Perfect Union banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
(Bill, I wasn't sure if this should go in a different forum or not. If it belongs elsewhere, please move it. Thanks.)

This is a direct cut-n-paste from a Gun Owners of America e-mail. You can go to their website and fax, email or mail a letter to President Bush urging him to veto this unconstitutional kick in the teeth.

Thanks,
DarkStar11
==========================

Senate Passes Incumbent Protection Bill
-- Please urge President Bush to veto proposal

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

"The President ought to compare the Shays-Meehan bill as passed
to the six principles he enunciated, and if he does that, I think
it will convince him that the bill ought to be vetoed."
-- Rep. John Shadegg, Arizona Republican

(Thursday, March 21, 2002) -- Yesterday, the U.S. Senate drove a
stake into the Bill of Rights and passed the Incumbent Protection
Bill by a vote of 60-40. The bill, which squelches the voice of
pro-gun organizations such as Gun Owners of America, now goes to the
President who has indicated that he will sign it.

"The reform passed today, while flawed in some areas, still improves
the current system overall, and I will sign them into law," Bush
said in a statement after the passage of the bill.

The President is right about one thing. The bill is flawed. It is
fatally flawed.

But in the wake of the Enron scandal, politicians are scrambling to
appear as though they are getting tough on corruption in politics.
The name "Enron" came up several times during the debate in the
Senate. Yet the bill does not get tough on real corruption; rather,
it cracks down on the First Amendment rights of citizens --
specifically, the right they have to criticize their elected
officials.

The key vote in the Senate yesterday was not the vote on final
passage. The key vote was on whether to "invoke cloture" -- that
is, on whether to end debate on the filibuster.

As it turns out, there were eight senators who tried to please
advocates on both sides of the fence yesterday. These eight
senators voted to end the filibuster (that is, they voted IN FAVOR
of the bill), but then turned around and voted AGAINST the bill on
final passage.

You can be sure that these eight men will try to tell you that they
voted against the Incumbent Protection Bill, when in reality, they
voted IN FAVOR of the bill at the very time we had the best chance
of killing it.

The eight TURNCOAT SENATORS who voted IN FAVOR of the bill by
helping to kill the filibuster are:

John Breaux (D-LA)
Bill Frist (R-TN)
Charles Grassley (R-IA)
Chuck Hagel (R-NE)
John Kyl (R-AZ)
Ben Nelson (D-NE)
Gordon Smith (R-OR)
Ted Stevens (R-AK)

[The vote tally for these eight turncoats, plus the other 60
senators who voted wrong yesterday, can be found at
http://www.gunowners.org/a032102x.htm on the GOA website. If your
Senator voted wrong, you can also send him a sample letter from
there expressing your displeasure.]

The Incumbent Protection Bill now goes to President Bush. He says
he will sign this bill, even though it contradicts the very
principles that he said must be included in a campaign finance
reform bill.

According to The Washington Times, the House Republican Study
Committee issued a statement last month asserting that the
Shays-Meehan bill would violate all of President Bush's six reform
principles which he enunciated one year ago.

The first principle on Mr. Bush's list says the reform bill must
"protect the rights of individuals to participate in democracy."
Among those rights are "the rights of citizen groups to engage in
issue advocacy."

The Times article points out, however, that the Shays-Meehan bill
"contains provisions that would prevent advocacy groups from running
television and radio campaign ads in the final month of a primary
campaign and the final 60 days before a general election."

ACTION: Please urge President Bush to VETO the Shays-Meehan
Incumbent Protection Bill. You can use the pre-written letter below
to help direct your comments to President Bush; go to the GOA
Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm
to send it via e-mail. You can also call him at 202-456-1414 or fax
him at 202-456-2461.

----- Pre-written message -----

Dear President Bush:

I am completely opposed to the Shays-Meehan Incumbent Protection
Bill. I hope that you will do the right thing and veto this
restriction upon our First Amendment freedoms.

You yourself outlined six principles that had to be included in a
campaign finance reform bill. According to the House Republican
Study Committee, this bill violates all six of those principles.

The first principle on your list says that a reform bill must
"protect the rights of individuals to participate in democracy."
Among those rights are "the rights of citizen groups to engage in
issue advocacy."

But the Shays-Meehan bill contains provisions that would hinder
advocacy groups from running television and radio campaign ads in
the final month of a primary campaign and the final 60 days before a
general election.

That is a restriction upon the First Amendment right of free speech.
All citizens, and the groups that represent those citizens, should
have to the right to freely criticize their elected officials.
History shows that only tyrants try to squelch the people's ability
to criticize government leaders. President Bush, I DO NOT consider
you to be a tyrant, and that's why I hope you will kill this
terrible bill.

Please veto the Incumbent Protection Bill!

Sincerely,

****************************
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,555 Posts
I sent the President an email pertaining to the topic. Has anyone else?

:sniper:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Well, as promised, Bush signed it this morning and said the judges can decide if it is unconstitutional or not.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top