Posted on 06/17/2010 11:14:52 AM PDT by Dan Nunn
We appreciate some NRA members' concerns about our position on H.R. 5175, the "DISCLOSE Act." Unfortunately, critics of our position have misstated or misunderstood the facts.
We have never said we would support any version of this bill. To the contrary, we clearly stated NRA's strong opposition to the DISCLOSE Act (as introduced) in a letter sent to Members of Congress on May 26 (click here to read the letter).
Through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has consistently and strongly opposed any effort to restrict the rights of our four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide. The initial version of H.R. 5175 would effectively have put a gag order on the NRA during elections and threatened our members' freedom of association, by forcing us to turn our donor lists over to the federal government. We would also have been forced to list our top donors on all election-related television, radio and Internet ads and mailings—even mailings to our own members. We refuse to let this Congress impose those unconstitutional restrictions on our Association.
The NRA provides critical firearms training for our Armed Forces and law enforcement throughout the country. This bill would force us to choose between training our men and women in uniform and exercising our right to free political speech. We refuse to let this Congress force us to make that choice.
We didn't "sell out" to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate. If that commitment is not fully honored, we will strongly oppose the bill.
Our position is based on principle and experience. During consideration of the previous campaign finance legislation passed in 2002, congressional leadership repeatedly refused to exempt the NRA from its provisions, promising that our concerns would be fixed somewhere down the line. That didn't happen; instead, the NRA had to live under those restrictions for seven years and spend millions of dollars on compliance costs and on legal fees to challenge the law. We will not go down that road again when we have an opportunity to protect our ability to speak.
There are those who say the NRA has a greater duty to principle than to gun rights. It's easy to say we should put the Second Amendment at risk over some so-called First Amendment principle – unless you have a sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment above all else, as we do.
The NRA is a bipartisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That's their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. And that we do without apology.
How much does it cost to maintain the position that the bill is unconstitutional rather than remaining silent and hiding in the shadows?
How much is it going to cost in dropped membership and loss of respect?
I'll tell you how much it's going to cost: EVERYTHING!!
I'm equally concerned with the politics that got us the AWB in the first place.
I actually I think the reason we didn't get a new AWB is due to the MILLIONS of weapons and the BILLION rounds of ammunition that has been bought and stored since the Obamanation and his leftist minions took office.
“Found it. My apologies”
No problem...Sorry I’m so bent...but I have a long memory...and if Democrats had the power to get away with banning all guns they would do it in a new york minute.
What’s at play here is the democrats are sly...they can see pro-gun laws passed all around the country at the state level and can see hand writting on the wall...if they dont say the right things and stand aside once and a while they will loss power...
No one can quote scripture quite as good as the devil...doesnt mean he really supports it...
If you want your 2nd Amendment rights protected, you need to support the NRA, period. There is really nothing to think about here, it’s a no brainer.
I hear you. At first I was bugged by this sellout, but the more I reflect on it the more I can see their point.
When they came for the SAS, I didn't stand up because I belong to the NRA.
When they came for the JPFO, I didn't stand up because I belong to the NRA.
You get the idea.
And when they came for the NRA?
So, a life long gun backer is out. But you will back a Republican who will lie to ya...
I won’t be voting for Strickland for a host of reasons. His stance on firearms is not one of them.
They endorsed Harry Reid also.
Yea, they'll be the only ones on the block and even though the second Amendment will eventually be whittled away as well, the NRA can drag it out until the old hands can retire. The members will still be able to get in a lot of shooting before the government takes their guns. Let's just the kids and grand kids worry about it... But in reality, we won't have to wait that long...
So, a life long gun backer is out. But you will back a Republican who will lie to ya...
I won’t be voting for Strickland for a host of reasons. His stance on firearms is not one of them.”
Then what differnce does it make what his stand on firearms is...you already said you wouldnt vote for him...
But the NRA endorsment WILL sway some gun owners..
I wont be voting for ANY democrat for ANY reason EVER...I dont care if they deliver an AR-15 to my front door.
Just becuase democrats are in craven fear of gun owners and are lying low in the grass is no reason to endorse them...
That’s like praising a career robber because he didnt rob today...
Or praising Stupak as a pro-life dem.
when they chips are down...they are still democrats.
Yup..and Jerry Brown.
ATTENTION PATRIOTS . . . below is a URGENT ACTION ALERT from the National Tea Party . . . PLEASE make calls if you can TODAY!
Having trouble viewing this email? Click here
You’re receiving this email because of your relationship with Tea Party Patriots.
You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails.
