DOCSLIB.ORG

How the Gun Industry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How the Gun Industry MARKETING DEATH HOW THE GUN INDUSTRY USES THE NRA TO BOOST PROFITS AND UNDERMINE PUBLIC SAFETY While the country mourns the lives of multiple mass shooting victims and sufferers of gun violence, the radical gun lobby known as the National Rifle Association has not wavered in its stance against commonsense gun safety laws. The NRA claims to represent regular gun owners, but as of 2015, most of them disagreed with the NRA’s positions against universal background checks and assault weapons bans. Instead, the group is incentivized to take extreme policy views and spread rhetoric that helps pad the wallets of the gun industry. The NRA is financially backed by the gun industry and has multiple sitting board members with ties to gun and ammunition manufacturing. Today’s NRA does not speak for everyday gun- owners and sportsmen, but mainly represents the interests of the $13.5 billion-a-year gun industry. The NRA’s board of directors is filled with gun manufacturing executives, lawyers, and lobbyists. NRA First Vice President and CEO of Brownells, Inc., Pete Brownell, leads the “world’s largest supplier” of gun accessories and gunsmithing tools, which included the so-called “cop killer” bullets the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms proposed to ban. Brownell, who has donated at least $1 million to the NRA, said that having gun industry leaders as NRA directors “ensures the NRA’s focus is honed on the overall mission of the organization.” Another NRA board member, CEO of Barrett Firearms Manufacturing Ronnie Barrett, created the first .50 caliber military-style rifle for civilian use and has testified to his rifles’ “usefulness against commercial planes.” In addition to the NRA directors who benefit from gun sales, the group’s board is packed with extremists who are out of step with typical American gun owners, and in many cases, even mainstream American values. After the 2015 Mother Emanuel A.M.E. church shooting in Charleston, NRA board member Charles Cotton disgracefully blamed the pastor, who was also murdered, for the deaths of his eight congregants. Cotton wrote, “Eight of his church members… might be alive if he had expressly allowed members to carry handguns in church.” After the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2013 took the lives of 20 children and six adults, fellow NRA board member Scott Bach outrageously described the Newtown families pushing for stricter gun safety laws as a “prop.” Considering the NRA’s reliance on the gun manufacturing industry, it is not surprising that it has consistently fought commonsense gun safety legislation to protect its profits. Just one day after the San Bernardino massacre killed 14 people and injured 21 others, the NRA tweeted that members should call their senators and “urge them to vote no” on “any and all” gun violence prevention measures. In fact, the assault weapons the alleged attackers used in the mass shooting were purchased legally because the NRA had blocked a renewal of the federal assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. Since the end of the assault weapons ban, “annual rifle production has increased about 38 percent.” The group also “choked off money” for “basic” research on gun safety and was against blocking suspected terrorists’ ability to buy guns. The “No. 1 legislative priority” of the NRA was a law that shields gun manufacturers and dealers from liability lawsuits. Passage of the law in 2005 saved gun manufacturers millions. Smith & Wesson praised the law and said it looked forward to the “potential savings going forward.” That same year the NRA created its “Ring of Freedom” donor program for members and corporations. The NRA successfully pushed for the rapid spread of laws legalizing the carrying of concealed firearms at the state level, which increased sales for gun manufacturers. In 2010, the number of licensed concealed-gun carriers jumped from less than one million in the 1980s to “a record 6 million.” The NRA also wields its influence in the electoral arena to elect loyal, gun-friendly politicians. During the 2008 election, the NRA spent $15 million to paint Obama as a “threat to the Second Amendment” and the president of gun manufacturer Sturm Ruger said the election led to a “spike” in gun sales. The NRA is likely to be a major player in the 2016 election, especially considering the NRA and presumptive nominee Donald Trump have thoroughly embraced one another. Billionaire right-wing heavyweights Charles and David Koch even joined forces with the NRA to spread their message of fear across the Koch network. The NRA took $11.5 million the Koch-allied Freedom Partners and the Center to Protect Patient Rights and worked with Americans for Prosperity “to train and mobilize gun owners.” Koch Industries even served on a task force that was co-chaired by the NRA while it was a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council. The gun industry has been the winner of the NRA’s push to weaponize America, while the American public sees rising fatalities and casualties of gun violence. Gun manufacturers’ stocks have risen over 300% since the beginning of the Obama presidency, fueled in large part by the NRAs pushing conspiracy theories, fear, and easier access to deadly weapons. The NRA’s propaganda is working—despite crime statistics holding “near 20-year lows,” the Pew Research Center has found that “we are at a moment when most Americans believe that crime rates are rising and when most believe gun ownership,” not gun violence prevention laws, “makes people safer.” It is clear that the gun and ammunition manufacturing industry has found a powerful and lucrative voice in the NRA. Table of Contents The NRA Does Not Represent The Policy Preferences Of Most Gun Owners ..................... 