest Service: Appointed by Tom Vilsack, Moore's position seems to be more of an intermediary role, executing decisions made by the Secretary of Agriculture. This role could be pivotal in how forest resources are managed and utilized.

• Gary Gensler, Chairman of the SEC: Though information on the SEC's involvement is less clear, they are likely to play a crucial role in determining how U.S. natural assets are converted into carbon credits. This includes establishing their value and regulating their trade on exchanges.

Government Enrichment through Carbon Credit Systems: A Closer Look

As part of the broader framework surrounding Natural Asset Companies (NACs), certain legislative and regulatory developments are key to understanding how the government stands to benefit financially. These developments, which encompass carbon credit generation, distribution, and trading, are crucial in the shift towards a system that could significantly impact public access to natural resources and the economic landscape.

• Section 201 of Senate Bill 2991: This section outlines the generation, distribution, and payment of carbon credits through a single non-governmental organization (NGO), specifically the National Forest Foundation. The bill explicitly states how carbon credits will be managed and funneled through this singular entity. The full text of the bill can be found here: [Senate Bill 2991]

• CFTC's Move Toward Mandatory Carbon Credit Trading: Currently, carbon credit trading is a voluntary system. However, there are movements towards making this trading mandatory, as outlined by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). This shift would mark a significant change in how carbon credits are traded, potentially leading to more stringent regulations and requirements for businesses and individuals alike. More information about these developments can be found in this overview: [Voluntary Carbon Markets]

• SEC Rule on Natural Asset Companies: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) plays a pivotal role in how NACs will operate within the market. A specific SEC rule relating to natural asset companies is likely to be a critical component in achieving what the legislation deems a "successful" outcome. This rule will shape how NACs are structured, regulated, and integrated into the current economic system. The details of this SEC rule can be found here: [SEC Rule on NACs]

The government's potential financial gain from these systems is substantial. By centralizing the control and distribution of carbon credits through a specific NGO and moving towards a mandatory carbon trading system, the government can significantly increase its revenue stream. Additionally, the SEC's involvement in defining and regulating NACs will further solidify this new market structure.

Impact of Legislation on Agriculture and Revegetation

The proposed legislation in question notably sets its sights on lands west of the 100th Meridian in the United States, encompassing states like Texas, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and every state west thereof. It also includes provisions for international application. This geographical focus is significant as it targets a vast expanse of the country's agricultural and natural lands.

Key Points of the Legislation:

• Historically Forested Areas: Congress emphasizes that reforestation projects should prioritize areas that were historically forested but have since degraded or been impacted by wildfires, windstorms, or other natural events. This focus is articulated in Section 2.3 of the bill, steering clear of other natural habitats like grasslands.

• Carbon Storage in Forests and Rangelands: The bill recognizes the importance of forests and rangelands in storing carbon, as outlined in Section 2.4. This acknowledgment aligns with broader environmental goals of carbon sequestration.

• Vegetation for Carbon Sequestration: The legislation mandates the establishment of vegetation with a high capacity for carbon sequestration and storage. It also focuses on establishing wildlife habitats that are underrepresented in specific states. Notably, the bill allows for the use of non-native, non-invasive high-capacity carbon-sequestering vegetation.

• Tree Planting for Communities: A notable section of the bill, Section 105.a, details the establishment of tree planting initiatives within communities. The Secretary of Labor is tasked with developing career and education programs, particularly within the Job Corps program, focused on tree planting and maintenance.

• International Technical Assistance: The Secretary of Agriculture is granted the authority to evaluate requests from other countries for technical assistance in tree planting activities. This assistance is contingent upon the availability of Forest Service personnel and funding. Furthermore, the bill permits the sharing of personnel, knowledge, technical on-site instruction, and partnerships with NGOs that operate internationally. The aim is to restore vegetation and promote global carbon sequestration through revegetation efforts.

The implications of these legislative actions are far-reaching, impacting not only the American agricultural landscape but also extending globally through international partnerships and technical assistance programs. The focus on revegetation and carbon sequestration aligns with broader environmental initiatives but also raises questions about land use priorities, the introduction of non-native vegetation, and the overall impact on existing ecosystems and agricultural practices. As this legislation progresses, understanding its impacts on agriculture and natural habitats will be crucial for stakeholders across various sectors.

The Intricacies of Carbon Sequestration and Its Implications

The concept of carbon sequestration, as outlined in the proposed legislation, raises critical concerns about the control and management of carbon credits and their broader impact on the environment and society.

• Carbon Credits from National Forest Lands: Carbon credits, as per this legislation, will be generated from lands within the National Forest System. These credits are set to be managed by the National Forest Foundation, a 501(c)3 non-governmental organization (NGO), under the leadership of Rob Leary. This arrangement centralizes the control of carbon credits in the hands of a specific NGO, which could lead to concerns about transparency and equitable management.

