NRA Board Members Puzzling Over CARA

Sierra Times ^ | 09.05.01 | John G. Lankford

[Movemout]

Based on early indications, most members of the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association may have been left unprepared for a building controversy over the organization's support of CARA.

CARA is the Conservation and Reinvestment Act, HR 701 and now S 1326, poised for a Congressional vote.

If passed, the Act would divert $3.125 billion per year, for 15 years, from the federal general revenue pool to a special fund set aside for public conservation and recreation purposes.

A great deal of the money would be devoted to land acquisitions by federal and state governments. Hundreds of millions of dollars would flow from that fund to one traditionally used to provide public hunting and shooting facilities and game conservation. Stating that as its reason, NRA's legislative staff supports the CARA proposition.

CARA's author is Rep. Don Young (R AK). Young is also a member of the NRA Board.

But over the Labor Day weekend, many NRA Board members expressed bewilderment over CARA's provisions, and even greater dismay at finding themselves assailed over NRA's support of it.

"What an uproar!" Board member Mike Baker told another member. Baker indicated the cursory research his schedule permitted so far "has produced mostly confusion and contradictions.

"There is no way to know how to answer all these people attacking NRA until more is learned about CARA," Baker added.

Beleaguered member Dr. David Oliver agreed. "I know of several Board members whose brains are now on circuit overload (very definitely mine), and we may not be able to sort this all out until next week," he wrote correspondents Tuesday.

Earlier, Oliver sent a stiff response to columnist Diane Alden, who in a scathing article titled "NRA, CARA, and the Cafe' Constitution" excoriated NRA for its support of CARA, and for the tone of a response to dissenters posted on NRA's legislative action website by Director James J. Baker.

In the reply, addressed to fellow board members with a copy to Alden, Oliver concluded by writing, " If CARA is like Ms. Alden says, then I suspect that I will be solidly against it."

Board member Jay Printz agreed, writing Oliver, "Just from a quick perusal, it appears there may be something to the concern."

CARA is vehemently opposed by property rights organizations, whose advocates maintain its provisions, coupled with official overzealousness in bringing about acquisition of lands, presents an escalation in dire threats to private property owners. Stewards of the Range lawyer Fred Kelly Grant has prepared a specific critique of CARA, and Paragon Foundation's Jay Zane Walley and other CARA opponents want NRA to consider it.

"I would like to hear what Fred Kelly Grant says," Oliver told Sierra Times. "I guess that I will hear Rep. Don Young's side of it, since I am going to the Hunting & Wildlife Conservation Committee meeting. We have two days of Board meetings, after the committee meetings are over, and it should be discussed there."

By Tuesday evening, Oliver was unable to respond whether Grant would receive an invitation to address the Board members, or whether any would oppose CARA or demand it be re-examined. He described the Board as "a bunch of men and women, at least some of who don't know much about what is going on."

Young authored CARA and has publicly sponsored it since 1999. Reporters and Tom Childs, an NRA member actively opposing CARA, have been unable to elicit comments from prominent Association figures President Charlton Heston, Executive Vice-President Wayne LaPierre, Jr., Board member Oliver North, Jr., or past NRA prominence and stalwart supporter Neal Knox despite messages sent them all. Childs published a public call for North's response on AldenChronicles.com and KeepAndBearArms.com.

The bewilderment besetting at least some Board members early this week indicated some of the usually visible NRA spokesmen may not be reticent, but rather unincluded in the NRA's CARA briefing loop.

Tuesday afternoon, Oliver told another Board member, "I think that if (two Board members identified by first names only) don't know anything about it, it is safe to say that CARA has never been brought up before the BOD (Board of Directors)".

[Movemout]

I guess all our phone calls and e-mails have had an effect. Way to go FReepers!

[xm177e2]

"Hey, I've got an idea! Let's read things BEFORE we endorse them!!"

[Movemout]

That would be a novel approach.

[Anthem]

G.O.A.

[backhoe]

"Hey, I've got an idea! Let's read things BEFORE we endorse them!!"

Great idea! Now if only we could get our "representatives" to do the same with the stupid laws & regulations they inflict on us in flyover country!