1 Most Gun Owners Disagreed With The NRA’s Stance Against Background Checks ................................ 1 More Than Half Of Gun-Owners Disagreed With The NRA’s Stance Against A High-Capacity Magazine Ban ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Even Large Numbers Of NRA Members Disagreed With The NRA On Background Checks, Assault- Style Weapon Bans, And High-Capacity Magazine Bans ........................................................................... 2 The NRA Has Transformed Into A Lobbying Group For Gun Manufacturers And The Extreme Right ........................................................................................................................... 3 The NRA Was Considered One Of The Most Powerful Lobbies In Washington ...................................... 4 The NRA Was Funded Primarily By Gun And Ammunition Manufacturers ............................................. 6 The NRA’s Executive Leadership And Board Of Directors Had Deep Ties To The Firearms Industry . 13 NRA Supported Policies That Enriched The Industry ............................................................................. 25 NRA Gave Cover To The Extreme Right .................................................................................................. 37 The NRA Has Undermined Public Safety ............................................................................. 47 The NRA Fearmongered To Incite Their Members To Push For Legislation And Increase Gun Sales . 49 The NRA Targeted The Court System As A Way To Fight Reasonable Gun Safety Measures ............... 57 The NRA Fought Against Reasonable State And Local Gun Safety Measures ........................................ 60 The NRA Fought Against Reasonable Federal Gun Safety Measures ...................................................... 75 The NRA Fought Against Laws That Keep America Safe From Terrorists ............................................. 88 1 THE NRA DOES NOT REPRESENT THE POLICY PREFERENCES OF MOST GUN OWNERS FEWER THAN TEN PERCENT OF GUN OWNERS WERE NRA MEMBERS At Most Ten Percent Of American Gun Owners Belonged To The NRA As Of 2015. According to the Washington Post, “Let’s start with the membership numbers. In recent years the NRA has said it has 5 million dues-paying members. There’s some reason to be skeptical of this figure, but let’s assume 5 million is right. Those 5 million members only comprise somewhere between 6 and 7 percent of American gun owners. That would imply that the overwhelming majority of American gun owners -- over 90 percent of them -- do not belong to the NRA.” [Washington Post WonkBlog, 10/15/15] POLLS SHOWED THAT MOST GUN OWNERS DISAGREED WITH THE NRA ON BACKGROUND CHECKS, ASSAULT-STYLE WEAPON BANS, AND HIGH- CAPACITY MAGAZINE BANS Washington Post: The NRA Was “Adamantly Opposed To Any New Restrictions On Weapons,” Leaving Gun Owners In Favor Of Reforms “Shut Out Of The Argument.” According to The Washington Post, “Gun owners who favor tighter restrictions on firearms say they are in the same position after the mass shooting in Oregon as they have been following other rampages — shut out of the argument. The pattern, they say, is frustrating and familiar: The what-should-be- done discussion pits anti-gun groups against the National Rifle Association and its allies, who are adamantly opposed to any new restrictions on weapons.” [Washington Post, 10/9/15] Most Gun Owners Disagreed With The NRA’s Stance Against Background Checks THE NRA OPPOSED BACKGROUND CHECKS AT GUN SHOWS AND FOR PRIVATE SALES 2013: NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre: The NRA Does Not Support Universal Background Checks At Gun Shows. According to a video of a Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Coalition Letter
    Monday, April 15th 2019 Dear Members of Congress: On behalf of our organizations and the millions of American individuals, families, and business owners they represent, we urge you to focus on comprehensive reforms to prioritize, streamline and innovate the fnancing and regulation of our nation’s infrastructure projects rather than considering any increases to the federal gas tax. As part of any potential infrastructure package, Congress has an opportunity this year to institute major reforms to our federal funding and regulatory systems. Reforms are badly needed to improve outcomes, target spending toward critical projects, and streamline much needed maintenance and construction projects. Te goal this year should be a more modern and efcient national infrastructure system that will allow people and goods to move where they need to both safely and economically, contributing to an efective and well-functioning system of free enterprise. A 25-cent per gallon increase in the federal gas tax, a current proposal from some on and of Capitol Hill, would more than double the current rate and would amount to an estimated $394 billion tax increase over the next ten years. Before asking Americans for more of their hard earned money at the gas pump, lawmakers must consider how federal gas tax dollars are currently mishandled. More than 28 percent of funds from the Highway Trust Fund are currently diverted away from roads and bridges. Still more taxpayer dollars are wasted on infated costs due to outdated regulatory burdens, a complex and sluggish permitting system, and overly restrictive labor requirements. Tese reforms can be achieved by focusing on three core outcomes: 1) spending smarter on projects of true national priority, 2) reforming outdated and costly regulations, and 3) protecting Americans from new or increased tax burdens.