• Assessment of Federal Lands for Revegetation: The Secretaries are tasked with evaluating the extent of federal lands needing revegetation. This includes areas affected by wildfires, windstorms, or other natural events, lands after regeneration harvests, and areas that could benefit from appropriate revegetation efforts (Section 102.b.1.A). This assessment is crucial in determining the scope and scale of the revegetation projects and their potential impact on carbon sequestration efforts.

• Collaboration with NGOs and Other Entities: The bill allows for collaboration with NGOs and other non-federal entities, including Indian Tribes, to assess opportunities for forest or rangeland restoration on non-federal lands. However, it explicitly states that this collaboration does not grant additional authority over or access to non-federal lands (Section 102.b.3), which is a vital clarification to ensure respect for property rights and tribal sovereignty.

• Long-Term Contracts for Tree and Seed Planting: The establishment of long-term contracts (up to 10 years) for tree and seed planting on federal lands is outlined in Section 104. This excludes public lands, land held in trust for Indian Tribes, and certain other designated areas. This section emphasizes the government's commitment to long-term environmental strategies.

• Retail Power Provider Tree Planting Grant Program: An innovative aspect of the bill is the Retail Power Provider Tree Planting Grant Program (Section 105.b), aimed at reducing residential energy consumption through tree planting. The prioritization of projects that offer the most significant potential reduction in energy consumption, along with a focus on equitable geographic representation, is noteworthy. The program also addresses economically distressed communities by allowing for a higher federal cost share in these areas.

The involvement of various regulatory bodies in this initiative indicates a comprehensive approach to integrating environmental conservation with energy policies. The legislation ties together multiple aspects of environmental management, from forest restoration to energy consumption reduction, and presents a multi-faceted strategy to address carbon sequestration.

In upcoming discussions, we will explore how these pieces fit together with existing regulations that impact our electrical grid and other critical sectors. It's essential to understand the broader context and implications of these legislative efforts, as they have the potential to significantly shape our environmental and energy policies in the years to come.

Tying It All Together: A Call to Action Against Degrowth Communism

As America Mission delves deeper into the implications of Natural Asset Companies (NACs) and the broader environmental and economic policies, it becomes increasingly clear that we stand at a crossroads. The concept of NACs, while presented under the guise of environmental conservation, represents a significant shift towards what can only be described as "degrowth communism" - a fundamentally un-American practice that threatens our economic freedom and natural resource management.

The World Economic Forum's (WEF) "New Nature Economy" report series in 2020 laid the groundwork for this shift, advocating for a reimagined economic model that prioritizes environmental considerations over traditional growth metrics. This report can be accessed [here]. Further supporting this agenda, President Biden's Executive Order in April 2022, "Executive Order on Strengthening the Nation’s Forests, Communities, and Local Economies," echoes the sentiments of S.2991, focusing on revegetation and conservation of Federal lands. The full text of the Executive Order is available [here].

The NAC framework and related environmental policies are more than mere conservation efforts; they represent a calculated move towards enforcing corporate compliance with woke, Marxist ideologies. The fall of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) corporate decisions has paved the way for this new strategy, urging corporations to invest in and sell carbon credits based on land ownership, both private and governmental. This shift not only undermines the principles of free enterprise but also poses a direct threat to public access to natural resources.

America Mission's Urgent Call to Action

America Mission strongly urges every citizen to stand against these policies. The stakes are high – if left unchecked, we risk seeing corporations across the country selling carbon credits, effectively privatizing natural resources that should be accessible to all. The real danger lies in the monopolization of these resources, leading to economic and environmental policies that benefit a select few at the expense of the many.

How You Can Make a Difference

1. Stay Informed: Keep abreast of developments related to NACs, carbon credit systems, and related environmental policies. Knowledge is power in the fight against degrowth communism.

2. Contact Your Representatives: Reach out to your congresspeople and voice your concerns about NACs and their potential impact on natural resource management and public access. Make it clear that preserving natural resources for public benefit is paramount.

3. Spread the Word: Share information about NACs and the associated risks with your community. Encourage others to join in the effort to oppose these policies.

4. Advocate for Transparency and Fairness: Demand that environmental policies are crafted transparently and fairly, serving the public interest and protecting our natural heritage.

The time to act is now. By engaging in this crucial issue and making our collective voices heard, we can help steer the course towards environmental policies that respect economic freedom, public access to natural resources, and the principles upon which our nation was founded. Let us stand together to ensure a future where environmental conservation and economic freedom coexist in harmony.