Our Facebook Page (1,410 fans)
@amconparty (1,388 followers)
1900 Campus Commons Dr., Suite 100
Reston, VA 20191
527 or PAC (e.g. groups primarily created to influence election of candidates for public office)
Don’t see your organization on POPVOX? Any U.S. nonprofit organization or community group can get listed.
Mission: Formed in Feb. 2008, members of the ACP are "tireless advocates for limited government" at the federal, state, and local levels.
The American Conservative Party stands opposed to the bipartisan "statement of principles" from a group of senators, which gives illegal immigrants a clear path to citizenship. While we understand there is a need to address the issue of 11 million illegal aliens already in our country, the first step in any reform starts with securing our border and enforcing existing immigration laws. Any actions other than these first steps is just more smoke and mirrors by politicians hoping to gain political security at the expense of national security.
Though the latter three bulletpoints sound great, the first one kills any possibility of true reform because it doesn't establish criteria for what "secure borders" actually mean. Further, the other three points can be accomplished without creating a new powerful magnet for illegal immigration.
Americans cannot afford an additional 11 million dependents when we can't afford the existing entitlement system we have now.
This is nothing short of an assault on limited government and core checks and balances on the Executive Branch. This is a bill which should never see the light of day and is not a productive use of Congress' time.
The ACP seeks to promote and defend property rights and economic freedom over central planning and collective control of resources.
Since original iteration of the "Clean Water Act" in 1972, there is a long train of abuses by the Federal Government (and the EPA in particular) in the way in which it has expanded its reach beyond "navigable waters" to include...well, anything it wants.
One could argue soundly that the Federal Government does not have the authority Constitutionally to regulate water quality in any way that doesn't definitively affect interstate commerce, but it certainly can't do it without being consistent about what kinds of bodies of water it can regulate.
State regulatory agencies are more than capable of handling the job of managing isolated pollution regulation in their respective waterways, and the burden of proof on what constitutes a body of water worthy of Federal intervention lies with the Federal Government, and not with the property owner.
We support the clarification of what types of waterways the EPA (and other agencies, such as the Army Corps of Engineers) can rationally consider under its purview, and thus support S.890.