    [Show full text]
  • Marc Short Chief of Staff, Vice President Pence
    MARC SHORT CHIEF OF STAFF, VICE PRESIDENT PENCE u Life in Brief Quick Summary Hometown: Virginia Beach, VA Lifelong conservative GOP operative who rose through party ranks to become a trusted Mike Current Residence: Arlington, VA Pence confidante. Utilizes expansive network of Koch allies, White House staff, and congressional Education ties to push Administration priorities • BA, Washington & Lee, 1992 • MBA, University of Virginia, 2004 • Polished and pragmatic tactician who plays a behind-the-scenes role advising Vice President Family: Pence and other senior leaders • Married to Kristen Short, who has • Early conservative political views shaped By his worked for Young America’s Foundation, father, Dick Short, a wealthy GOP donor well- Freedom Alliance, and the Charles G. connected to Virginia GOP circles Koch Foundation • Extensive experience with Freedom Partners and • Three school-aged children the Koch Brothers exposed him to large network of GOP donors and influencers Work History • Earned reputation as smart strategist on the Hill • Chief of Staff to the Vice President of the working closely with then-Rep. Mike Pence United States, 2019-Present • Provided GOP estaBlishment credentials and • Senior Fellow at UVA Miller Center of congressional experience to Trump White House PuBlic Affairs, 2018-19 to advance Administration’s early agenda, • Contributor for CNN, 2018-19 including on 2017 tax cuts and Neil Gorsuch’s • Partner at Guidepost Strategies, 2018-19 confirmation to the Supreme Court • White House Director of Legislative •
    [Show full text]
  • The Coming $100 Million Senate Race $75 Million Senate Race in 2016; Money Floods In; Hill, Braun May Enter by BRIAN A
    V22, N38 Friday, June 9, 2017 The coming $100 million Senate race $75 million Senate race in 2016; money floods in; Hill, Braun may enter By BRIAN A. HOWEY INDIANAPOLIS – In 1998, the U.S. Senate race between Democrat Evan Bayh and Republican Paul Helmke ended up in the $4 million range. In 2010, Republican Dan Coats and Democrat Brad Ellsworth spent $9 million. And in 2012, Sen. Dick Lugar, Treasurer Richard Mourdock and Republicans Eric Holcomb and Marlin Stutzman, and it and Democrat Joe Donnelly saw a combined $51 million topped $75 million. course through their campaigns, including $32,844,0452 With the Senate balance in the 2018 mid-terms from outside groups. potentially hanging on U.S. Sen. Donnelly’s reelection, Howey Politics Indiana added up the total cost Hoosiers are probably looking at a $100 million race. U.S. of the 2016 showdown between Republican Todd Young Continued on page 3 and Democrat Evan Bayh, along with Democrat Baron Hill Director Comey’s rebuke By BRIAN A. HOWEY INDIANAPOLIS – It was a stark assessment from the fired FBI Director James Comey: The president of the United States is a liar. In the May 9 dismissal by President Trump, Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee in sensational testi- “Despite so many false state- mony Thursday, “The administration then chose to defame me and more importantly the FBI, by saying the organi- ments and lies, total and com- zation was poorly plete vindication ... and WOW, led. Those were lies, plain and simple.” At Comey is a leaker.” least five other times, Comey questioned - President Trump tweeting the truthfulness of his reaction to the James President Trump.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network
