• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

NRA cuts a deal with Democrats over free speech/campaign finances

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
I am a member of the GOA and the NRA and generally I side with the NRA on most issues but this time it seems like the GOA is taking the 'high road' and the NRA is making a big mistake.
House Democrats Close to Reinstituting Penalties for Criticizing Congress
-- Help GOA get other pro-gun groups on board in this fight


Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org



Tuesday, June 15, 2010

We alerted you last week to the very dangerous DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175), where liberal House Democrats are trying to gag their political opponents.

Well, there have been some late-breaking developments in the fight to kill this bill, but you're not going to believe what's happening. This is what Politico.com reported yesterday:
House Democrats have offered to exempt the National Rifle Association from a sweeping campaign-finance bill, removing a major obstacle in the push to roll back the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.

The NRA had objected to some of the strict financial disclosure provisions that Democrats have proposed for corporations and politically active nonprofits and that had kept moderate, pro-gun Democrats from backing the legislation.​
But if the NRA signs off on the deal, the bill could come to the House floor as early as this week. The NRA said it would not comment until specific legislative language is revealed. An NRA official also noted that the group would not be supporting the bill but would not actively oppose it if the deal with the Democratic leadership holds up.

So if the NRA gets an exemption for itself, it will not oppose the anti-freedom DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175). This legislation is designed to overturn major parts of the recent Supreme Court decision which restored the ability of groups like GOA to freely criticize elected officials during a campaign.

But the NRA would no longer oppose the bill once they've won an exemption for themselves. As reported by Politico.com:
The legislation in question is designed to restore more campaign finance rules in the wake of last year's Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, which removed prohibitions on corporations and unions running TV ads opposing or backing candidates in the run-up to an election.​
Democratic leaders fear the Citizens United decision could open the floodgates for corporate money to flow into this year's midterm elections, which they believe would favor Republican interests.

The legislation, offered by Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, would require special-interest groups to disclose their top donors if they choose to run TV ads or send out mass mailings in the final months of an election.
In addition to benefiting the NRA, this "exemption" amendment will benefit Blue Dog Democrats who will be given a green light to support the Obama-Pelosi backed bill:
Democrats are justifying the NRA exemption, saying the organization has a long history of being involved in the political process, and they say the real goal of the new campaign finance bill is to expose corporations and unions that create ambiguous front groups to run attack ads during campaigns. Unions would not be allowed to use the NRA exemption.
North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler, an NRA backer and conservative Democrat, proved to be pivotal to the NRA deal. Shuler was the first to offer an amendment to exempt the NRA and other nonprofits from the legislation, but that move drew objections from campaign watchdog groups.​
"There were a number of concerns that the DISCLOSE Act could hinder or penalize the efforts of certain long-standing, member-driven organizations who have historically acted in good faith," Shuler said, referring to the NRA. "Most of those concerns are addressed within the manager's amendment."

But here's the rub, the special exemption amendment will ONLY benefit the NRA and no other groups whatsoever. It will leave all other groups who are currently in Obama's crosshairs dangling in the wind:
The proposal would exempt organizations that have more than 1 million members, have been in existence for more than 10 years, have members in all 50 states and raise 15 percent or less of their funds from corporations. Democrats say the new language would apply to only the NRA, since no other organization would qualify under these specific provisions. The NRA, with 4 million members, will not actively oppose the DISCLOSE Act, according to Democratic sources.​
The exemption for a huge group like the NRA is sure to outrage smaller special-interest groups [like Gun Owners of America].

We are in a political war, and our opponents are trying to change the rules of the game by gagging those groups that are their political enemies. Some might say that the requirement to disclose our membership is not a gag rule, but it most certainly is. Gun Owners of America will NOT do anything that would jeopardize the privacy of our members!

Gun owners know the dangers of being registered, as it has often proven to be the first step towards gun confiscation -- which, by the way, is why it's lamentable that the management of the NRA is selling out its members for the proverbial bowl of pottage. (Go to http://tinyurl.com/2uw9sm9 to see what a leading Capitol Hill blog has written about this sell-out.)

We're positive that regular members of the NRA would never want this to happen -- where all the other pro-gun organizations (like GOA) that are fighting to protect our rights would be gagged, while special favors are cut for one group in particular.

We stand shoulder to shoulder with NRA and all the other pro-gun groups when they are fighting to defend our Second Amendment freedoms. We all have to stick together if we are going to win these battles.

