The concept of becoming a "citizen of the world" may be gaining popularity with some Americans, but the United States' persistent resistance to any sort of world government has, so far, prevented the official formation of such a legislative body.

However, that hasn't stopped groups such as the World Federation Association or the World Citizen Foundation from trying to convince people -- especially Americans -- that the concept of global governance, through a "reformed" United Nations, is preferable to individual state sovereignty.

The goal of these organizations is nothing short of establishing a "democratic world federation limited to achieving positive global goals that nations cannot accomplish alone."

But the term "federation" is not used to imply a stipulation that countries will retain separate but equal power, as in the U.S. system where powers are delineated between federal, state and local governments elected by the people. The World Federation Association's mission seeks to negate the "old order" of separate nation-states and replace governments with a centralized system using the United Nations.

Among the WFA's stated goals:

• To work toward an effective democratically elected federal system of global governance with an equitable voting structure (not one-nation, one-vote) and authority over individuals as well as nations, that would have adequate power exercised under the rule of law to deal with global problems.

• To convince the people and leaders of the United States that reforming the United Nations and other institutions of global governance along federalist lines would enable them to provide justice and common security for individuals and communities, freeing humanity from the threat of war to give its full attention to promoting sustainable development, protecting human rights and diversity, preserving a healthful environment, and providing equal and expanded opportunities for all.

• To explain the benefits that would be realized by full American participation in, and support of, the United Nations system and of how these benefits would be increased if the United Nations were made more effective.

The WFA also supports moving "the world community beyond current norms of international law to a system of world law that applies to individuals as well as nation-states." And WFA literature says, "we believe that every person is a world citizen and has obligations to the world community," and that elements of peace, security, and a sustainable economy and environment are also "fundamental human rights."

There is, however, no direct mention of religious principles -- only that the WFA acknowledges and supports the "diversity" and ethnic, cultural differences between people.

The WFA, like most globalist organizations, blames the U.S. for the current lack of what it calls "adequate levels of funding" for the UN. Each group states unequivocally that the U.S. is the U.N.'s largest debtor nation, but fails to mention other critical elements endemic to U.S. participation in the U.N. -- such as peacekeeping.

However, figures from the National Defense University show that between February 1992 and October 1994 the cost of U.S. participation in U.N.-mandated peacekeeping operations topped $6.6 billion -- only a fifth of which was factored into dues already assessed the U.S. In fact, the United States is the U.N.'s largest contributor in direct funding and ancillary support (such as food, medical and military supplies), and in some cases contributes more than its share.

Furthermore, the World Citizen Foundation's figures show that in 1994, U.S. troops serving in U.N. peacekeeping operations numbered only 964, but that chart does not include U.S. forces deployed under U.N. auspices in Bosnia, nor does it take into account the 38,000 U.S. troops regularly deployed under the U.N. flag in South Korea.

The vision to move America toward a global form of government is deeply rooted in many American leaders, including President Bill Clinton.

Others, such as U.S. Rep. Helen Chenoweth, R-ID, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms, R-SC, Sen. John Ashcroft, R-MO, and former Secretary of State Jeanne Kirkpatrick have spoken out against surrendering U.S. sovereignty to any global government.