GOA Slams Bloomberg and Justice Stevens for their Idiotic Ideas on the 2nd Amendment
Obama Budget Lays Groundwork for Universal Gun Registry
Gun Owners win key victories, including one before the Supreme Court
Time to Repeal Gun-Free Zones!
Lawless Obama Shreds More Constitutional Protections for Steel Core 5.45x39 Ammo
Will the New Jersey Governor Sign a Gun Control Bill?
GOA Slams Bloomberg and Justice Stevens for their Idiotic Ideas on the 2nd Amendment -- While gun owners dramatically winning the culture war


Read the Full Story
Obama Budget Lays Groundwork for Universal Gun Registry -- And ATF makes the import ban on 5.45x39 ammo official



Read the Full Story
Gun Owners win key victories, including one before the Supreme Court -- And gunnies say goodbye to a good friend



Read the Full Story
Time to Repeal Gun-Free Zones!



Read the Full Story
Lawless Obama Shreds More Constitutional Protections for Steel Core 5.45x39 Ammo


Read the Full Story
Will the New Jersey Governor Sign a Gun Control Bill? Take the GOA poll and send a message to Gov. Christie  

Read the Full Story
image GOA Slams Bloomberg and Justice Stevens for their Idiotic Ideas on the 2nd Amendment
image Obama Budget Lays Groundwork for Universal Gun Registry
image Gun Owners win key victories, including one before the Supreme Court
image Time to Repeal Gun-Free Zones!
image Lawless Obama Shreds More Constitutional Protections for Steel Core 5.45x39 Ammo
image Will the New Jersey Governor Sign a Gun Control Bill?

Legislative Action Center LINK

GOA News

Top Headline
Resist

An Open Letter to the People of Connecticut:
How citizens of the Constitution State must resist lawless gun control

“He may be the first person charged under [the] Conn. gun registration law,” reported The Blaze on April 16, 2014.  “But why did police take ‘several’ of his legal guns for ‘safe keeping’?” For...

Read More...
Mayor Michael

Michael Bloomberg is late to the party with his anti-gun push

Editor's note: Michael Hammond is the legislative counsel for Gun Owners of America. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. (CNN) -- Like a 3-year-old who thinks he's just discovered the wheel, billionaire Michael Bloomberg is reveling over his startling new...

Read More...
Judge Stevens

Gun Groups Slam Stevens' 'Idiotic' Idea to Alter Second Amendment

Gun-rights advocates slammed retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens' suggestion to revise the Second Amendment to specify that Americans have the right to bear arms only when serving in militias... Erich Pratt, spokesman for the Gun Owners of America, told Newsmax that the view represented "sour grapes on his part." Pratt...

Read More...
Scott Wagner

Tea Party Write-in Candidate Defies the Establishment
-- Trounces Republican and Democrat candidates in state senate race

Earth to the Republican Party:  Ronald Reagan called and he wants his party back. Both Republicans and Democrats alike were stunned when a write-in candidate trounced the establishment picks for their respective parties in a state senate race last week. The Republican...

Read More...

Self-Defense Corner

Top Headline

Armed thugs meet armed combat veteran (Connecticut)

A National Guard Staff Sergeant found himself in a combat situation at home - in Hartford, Connecticut. The Staff Sergeant deployed twice to Afghanistan with the 102nd Infantry Regiment. Just before 2:30 Saturday morning (April 19, 2014), the Staff Sergeant encountered two cars blocking the road he was driving on. He honked and asked the...

Read More...

California Jewelry Store Owner Wins Gunfight With Armed Robber

Many times, the mere presence of a firearm is enough of a deterrent to end a violent crime. However, sometimes a defensive situation does deteriorate into an actual gunfight. This is the situation a jewelry store owner in Antioch, CA found himself in last week. Two armed men attempted to rob the Hardy Nix Jewelry store, but...

Read More...