    PLATFORMS AND OUTSIDERS IN PARTY NETWORKS: THE EVOLUTION OF THE DIGITAL POLITICAL ADVERTISING NETWORK Bridget Barrett A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at the Hussman School of Journalism and Media. Chapel Hill 2020 Approved by: Daniel Kreiss Adam Saffer Adam Sheingate © 2020 Bridget Barrett ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Bridget Barrett: Platforms and Outsiders in Party Networks: The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network (Under the direction of Daniel Kreiss) Scholars seldom examine the companies that campaigns hire to run digital advertising. This thesis presents the first network analysis of relationships between federal political committees (n = 2,077) and the companies they hired for electoral digital political advertising services (n = 1,034) across 13 years (2003–2016) and three election cycles (2008, 2012, and 2016). The network expanded from 333 nodes in 2008 to 2,202 nodes in 2016. In 2012 and 2016, Facebook and Google had the highest normalized betweenness centrality (.34 and .27 in 2012 and .55 and .24 in 2016 respectively). Given their positions in the network, Facebook and Google should be considered consequential members of party networks. Of advertising agencies hired in the 2016 electoral cycle, 23% had no declared political specialization and were hired disproportionately by non-incumbents. The thesis argues their motivations may not be as well-aligned with party goals as those of established political professionals. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES .................................................................................................................... V POLITICAL CONSULTING AND PARTY NETWORKS ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • How the Firearms Industry and NRA Market Guns to Communities of Color
    JANUARY 2021 How the Firearms Industry and NRA Market Guns to Communities of Color WWW.VPC.ORG COPYRIGHT AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Copyright © January 2021 Violence Policy Center Violence Policy Center 1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 1210 Washington, DC 20036 202-822-8200 The Violence Policy Center (VPC) is a national nonprofit educational organization that conducts research and public education on violence in America and provides information and analysis to policymakers, journalists, advocates, and the general public. This study was authored by VPC Executive Director Josh Sugarmann. Additional research assistance was provided by Alyssa Berkson, Jacob Gurvis, Nicholas Hannan, Ellie Pasternack, and Jill Rosenfeld. This study was funded with the support of The Joyce Foundation and the Lisa and Douglas Goldman Fund. For a complete list of VPC publications with document links, please visit http://www.vpc.org/publications. To learn more about the Violence Policy Center, or to make a tax-deductible contribution to help support our work, please visit www.vpc.org. 2 | VIOLENCE POLICY CENTER HOW THE FIREARMS INDUSTRY AND NRA MARKET GUNS TO COMMUNITIES OF COLOR TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Section One: The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Firearms Industry 4 Section Two: The National Rifle Association 20 Section Three: The NSSF and NRA Exploit COVID-19 in Their Marketing Efforts 28 Section Four: The Reality of Black and Latino Americans and Guns 32 Section Five: The Myth of Self-Defense Gun Use 36 Conclusion 38 This study is also available online at: https://vpc.org/how-the-firearms-industry-and-nra-market-guns-to-communities-of-color/.
