My concern was that once the new European Constitution was passed, the bird hunting that I saw over wide areas of Spain would eventually be eliminated by animal rights EU bureaucrats and politicians and the more powerful President in Brussels. I was also concerned that the beautiful Spanish double barrel shotguns I saw the hunters using would also soon become things of the past. I knew that it would only be a matter of time when the dog packs I saw trailered around in every manner of cage and trailer would first be “regulated” and then eliminated. How did I know this? Any warm-bodied American animal owner or natural resource user in the past three decades knows how I knew.

Thirty years ago we (the US) passed a new Constitution. No we didn’t call it that, people would have gotten upset, we said it was legislation to “save” our environment and “protect” animals. The laws were the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Wilderness Act and the Animal Welfare Act. Each of these laws effectively gave the President and his bureaucrats wide-ranging new powers formerly vested in state governments by the original Constitution. By simply passing laws, as opposed the “old” requirement to amend the Constitution or ratify a valid treaty, Congress and the President assumed broad new powers over ever expanding lists of plants and animals and the private and public properties on which they occur. This has led to all manner of abuse by the Federal government.

Today we accept the notion that Federal inspectors should license and inspect dog breeders. We accept the fact that Federal biologists can force wolves on vast areas where the local people don’t want them and are harmed by them. We accept the Federal regulation of speedboats and the suppression of harvests of polar bears, whales, and seals. We accept the fact that private property owners can be prohibited from all manner of use of their property without compensation and for frivolous purposes to boot.

We accept that the President should help to eliminate animal experiments, circuses, and even rodeos. We accept that it is unavoidable that rural communities should be eliminated to increase wilderness areas or to increase some innocuous plant or animal neither known to or used by the vast majority of the citizens of the country. We accept as inevitable that loggers, ranchers, big game hunters, trappers, and fishermen should be reduced and eliminated by government actions while trees, forage, fish, and wildlife are decreased by reduction of government resource management programs.

We accept increasing annual government land acquisition, increased government easements on private lands, and a massive government-supported acquisition and easement program by non-government “partners” like The Nature Conservancy that increases the already gargantuan Federal land ownership that is being used to implement hidden agendas to stop hunting, logging, ranching, farming, etc. We accept the closure of these public lands to traditional uses and the charging of entrance fees on lands bought with taxpayer money that are increasingly becoming fire hazards and left unmanaged for traditional and sustainable human uses.

We accept local jurisdictions, like Washington, DC totally banning any firearms possession and then agree that the “right to bear arms” is not being “infringed.” Indeed in this latter case, we even tolerate the Congress and others considering such a rogue dictatorship as the gun-banning DC government as worthy of more “home rule” over the most powerful city in America and one which should be a showcase of American values. Yes, this is what results when our central government grows in power and authority and state authorities diminish accordingly.

This is exactly what the most numerous and powerful EU nations, EU bureaucrats, and the same radical environmental sects and animal rights cults want to mimic in Europe. Just like in the US when a more powerful President gets in office, the radicals will bribe him to place their people in key slots as was done in Washington in the 90’s. They will make Spain gun and hunting-free like Britain, they will regulate dog breeding and ownership like Germany, and as those countries further advance radical environmental and animal rights agendas, smaller countries like Spain will be forced to comply.

Look at New York, Illinois, New Jersey and California. Compare their radical environmental and animal rights philosophies, and their gun laws to those they force their views on like Missouri, Montana, Arizona, and Nebraska. The smaller and more rural communities, be they states or nations, are increasingly abused by their more densely-populated and “progressive” neighbor, given the opportunity. And increased US Federal power, like increased European central governing power, is a historically proven recipe for abuse and ultimately disaster.

The funny thing, and the lesson to be learned, is that some of those European countries “get it” and are willing to fight for their national identity and their citizens rights. This morning papers’ front page reports the collapse of the European Summit to adopt a new Constitution. The resistance was led by Spain and Portugal. The big guys (France, Germany, Britain, and Italy [Belgium too but only because they will be the “capital]) are in a snit and say they will fast-track their own “new Constitution.” Shades of the Red/Blue map after the last election. The big, urban centers are huffy because those amusing, rural bumpkins won’t submit to “progressive” ideas and leadership.

It is worth asking ourselves why older European nations without guaranteed rights like us, in more socialist societies, and where many American freedoms are unknown will stand up to those who would bully them into being told what they can and cannot do. Did any state stand up to the creation and expansion of Federal “Endangered Species” or Marine Mammal jurisdiction over species occurring in state jurisdictions? Does any state oppose the current attempt to give Federal authority over very “non-native (i.e. Invasive) plant and animal in the nation? Does any state tell the Federal government to but out of dog regulation or animal experiment regulation? Do you hear any state tell the Federal government that just because the Federal government buys a piece of land in a state for anything other than national defense, that it has no more right to turn it into a fire hazard or to disregard state laws than any other owner? Is any state telling the Federal government to stop trying to regulate cockfighting or trapping because the state does that just fine for the residents of their own state? Are any states doing more than rolling over for the forced introduction of wolves or the increased wilderness and roadless areas that put more of the state out of contact each year?

Well the Spaniards get it. They may still get roped into some EU hegemony but it may not have the power to take away Spanish traditions because Spain stood up for itself. Spain worked with others like Portugal and made it clear that their birthright was not for sale.

You see, they know what the Founding Fathers knew. They know why the US Constitution gave the states day-to-day authority over citizens while limiting the Federal government to defense and interstate matters. They know that the more remote the central and all-inclusive ruling power, the less say anyone has about abuses or mandates. They know that a corrupt or abusive Spanish government is much more amenable to reform than some remote President and bureaucrats in Brussels. They know that the big guys will eventually make their lives less rewarding and enjoyable as German customs are eventually forced on Spaniards. They know that their traditions are worth fighting for.

Today in the US the states go along with Federal power expansion as long as they get some grant funds. They go along with New Yorkers, Chicagoans, and San Franciscans that may elect the next President who may just do away with private property or pet ownership because he will appoint two Supreme Court justices. They go along because they don’t want to jeopardize highway funds or education funds. They go along because Federal land purchases or Conservation easements will bring money into the state and elections are coming up. None of that idealistic, Spanish, principled stuff for us. The bulwark for our freedoms, state rights, are eroding all around us and some small European nations can stand up to more powerful neighbors to preserve their rights in a European Union that they still support. There is a lesson here for those who will consider it.

14 December 2003

This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewforum.php?f=91