Gun Control Group Calls For Ethics Inquiry Into Gun Bill

CNSNews.com ^ | March 10, 2004 | Melanie Hunter

[kimber]

A gun control group is calling for a House Ethics inquiry into National Rifle Association board members who co-sponsored a bill to give NRA civil immunity.

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence delivered a letter to the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, accusing House members Don Young (R-Alaska) and Barbara Cubin (R-W.V.) of using their legislative powers to further the financial interests of the NRA, which they serve as members of the board.

"As members of the House of Representatives, Representatives Cubin and Young are each under an affirmative obligation to avoid conflicts or appearances of conflicts due to their NRA position," the letter states.

"They have done precisely the opposite of what the ethics rules require. Wearing their NRA Directors' hats, they have co-sponsored the NRA's 'top legislative priority' and voted for the bill." The letter is signed by Michael Barnes, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence united with the Million Mom March.

According to House ethics rules, members are prohibited from using their legislative powers to further the financial interests of organizations with which they are affiliated.

"General ethical standards and rules restrict the ability of both Members and employees to engage in undertakings inconsistent with congressional responsibilities," the House Ethics Manual states.

"Even the appearance of a conflict may adversely affect public perceptions and confidence. No special advantage should be provided to an outside organization with which a Member is affiliated," the manual states.

The Brady Campaign's letter pointed to a conflict of interest stemming from Young's and Cubin's active support of H.R. 1036, which gives broad immunity to gun manufacturers, dealers and trade associations from civil litigation. The NRA, as a "trade association," would benefit from the measure.

Cubin received notoriety during the debate on H.R. 1036 when she said, "One amendment today said we could not sell guns to anybody under drug treatment. So, does that mean if you go into a black community, you cannot sell a gun to any black person...?" She apologized later.

Last week, the Brady Campaign pointed out a similar conflict of interest in a complaint filed with the Senate Ethics Committee against Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), the floor leader for a similar measure in the Senate.

[Puppage]

Cubin and Young are each under an affirmative obligation to avoid conflicts or appearances of conflicts due to their NRA position

Their NRA position is pro 2nd Amendment. Do we take this further & say they can't speak freely on anything because of their position on the 1st Amendment?

Are these not one in the same?

BEHOLD! The mind of the defenseless

[Eric in the Ozarks]

This is a reach.

[Joe Brower]

Boy o boy, what will these devious Marxists think of next?

[joesnuffy]

Everytime in those areas where gun control nuts have established anti gun laws and an unarmed woman or child is raped beaten or murdered...they should be allowed to sue the Brady Bunch....
And every govt offical or politican who helped bring such insanity on the victims

[Puppage]

EVERYTHING, the anti-gun left tries to do is a reach. Facts mean nothing when there's feelings involved.

[Wonder Warthog]

"The Brady Campaign's letter pointed to a conflict of interest stemming from Young's and Cubin's active support of H.R. 1036, which gives broad immunity to gun manufacturers, dealers and trade associations from civil litigation. The NRA, as a "trade association," would benefit from the measure."

Firstly, the NRA is not a "trade association", it is a civil rights and safety organization. Secondly, how about the "conflict of interest" on the part of "Lousy" Lautenberg, "Turkey" Teddy Kennedy, "Upchuck" Schumer, and others who act as shills for the "Brady bunch" of knee-jerk anti-gunners.

Cheez---GIVE ME A BREAK!!!! These people had NO SHAME.

[NRA2BFree]

These people are dead serious about disarming us. We've got to stop them. It's obvious that bunch of jack*sses in Congress aren't going to do anything.

[Dan from Michigan]

What about Dianne Feinswine and being a board member of CEASEFIRE?

[Prime Choice]

If they want the NRA held civilly liable, when can we push to have the ACLU held civilly liable for their actions? Hmmmmm?

[Sender]

Don't you guys know that ethics laws only apply to Republicans?

[templar]

Anybody got a legally accurate definition of 'trade organization' and how the NRA (a member organization representing the political and sporting interests of its members, not representing the gun trade) would meet that definition?

[harpseal]

Now under the same rules Feinstien, Schummer, McCarthy, Clinton and many other Democrats would be subject to the same kind of ethics complaint regarding Brady's organization.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Following Brady's tortured logic, a legislator would be banned from voting on education legislation if he or she had children at home who might benefit directly.

[NRA2BFree]

Ping!

[School of Rational Thought]

Doesn't the Brady Campaign and Million Moms financially benefit from contributions based on the increased violence generated from pursuing their policies?