    [Show full text]
  • Threat from the Right Intensifies
    THREAT FROM THE RIGHT INTENSIFIES May 2018 Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 Meeting the Privatization Players ..............................................................................3 Education Privatization Players .....................................................................................................7 Massachusetts Parents United ...................................................................................................11 Creeping Privatization through Takeover Zone Models .............................................................14 Funding the Privatization Movement ..........................................................................................17 Charter Backers Broaden Support to Embrace Personalized Learning ....................................21 National Donors as Longtime Players in Massachusetts ...........................................................25 The Pioneer Institute ....................................................................................................................29 Profits or Professionals? Tech Products Threaten the Future of Teaching ....... 35 Personalized Profits: The Market Potential of Educational Technology Tools ..........................39 State-Funded Personalized Push in Massachusetts: MAPLE and LearnLaunch ....................40 Who’s Behind the MAPLE/LearnLaunch Collaboration? ...........................................................42 Gates
    [Show full text]
  • A GUIDE to ELECTION YEAR ACTIVITIES of SECTION 501(C)(3) ORGANIZATIONS
    A GUIDE TO ELECTION YEAR ACTIVITIES OF SECTION 501(c)(3) ORGANIZATIONS BY STEVEN H. SHOLK, ESQ. STEVEN H. SHOLK, ESQ. GIBBONS P.C. ONE GATEWAY CENTER NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 07102-5310 (973) 596-4639 [email protected] ONE PENNSYLVANIA PLAZA 37th FLOOR NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10119-3701 (212) 613-2000 Copyright Steven H. Sholk 2018 All Rights Reserved 776148.40 999999-00262 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page STATUTORY PROVISIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS, EXPENDITURES, AND ELECTIONEERING .......................................................................................................... 1 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS TO AND FUNDRAISING FOR SECTION 501(c)(3) ORGANIZATIONS ................................. 180 REGULATORY PROVISIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS, EXPENDITURES, AND ELECTIONEERING ...................................................................................................... 212 VOTER REGISTRATION AND GET-OUT-THE-VOTE DRIVES......................................... 348 VOTER GUIDES........................................................................................................................ 359 CANDIDATE APPEARANCES AND ADVERTISEMENTS ................................................. 372 CANDIDATE DEBATES .......................................................................................................... 387 CANDIDATE USE OF FACILITIES AND OTHER ASSETS ................................................. 390 WEBSITE ACTIVITIES ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Super Pacs and 501(C) Groups in the 2016 Election
    Super PACs and 501(c) Groups in the 2016 Election David B. Magleby* Brigham Young University Paper presented at the “State of the Parties: 2016 and Beyond”, Ray C. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics, University of Akron. November 9-10, 2017. *I would like to acknowledge the research assistance of Hyrum Clarke, Ben Forsgren, John Geilman, Jake Jensen, Jacob Nielson, Blake Ringer, Alena Smith, Wen Je (Fred) Tan, and Sam Williams all BYU undergraduates. Data made available by the Center for Responsive Politics was helpful as were two interviews with Robert Maguire, whose expertise in political nonprofits was informative. 1 Super PACs and 501(c) Groups in the 2067 Election David B. Magleby Brigham Young University In only a short period of time, Super PACs have come to be one of the most important parts of American electoral politics. They raise and spend large sums of money in competitive federal elections. They have become fully integrated teammates with candidates, party leaders, and interest groups. While initially they were most visible in paying for television advertising, by 2016 they expanded their scope by providing a wide variety of campaign services once thought to be funded by candidate campaign committees (campaign events) or party committees, (get-out-the-vote, voter registration, list development). Where does the money come from that funds Super PACs and other outside groups? While much of the attention on sources of funding for Super PACs was initially on corporations and unions, the reality has been that most of the funding for Super PACs has been individuals. Publicly traded corporations have been infrequent funders of Super PACs, while unions have been more active in using Super PACs.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 114 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 114 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 162 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2016 No. 137 Senate The Senate met at 3 p.m. and was Senator from the State of Oklahoma, to per- call with respect to the cloture motion called to order by the Honorable JAMES form the duties of the Chair. be waived. LANKFORD, a Senator from the State of ORRIN G. HATCH, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- Oklahoma. President pro tempore. pore. Without objection, it is so or- Mr. LANKFORD thereupon assumed dered. f the Chair as Acting President pro tem- CONTINUING RESOLUTION pore. PRAYER Mr. MCCONNELL. Mr. President, f Members on both sides have been work- The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- ing toward an agreement to respon- fered the following prayer: RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER sibly fund the government. We have Let us pray. made a lot of important progress al- Almighty God, Ruler of all nations, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- ready. I expect to move forward this show our lawmakers clearly what their pore. The majority leader is recog- week on a continuing resolution duty is and strengthen them to be nized. through December 9 at last year’s en- faithful in doing it. May they do even f acted levels that includes funds for the small duties in a way that will glo- LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPRO- Zika control and our veterans. Talks rify You, transforming common tasks PRIATIONS ACT, 2017—MOTION TO are continuing and leaders from both into acts of worship.