DISCLOSE ACT - WE MUST DEFEAT THIS BILL
Dear Fellow Tea Party Patriots,
We have received information from Capitol Hill regarding the “Disclose Act” and we must work to defeat this bill. The vote is expected to take place tonight or tomorrow.
On April 29, 2010, Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) introduced H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act. The bill is a direct response to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (McCain- Feingold) - a First Amendment victory in which the Supreme Court overturned the prohibition on corporations and unions using treasury funds for independent expenditures supporting or opposing political candidates at any time of the year. Simply put, the DISCLOSE Act will limit the political speech that was protected and encouraged by Citizens United.
Speaker Pelosi and the House Majority Leadership are making it a priority to pass this bill. This bill is designed to take away the influence of Tea Party and other conservative groups in the upcoming November election. We feel like this bill will be successfully challenged in the courts, but the ruling will not come before the November election.
An exemption has been carved out for the Labor Unions and other leftist advocacy groups. The NRA was also exempted so they would not oppose it.
Roll Call Magazine reports today that they have carved out even deeper exemptions in order to assure passage and we believe it clearly shows the intent of the bill is to diminish the effectiveness of Tea Party groups and other newer conservative advocacy groups.
“Facing wide-ranging blowback from an exemption tailored for the National Rifle Association, House Democratic leaders have decided to expand the carve-out from disclosure requirements in a campaign finance measure they are trying to pass this week.
The new standard lowers the membership requirement for outside groups from 1 million members to 500,000. Those groups would still need to have members in 50 states, have existed for 10 years and can accept no more than 15 percent of their funding from corporate or union sources. The broader bill, called the DISCLOSE Act, comes in response to the controversial Supreme Court decision in January that struck down limits on corporate and union spending in elections. The bill would force groups participating in elections to name their top donors, among other changes.”
We need you to make phone calls, send emails and faxes and urge the Congressmen listed below to vote no on this bill. If you are a NRA member, we urge that you email the NRA and ask them to oppose this bill.
Together, we can make a difference!
NRA - CCox@NRAHQ.org and KeeneD@CarmenGroup.com
Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Administration 202-225-2801 202-225-5823
Rep. Baron Hill (IN-09), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Policy 202-225-5315 202-226-6866
Rep. Jim Matheson (UT-02), Blue Dog Co-Chair for Communications 202-225-3011 (202) 225-5638
Altmire, Jason (PA-04) 202-225-2565 202-226-2274
Baca, Joe (CA-43) 202-225-6161 202-225-8671
Barrow, John (GA-12) 202-225-2823 202-225-3377
Berry, Marion (AR-01) 202-225-4076 202-225-5602
Bishop, Sanford (GA-02) 202-225-3631 202-225-2203
Boren, Dan (OK-02) 202-225-2701 202-225-3038
Boyd, Allen (FL-02) 202-225-5235 202-225-5615
Bright, Bobby (AL-02) 202-225-2901 202-225-8913
Cardoza, Dennis (CA-18) 202-225-6131
Carney, Christopher (PA-10) 202-225-3731
Childers, Travis (MS-01) 202-225-4306 202-225-3549
Cooper, Jim (TN-05) 202-225-4311 202-226-1035
Costa, Jim (CA-20) 202-225-3341 202-225-9308
Cuellar, Henry (TX-28) 202-225-1640 202-225-1641
Dahlkemper, Kathy (PA-03) 202-225-5406 202-225-3103
Davis, Lincoln (TN-04) 202-225-6831 202-226-5172
Donnelly, Joe (IN-02) 202-225-3915 202-225-6798
Gordon, Bart (TN-06) (202) 225-4231
Holden, Tim (PA-17) (202) 225-5546 (202) 226-0996
Kratovil, Jr., Frank (MD-01) (202) 225-5311 (202) 225-0254
McIntyre, Mike (NC-07) (202) 225-2731 (202) 225-5773
Markey, Betsy (CO-04) 202.225.4676 202-225-5870
Marshall, Jim (GA-08) 202-225-6531 202-225-3013
Matheson, Jim (UT-02) (202) 225-3011 (202) 225-5638
Melancon, Charlie (LA-03) (202) 225-4031 (202) 226-3944
Michaud, Mike (ME-02) 202-225-6306 202-225-2943
Minnick, Walt (ID-01) (202) 225-6611 202) 225-3029
Mitchell, Harry (AZ-05) (202) 225-2190 N/A
Moore, Dennis (KS-03) (202) 225-2865 (202) 225-2807
Murphy, Scott (NY-20) (202) 225-5614 (202) 225-1168
Nye, Glenn (VA-02) (202) 225-4215 202) 225-4218
Peterson, Collin (MN-07) (202) 225-2165 202) 225-1593
Salazar, John (CO-03) 202-225-4761 202-226-9669
Scott, David (GA-13) (202) 225-2939 202) 225-4628
Space, Zack (OH-18) (202) 225-6265 (202) 225-3394
Tanner, John (TN-08) (202) 225-4714 (202) 225-1765
Taylor, Gene (MS-04) 202-225-5772 202.225.7074
_______________________________________________________________
You are the heart and soul of the Tea Party Movement. Thank you for promoting the causes of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets with us!