Entire Family Opens Fire on Early Morning Home Invader

You’re going to have a bad day if you’re a home invader and you’re facing a single armed citizen. You’re probably going to have a terrible day if you’re facing an entire armed family. According to WFLA, that’s exactly what happened to one unlucky home invader in Winter Haven, FL, According to WHPD, the suspect was a complete...

Read More...

BREAKING: First Defensive Gun Use in Chicago Illinois by Carry Permit Holder!

It has begun in Chicago! The law abiding citizens of Chicago will no longer sit idly by as criminals and thugs take over their city. Here we have the first ever documented defensive gun use in Chicago by a carry permit holder! According to The Chicago Tribune, a 53 year old man legally used deadly force to defend...

Read More...

DA finds fatal shooting justified

Kyle Ford was acting in self-defense when he shot and killed Joshua Pride Salyer, the Muskogee County District Attorney’s Office has ruled. Ford, 30, told officers that he shot a man, later identified as Salyer, after Salyer and two other men came toward him in an aggressive manner. Ford said his next-door neighbor had knocked on his door, asking for...

Read More...

John McCain's Lobbying Reform Provisions Unconstitutional And Would Protect Corruption

John McCain's Lobbying Reform Provisions Unconstitutional And Would Protect Corruption
by Mark Fitzgibbons

Editor's note: trashing the First Amendment rights of groups like GOA in 2002 with the infamous McCain-Feingold law -- better known as the Incumbent Protection Act -- wasn't enough for Sen. McCain. He's back for more in 2006 with S. 2128, the Gag Act.

Proposed regulation of the grassroots, such as Section 110 of S. 2128 (the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act), with similar provisions in counterpart bills before the House of Representatives, would harm America.

Not only does such regulation abridge freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people to peaceably assemble, to petition the Government for redress of grievances, and to exercise our respective faiths, but such regulation would actually protect the corruptive influences that these lobbying and ethics reform bills are purportedly intended to fix.

Through the grassroots, citizens across the country assemble peaceably, though perhaps not always politely, on political and social matters of importance to them. The problems Congress purports to cure through its recent efforts are the quid pro quo of legislation for gifts or other "consideration." Whatever the problems inside the Beltway, none of those problems can be blamed on too much citizen participation in public policy matters. Any efforts to regulate the grassroots, therefore, are misplaced.

The grassroots, of course, are the People. They are whom Justice William Brennan called "citizen-critic[s] of government." More than merely critics of government, the grassroots are populist means of criticizing corporations, even entire industries. They are critics of the institutional, mainstream media as well as critics of the new and alternative media. Grassroots organizations are critics even of other grassroots organizations.

S. 2128 would require registration and reporting of "paid" efforts to "stimulate" the grassroots. Section 110 of the bill defines these as efforts "to influence the general public... to contact one or more... legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials... to take specific action" on matters of public policy. "Attempts to influence" 500 or more citizens by any person or entity receiving or spending $25,000 or more in any quarter trigger these grassroots lobbying registration and reporting requirements.

The thresholds triggering registration and reporting may be met by the placement of just one media ad or just the postage for one direct mail letter mailed nationally. It is not merely that these thresholds are low; they are unconstitutional. These provisions directly violate the "constitutional rights" identified in 2 U.S.C. 1607(a) of the underlying lobbying registration statute that S. 2128 amends (not that constitutional rights need statutory recitation of the fact that they exist). What possibly could have made these constitutional rights fall out of favor since 1995, when the Disclosure of Lobbying Activities bill was first passed?

The registration requirements are a prior restraint on the exercise of First Amendment rights, and the reporting requirements are burdens on such rights, with civil and even criminal sanctions in some of the legislative proposals for failure to register and report. Registration is a prior restraint because failure to register within a set period of agreeing to engage in such rights sets off penalties. Speech and press rights must therefore obtain government clearance in advance of communications being issued.

James Madison, in describing the distinction between the American version of a free printing press versus the British version, said that

    a law inflicting penalties on printed publications would have a similar effect with a law authorizing a previous restraint on them. It would seem a mockery to say that no laws should be passed preventing publications from being made, but that laws may be passed for punishing them in case they should be made.