    [Show full text]
  • BEFORE the FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION in the Matter Of
    BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION In the Matter of ) ) Republican National Committee and ) MUR 6888 i Anthony Parker in his official capacity ). as treasurer; American Crossroads and ) Caleb Crosby in his official capacity as ); treasurer; Crossroads GPS; Americans ; for Prosperity; GOP Data Trust LLC; ) ] i360, LLC; National Republican j: 5 Senatorial Committee and Keith A. ) Davis in his official capacity as ) treasurer; Freedom Partners Action ) Fund, Inc., and Thomas F Maxwell III in ) his official capacity as treasurer; ) State Party Committee Respondents: ) Arizona Republican Party and Timothy ) Lee in his official capacity as treasurer; ) Montana Republican State Central ') Committee and Deborah Brown in her ") official capacity as treasurer; West ) Virginia Republican Parly, Inc. and ) Michelle Wilshere in her official capacity :) as Treasurer; Massachusetts Republican :)• Party and Brent T. Andersen in his official :). capacity as treasurer; ) Candidate and Authorized Committee ) Respondents: ) ) Andrew Walter; ) Andrew Walter for Congress and Chris ) Marston in his official capacity as )• treasurer; ) Benjamin Sasse; Ben Sasse for US Senate > Inc. and Mark Fahleson in his official ,) capacity as treasurer; .) Carl DeMaio; .:) Carl DeMaio for Congress and Paul ) Kilgore in his official capacity as treasurer; ) Robert Goodlatte; ). Bob Goodlatte for Congress Committee ) and Kenneth Lorenz Prickitt in his official ) Federal Election Commission MUR6888 February 25,2016 capacity as Treasurer; Robert T. Schilling; Bobby Schilling
    [Show full text]
  • From: Isaac Kamola, Associate Professor of Political Science
    From: Isaac Kamola, Associate Professor of Political Science, Trinity College, Hartford, CT ([email protected]) To: Higher Education and Employment Advancement Committee Date: March 5, 2020 Re: HB 5355 AN ACT CONCERNING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES - Oppose Dear chairs, ranking members, and distinguished members of the Higher Education and Employment Advancement Committee. I am writing to the committee in opposition of HB 5355 An Act Concerning Freedom of Expression on College Campuses. As a scholar working on dark money influence in higher education, this bill raises considerable concerns. Campus free speech bills are popping up at state legislatures across the country, in addition to being issued by executive order from the White House. On face, campus free speech bills appear to be common sense statements about the importance of free speech on college campuses. However, they should instead be understood as part of a broader political strategy among private and corporate entities to undermine existing standards and professional norms that currently govern the difficult issues around preserving academic and free speech on college and university campuses. Institutions must be free to address these complicated issues according to the mission and professional standards, not through legislative imposition. For context: Over the past few years there have been a large number of high-profile examples used to build the argument that conservative speech is stifled on college campuses. In many instances, the examples pointed to involve students protesting controversial conservative speakers, including Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, Charles Murray as well as Lucian Wintrich at UConn in 2017. This now common narrative of student protestors denying the free speech of conservative speakers becomes much more complicated, however, if one looks into the considerable funding and organized partisan machinery that makes these campus confrontations possible.
    [Show full text]
  • September 30, 2019 Acting Director Margaret Weichert U.S. Office Of
    September 30, 2019 Acting Director Margaret Weichert U.S. Office of Personnel Management 1900 E Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20415 Re: NRA Foundation Dear Ms. Weichert: On behalf of Everytown for Gun Safety, the nation’s largest gun violence prevention group, I write to urge you to investigate whether the NRA Foundation should be disqualified and expelled from participation in the Combined Federal Campaign (“CFC”), the workplace giving program for federal government employees. As you may be aware, over the past several months there has been a series of public disclosures and reports revealing substantial evidence of serious and wide-ranging financial impropriety at the National Rifle Association (“the NRA”) – a 501(c)(4) organiZation that according to its own regulatory filings controls CFC participant the NRA Foundation (which is a 501(c)(3) organiZation) – including self-dealing, improper enrichment of organiZation insiders, conflicts of interest, and violations of the not-for-profit laws. As a result, there are now active regulatory investigations by the Attorney General of the District of Columbia as to CFC participant the NRA Foundation and the NRA, and by the Attorney General of New York as to the NRA and its affiliated not-for-profit entities. These allegations and investigations of serious potential misconduct at the NRA are particularly troubling because, in the last two reported years, the NRA Foundation has sent over half of its revenue to the NRA, meaning that over $0.50 of every dollar raised through the federal government’s CFC for the NRA Foundation ended up in the coffers of the NRA.
    [Show full text]