[Joe Brower]

I just yesterday received a solicitation from the NRA-PVF. Today, I have mailed it back, sans check, with a hard copy of this article off of the SierraTimes website, along with the following note:

Folks,

I am withholding all further donations to the NRA, NRA-ILA, and NRA-PVF until the NRA officially withdraws it's support of CARA.

Sincerely,

Joe Brower

... ...

[Gadsden1st]

Just received mine also and is going back today with similar reply. Great opportunity to reply. Mine is going to:

National Rifle Association of America
Membership Processing Center
PO Box 421057
Palm Coast, FL 32142-1057

[Ben Ficklin]

Here are the way things are now. Your/My state agency dealing with fish, game, parks, wildlife, etc. are funded primarily by revenue from the sales of licenses, stamps, permits, etc as well as Pittman-Robertson excise tax and the other excise tax dealing with fishing(can't recall name). Your/my state agency must also spend part of that money to deal with ESA and related issues. It is an unfunded mandate. So hunters and fishermen are being required to carry a disproportinate share of the cost of ESA.

Many object to CARA Title 3 @ $350 million/year for fear that the enviro/animal rights groups will benefit from this money. Many hunters/fishers look at as even if the entire 350 mil goes that direction, it still frees up their money to be used for its intended purpose.

[brityank]

Here's a letter that succinctly lays it all out.
Letter to the NRA from Life Member James R. Mills.

[Movemout]

You're right it is a good letter. I thought about posting it as a seperate thread when I read it earlier this morning but I didn't. I'm grateful that you saw fit to provide a link.

[Movemout]

Good idea Joe! I called them up once and even drove down to their HQs but got the runaround. The next ILA alert I get is going back to them in the manner you have suggested. I am absolutely happy that the board is paying attention, finally. This is no time to ease up on the guys who purport to represent gun owners.

[brityank]

Here's the info I've gleaned from the September Issue of American Rifleman:

National Rifle Association
11250 Waples Mill Road,
Fairfax, VA. 22030-9400
Main Phone: (703)267-1000
Membership Info: (877)672-2000
Internet: N.R.A.

NRA/ILA
Grassroots: (800)392-8683
ILA Fax: (703)267-3918
Internet: NRA/ILA

I suspect that Fax can also access the NRA directly; I did not find a separate one.

[dixiechick2000]

Well, thank God these guys have finally started to come to their senses. Maybe now they will actually read the documents before endorsing them.

Thanks for posting this. BTTT!

[NMC EXP]

Another great post. This NRA support for the CARA federal land grab was pointed out in the last issue of the New American (John Birch Society). Come to your own conclusion....as usual, either the NRA (1) has it's collective administrative head up it's collective fourth point of contact, or (2) the NRA no longer supports the Constitution and BOR. You be the judge.

Regards

J.R.

[Movemout]

Hopefully neither one nor two will prevent them from doing the right thing. CARA is a clear and present danger to all of us. I think they will get on the correct side of the issue sooner than later.

[AuntB]

What a novel idea! The NRA is just following congress's lead....I bet 10% of 'em don't read a bill before they vote. I'll never forget Phil Crane and Marcy Kaptur on Larry King the day before NAFTA was passed. She was reading a scary passage and Crane says, "What is that you are reading???!!. She said, "Phil, this is what we are voting on tomorrow" I'm no Kaptur fan, but she was right about NAFTA and Crane didn't have a CLUE.

[NMC EXP]

re: your #15

An ardent NRA supporter, I presume. I gave up on that outfit several years ago. NRA is compromising our ass down the flusher. To the current NRA, the fight means more than victory. Join the GOA, or JPFO, or another really rabid group. The NRA is a d*ickless worm when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.....the NRA philosophy is to compromise. That philosophy has left us with damn near nothing. The 2nd is a hollow shell.

Regards

J.R.

[Movemout]

I also belong to the GOA. The NRA has earned a certain amount of criticism for the way they go about things but it isn't as though we have a plethora of organizations that are on our side. I will suppot NRA for the nonce and try to influence them as I can with one vote. GOA is a bit more focused and I like their style.

[backhoe]

Ndex...