We're not sure who is making the decisions over at the NRA headquarters... but this type of thing would have never happened in the past, and we're positive that the NRA membership would not be happy with it. This cannot stand!

ACTION: Please do everything you can to kill this dangerous DISCLOSE Act legislation (HR 5175). Here's what you can do:

1. Urge your congressman to oppose HR 5175. You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send a pre-written message to your Representative.

2. Call the NRA-ILA at (800) 392-VOTE (8683) and urge them to oppose this legislation and to rate any congressman who votes in favor of HR 5175 as having cast an ANTI-GUN vote. Urge them not to sell out our constitutional freedoms just because they can get an exemption for themselves.

3. Please help Gun Owners of America to continue fighting for your rights. You can go to http://gunowners.org/contribute-to-goa.htm to help us alert as many people as possible to this new threat.

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Representative:

I stand with Gun Owners of America in opposing the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175).

There are reports that a deal may be cut to exempt one large organization from the terms of the DISCLOSE Act. This smacks of the money-for-votes fiasco which helped grease the skids for passage of ObamaCare and which has already lowered Congress' reputation to unprecedented depths.

On the Senate side, Senator Mitch McConnell blasted this deal, which is aimed at carving out special exemptions for the NRA leadership in exchange for their promise to sit on their hands and not oppose the DISCLOSE Act. "If there is one thing Americans loathe about Washington, it's the backroom dealing to win the vote of organizations with power and influence at the expense of everyone else," McConnell said.

"Just as it wasn't the Democrats' money to offer in the health care debate, free speech isn't theirs to ration out to those willing to play ball -- it's a right guaranteed by our First Amendment to all Americans."

I agree wholeheartedly. Please do NOT vote in favor of this legislation, as it will have a chilling effect upon our free speech rights by forcing the organizations we associate with to disclose their membership lists.

How ironic that a Congress and President who treat transparency with contempt should now be trying to force legal organizations to disclose the names of their law-abiding members. The hypocrisy is blatant, to say the least.

Vote no on HR 5175.

Sincerely,​
 

muleman

Gone But Not Forgotten
GOLD Site Supporter
Hard to believe they are brokering a deal just for the NRA. The whole bill sucks! who are they to deny folks the chance to run opposing view ads. They sure don't crack down on lobbyists at all.:hammer::hammer:
 

mak2

Active member
I used to be a member of the NRA. I think I quit after they called me for the 200th time wanting money. IT still took a long time for them to realize I wasnt sending any more money and to quit calling. I think the NRA is just another huge lobby that has lost track of why they exist.
 

XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq

Master of Distraction
Staff member
SUPER Site Supporter
Another example of why we need to get rid of incumbents. The longer they are there the easier it is for the lobbyists to influence them.
 

joec

New member
GOLD Site Supporter
I am a member but only because my parent bought me a life time membership when I was a kid as gift. Now I've not heard from them in years nor have I gotten any of the magazines until recently when I bought a new gun. It seems the company sent them my name when I bought it and that started the mail again. Not a big deal to me either way, as I have problem telling them no. As for this bill I know little about it but do have a problem with the recent SCOTUS ruling about corporation being free to spend corporate money for political campaigns. I also consider the NRA and Labor unions as corporations as well. Get the money out of politics is the only way to clean out the swamp in Washington or even our state offices.
 

muleman

Gone But Not Forgotten
GOLD Site Supporter
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Statement From The National Rifle
Association On H.R. 5175, The Disclose Act
[/FONT]


[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The National Rifle Association believes that any restrictions on the political speech of Americans are unconstitutional. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]In the past, through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has opposed any effort to restrict the rights of its four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The NRA's opposition to restrictions on political speech includes its May 26, 2010 letter to Members of Congress expressing strong concerns about H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act. As it stood at the time of that letter, the measure would have undermined or obliterated virtually all of the NRA's right to free political speech and, therefore, jeopardized the Second Amendment rights of every law-abiding American. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The most potent defense of the Second Amendment requires the most adamant exercise of the First Amendment. The NRA stands absolutely obligated to its members to ensure maximum access to the First Amendment, in order to protect and preserve the freedom of the Second Amendment. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The NRA must preserve its ability to speak. It cannot risk a strategy that would deny its rights, for the Second Amendment cannot be defended without them. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Thus, the NRA's first obligation must be to its members and to its most ardent defense of firearms freedom for America's lawful gun owners. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]On June 14, 2010, Democratic leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives pledged that H.R. 5175 would be amended to exempt groups like the NRA, that meet certain criteria, from its onerous restrictions on political speech. As a result, and as long as that remains the case, the NRA will not be involved in final consideration of the House bill. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The NRA cannot defend the Second Amendment from the attacks we face in the local, state, federal, international and judicial arenas without the ability to speak. We will not allow ourselves to be silenced while the national news media, politicians and others are allowed to attack us freely. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]The NRA will continue to fight for its right to speak out in defense of the Second Amendment. Any efforts to silence the political speech of NRA members will, as has been the case in the past, be met with strong opposition. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]---nra--- [/FONT]​
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
UPDATE
Again I generally side with the NRA, but it seems to me they :shit5:

From the GOA:
Threat to Free Speech Lights a Fire in the Grassroots

-- Vote has been temporarily postponed; keep up the heat!

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
www.gunowners.org


“[T]he NRA -- on whose board of directors I serve -- rather than holding steadfastly to its historic principles of defending the Constitution and continuing its noble fight against government regulation of political speech instead opted for a political deal borne of self-interest in exchange for ‘neutrality’ from the legislation's requirements.”

-- NRA Director Cleta Mitchell, June 17, 2010​

Thursday, June 17, 2010

The above quote -- part of an editorial authored by NRA Director Cleta Mitchell -- ran in The Washington Post today.

Like Mitchell, bloggers and editorial writers around the country have lit up the Internet with the story that we have been alerting you to over the past 48 hours. Here are just some of the headlines:
* “The NRA sells out to Democrats on the First Amendment,” The Wall Street Journal

* “Conservatives take on the NRA over deal on disclosure bill,” The Washington Post

* “The National Rifle Association’s Excuse Holds No Water,” RedState.org
The conservative movement (and to be honest, many liberal organizations as well) are coming together to loudly protest the DISCLOSE Act -- legislation that threatens to gag our ability to effectively hold individual congressmen accountable in the days and weeks leading up to an election.

It is imperative that we continue hammering the Congress. But rather than cry “uncle,” liberal Democrats are now trying to buy off more groups with an exemption for those that have at least 500,000 members (rather than the higher threshold of one million, which would have applied to few groups other than the NRA).

Of course, how is the government going to know how many members an organization has? According to the legislation, each organization will have to certify to a government commission how many members they have. But what if the commission wants documentation; will the organization have to “disclose” the names of their members?

GOA, of course, will never do this. Furthermore, you should know that your Gun Owners of America can NOT be bought off. We will continue opposing this bill on principle, urging all gun groups to stick together in this fight. As we stated yesterday, we realize that: “We must all hang together, or we will all hang separately.”

GOA applauds NRA Director Cleta Mitchell for the courageous stand she took today. (You can read her editorial here.) We hope that the NRA leadership will heed her wisdom and take a stand against this bill. If they don’t, we wouldn’t be surprised if NRA members start demanding a change in their leadership. After all, the NRA has engaged in many good fights over the years, and it would be a shame to lose this VERY IMPORTANT battle because high-ranking staff led the NRA down the wrong path.

ACTION:

1. Please call your congressman today and urge him or her to oppose HR 5175. We’ve asked you to send emails before, but now on the eve before the vote, it is crucial that the phones ring off the hook. If they’re not ringing, they won’t be worried.

You can use the Talking Points below to call your Representative toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

2. If you haven’t yet urged the NRA staff to change its position on HR 5175 and stand with Gun Owners of America, please do so. NRA Director Cleta Mitchell was absolutely correct, and the NRA leadership should heed her wisdom. You can call the NRA at (800) 392-VOTE (8683).

3. Please help Gun Owners of America to continue fighting for your rights. You can go to http://gunowners.org/contribute-to-goa.htm to help us alert as many people as possible to the DISCLOSE Act threat.

----- Talking Points for contacting your Representative -----

1. I stand with Gun Owners of America in opposing the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175).

2. The Bill of Rights is clear in saying that Congress has no authority to pass legislation like this. Just like the Second Amendment says our gun rights “shall not be infringed,” the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.”

3. The Supreme Court was right earlier this year in the Citizens United case. Sen. John McCain -- the author of the Campaign Finance Reform law (otherwise known as the Incumbent Protection Act) -- was wrong. Americans, and the groups they choose to associate with, should be able to criticize Congress in the days and weeks leading up to an election WITHOUT BEING GAGGED OR FORCED TO JUMP THROUGH HOOPS that are mandated by Congress.​
 
Top