Your Tea Party Patriots National Coordinator Team,
Debbie Dooley, Mike Gaske, Rob Gaudet, Jenny Beth Martin, Mark Meckler, Sally Oljar, Diana Reimer, and Dawn Wildman
Tea Party Patriots Support Email: support@teapartypatriots.org
Tea Party Patriots Support Phone: 404-593-0877
Jenny Beth Martin (jennybethm@gmail.com, @jenuinejen)
Dawn Wildman (dmwlaw1@cox.net)
Mark Meckler (mark@teapartypatriots.org)
Debbie Dooley (debbie0040@yahoo.com)
Diana Reimer (philatppatriots@gmail.com)
Tea Party Patriots, Inc. operates as a social welfare organization organized under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code (status pending). Contributions to Tea Party Patriots, Inc. are not deductible as charitable contributions for income tax purposes.
So, What is Next on Deck?
Quick Links
Tea Party Patriots
Tea Party Patriots 1st Brigade - Join Today!
Tea Party Patriots on Nationalized Health Care
Tea Party Patriots Social Networking Site
Tea Party Patriots Facebook Fan Page
Tea Party Patriots Store
TeaPartyPatriots. TV
Tea Party Patriots Hot Tea Radio
(M, W, F 4:00 pm eastern)
Donate
Tea Party Patriots
1025 Rose Crk 620-322
Woodstock, GA 30189
Forward email
This email was sent to brownbd@charter.net by support@teapartypatriots.org.
Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.
Email Marketing by
Tea Party Patriots | 1025 Rose Creek Dr | Ste 620-322 | Woodstock | GA | 30189
Check the Facts:
1. Ted Strickland: 2006 A, 2004 A, 2002 A, 2000 A+, 1998 A, 1996 A, 1994 A+, 1992 A.
2. National Rifle Association, 1994.
3. John Kasich: 1998 B+, 1996 C+, 1994 F, 1992 B, 1986 A, 1984 A+.
There was no longer any reason not to admit they were working for the left all along? (just kidding, belay the flaming)
SCENARIO # 1
CONGRESS--"We are going to pass a bill that limits free speech."
NRA--"We can't support that."
CONGRESS--"If we give you an exemption, will you be OK with it?"
NRA--"That will work."
CONGRESS--"You got it."
Now imagine there is a single-issue organization called Free Speech America.
SCENARIO # 2
CONGRESS--"We are going to pass a bill that limits gun rights."
Free Speech America--"We can't support that."
CONGRESS--"If we give you an exemption, will you be OK with it?"
Free Speech America--"That will work."
CONGRESS--"You got it."
________________________________________________
In scenario one, the NRA said to heck with the free speech rights of others, so long as they got theirs.
In scenario two, Free Speech America said to heck with the gun rights of others, so long as they got theirs.
I understand the goal of a single-issue organization (I am an NRA member), but tunnel vision is sometimes short-sighted.
Just throwing this out there for discussion. My two cents.
If Mr. LaPierre doesn't issue a message against this law the Supreme Court has already struck down before the vote tonight or tomorrow then I'm not leaving the NRA, the NRA has left me.
You can't serve two masters...
LaPierre, is that French???
They've sold us out!
You remind me of Ben Nelson. He gets some trinkets for Nebraska while he sells out America by supporting an otherwise lousy piece of legislation, and he can’t figure out why the entire country - including Nebraska - is POd at him. “What is it that I get, that the other 310 million people in America don’t get?” he asks himself.
NRA = Ben Nelson.
Here is what The Federalist had to say about this:
"The DISCLOSE Act, a campaign finance bill meant partially to reverse the outcome of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, came one step closer to passing this week. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) made a deal with the National Rifle Association that would exempt the organization from disclosure rules in the bill. The NRA's reasoning for this back room deal is that it exists to protect Second Amendment rights and will fight to keep its donors' information private. They aren't offering support for any version of the bill, but by backing out of the way, they are handing the keys to passage to Democrats and their union allies, who oppose everything the NRA stands for. Despite the NRA's Faustian bargain, Republicans remain opposed and Democrats were forced to cancel a Friday vote as they struggled to unify their own caucus."
Personally, I'm still trying to separate the truth from the lies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.