Section 110 of S. 2128 is a prior restraint. Section 106 of the bill amending 2 U.S.C. 1606 would create substantial penalties for that to which all Americans have guaranteed and constitutionally protected rights "paramount to laws," as Madison said.

Such regulation would stifle speech, but more so, it would effectively censor small, start-up and unpopular causes already strapped for cash. These bills would treat small and unpopular citizen causes the same as large corporations hiring high-priced K Street lobbyists, and would penalize or completely shut out some of the most valuable means of citizens protecting their own freedoms.

It is well-settled law that paid efforts to engage in First Amendment rights merit no fewer constitutional protections than unpaid volunteer efforts. Journalists who receive paychecks are no less protected than unpaid bloggers.

The paid ads of the Committee to Defend Martin Luther King "communicated information, expressed opinion, recited grievances, protested claimed abuses, and sought financial support on behalf of a movement whose existence and objectives are matters of the highest public interest and concern." New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 266 (1964). Such "editorial advertisements," of course cost money to prepare, to place, to print and to disseminate. They are "the promulgation of information and ideas by persons who do not themselves have access to publishing facilities -- who wish to exercise their freedom of speech even though they are not members of the press." Id.

There are many other examples, too long to list in this letter, of why "paid" efforts to engage in protected First Amendment activity are not only as protected constitutionally, but are as important and as valuable as unpaid efforts. For example, paid efforts to circulate petitions are "core political speech" subject to the "zenith" of First Amendment protections. See, Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414, 421–422 (1988). The bottom line is that First Amendment protections of speech, the printing press, petitioning and association rights are not lost merely because it costs money to communicate in today's world of mass media.

Regulating "paid" efforts to stimulate grassroots activity merely gives the appearance that Members of Congress and their respective Republican and Democratic Party committees would prefer for their own professional political consultants to have a leg up in the marketplace of ideas and donations. Members of Congress may already send communications at taxpayer expense under their "free" franking privileges, and as 535 of the most important people in the country, easily have more access to express their views for free through the mainstream media.

Costs of compliance with quarterly reporting requirements will effectively reduce the ability of marginal grassroots efforts to communicate, and will silence cash-strapped unpopular causes. Corporations and large, established causes that are already wealthy will be able to comply. Thus, your bills would effectively silence some critics and allow the wealthier ones to communicate. Such censorship through regulation merely protects the corruptive influences inside the Beltway.

Since the apparent ethics issues are the quid pro quo, it seems that a better solution, and certainly one without constitutional prohibitions, would be to require Members of Congress who sponsor legislation or amendments to sign, under penalties of perjury, that such legislation is submitted without gifts or promises of some consideration.

The expansion of the grassroots these past 40 years has empowered Americans, and that is a good thing. The grassroots are the very antithesis of corruptive influences inside the Beltway. Whatever the solution to the complex problems of congressional ethics, a vote to regulate the grassroots would be the equivalent of a vote to protect the corruptive influences.

Opinion Editorials

  • 40 Oklahoma Sheriffs Asked to Disarm – They Leave Instead
    Gun-grabbing fever has finally reached the conservative stronghold of Oklahoma. An annual meet-and-greet at the Oklahoma State Capitol in Oklahoma City turned sour when an anonymous senator demanded that the 40 sheriffs in attendance remove their firearms. But...
  • The Stand
    The ongoing Bundy Ranch controversy is a test, and we’re the ones being tested. Never before in human history have a people just voluntarily laid down their liberty and property without bloodshed. The statists know this, which is why they’ve spent...
  • Federal agency vows to continue legal action after ending Nevada ranch standoff
    The Bureau of Land Management vowed Saturday that it would continue its legal fight to remove illegal cattle from a rural Nevada range after ending a tense weeklong standoff with a rancher and his supporters. "After 20 years and multiple court orders...