Do You Know What's In the Healthcare Bill?

Have you read it? Because you know that our Senators and Representatives haven't. They farm it out in sections to staffers to read and interpret and give them a quick review.

Why is it there is such a rush to pass through a 1018 page bill that no one has read? Because once it is a done deal, do you realize how difficult, if not impossible, it will be to take any of it away?

Would you sign a mortgage for a new house without reading it? Would you sign any other legal document without reading it?

Then why on earth do we allow for our elected representatives to pass laws that we must abide by when they not only didn't write them, but couldn't even bother to read them? And you realize that if they pass this health care bill, they don't even have to live with it themselves? They are exempt. Does this not make you stark-raving mad?

Doesn't it make you furious to hear the media and lawmakers say that those of us who are attending town hall meetings are part of a conspiracy - that we're part of an organized program to cause disruption when all we are there to do is let our feelings be known?

What ever happened to our elected representatives making laws based on the will of the people? If the will of the people across this country is saying NO to government-run health care, don't we think they should be listening to us instead of trying to come up with talking points to make us come on board with them? Instead of trying to cram it down our throats?

Do you know that Pelosi sent "talking points" home with her democratic peers because they were clueless about this bill?

Have any of you readers out there tried to read this 1000+ page document? Well, there is a member on SurvivalistBoards forum that is trying to get through the entire document and share her findings. So far she's read the first 100 pages and has posted information for us to know as she has gone along.

Here's a link to the first 100 pages she's read: Pages 1-100 of the Healthcare Bill.

She's going to post each 100 pages in a separate forum thread to make it easier to read. I encourage you to check this out. I strongly encourage you to try to read the entire document yourself, but at the very least follow along with us on the SurvivalistBoards forum.

Here's a link to the entire PDF file of the 1018 page Healthcare Bill.

Here's a link to the Liberty Counsel PDF file Overview of the Healthcare Bill.

If there is a town-hall meeting in your area - by all means try to go - get out there and hear what your elected officials are presenting on this health care bill. Find out if they've read it. Find out what they really know about it. Demand that they represent you - the people.

We cannot afford to stand by and be ignorant on this one folks.

TN Congressman Sells-Out on Healthcare

Received in my email today from Gun Owners of America - TN Residents need to pay attention and act:

Contact Senators Alexander and Corker
-- Tell them you don't want them to follow Rep. Gordon's cowardly example

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, August 4, 2009

Things were going so well! Perhaps too well.

It looked like the government-run health/anti-gun database created by the stimulus bill would not be extended to the most private medical records of every man, woman, and child in America!

It seemed like the health care bill was on life support.

But who should come riding to the rescue of socialized medicine, rationing, and a federal takeover of health care decisions but ... Tennessee's Bart Gordon.

On Friday, Rep. Gordon voted for a do-nothing "compromise" which allowed the massive health abomination to pass out of Energy and Commerce Committee and go to the House floor after the August recess.

Now that Gordon has sold out, it is imperative that we keep Senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker from following Gordon's cowardly example. Tennessee's congressional delegation may be pivotal in determining whether:

* Your most private medical records are placed in a health/anti-gun database operated by the federal government;

* Most Americans lose their current insurance coverage due to HHS-drafted standards that their current insurance fails to comply with [sections 123 and 124 of the House Obama care bill; section 143 of the Kennedy-Dodd bill in the Senate].

Even if the "compromise" that Gordon voted for were a wonderful bill -- which it isn't -- it will just move the process along so that a conference committee controlled by Nancy Pelosi will throw out all of the "compromises" and reinsert whatever she wants.

Once the process reaches that point -- and we realize that the final product is OUR WORST NIGHTMARE -- it will be viewed as having unstoppable momentum and our tools for fighting it will be gone.

The current health care proposals would destroy gun owner privacy safeguards. These bills would put the Obama administration in charge of determining what kind of insurance virtually every American is required to have -- and likewise, what information Americans are required to provide to that database.

Gun owners already know the dangers of a computerized health care database run by anti-gun bureaucrats. Just consider what is occurring right now to our veterans.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has its own nationalized healthcare system with centralized records. Since 1999, over 150,000 veterans, mostly combat veterans, have lost their Second Amendment rights. The reason? A diagnosis by a doctor that the person deals with issues like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. These veterans committed no crime, were not tried in a court of law, served their country honorably, yet lost their gun rights for life because they told a doctor that they sometimes had nightmares about what they saw in combat.

If our veterans can lose their gun rights based on the diagnoses of a psychiatrist, we're all in trouble if Obama-care comes to the rest of the country. And to our knowledge, none of the compromise talks on Capitol Hill right now would remove gun owners from Obama's crosshairs.

By the way, Gordon's "compromise" contains a phony assurance that the bill's vastly understated trillion-dollar price tag would be reduced by an unspecified and illusory hundred billion.

Some cynics had predicted that so-called moderate Democrats like Gordon were "Pelosi puppets," who would wiggle around a little at the end of their strings, before dutifully dancing to Pelosi's tune. And they were right about Bart Gordon.

The question is: Will Senators Alexander and Corker do the same thing? They could well be the deciding votes in the Senate.

ACTION:

Contact Senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker. Ask them to stand firm against gun control ... and against socialized medicine, including the Finance Committee's bill -- and not to sell out to cowardly compromises in order to please the liberal elite.

NOTE: You can "copy and paste" the pre-written letters into the appropriate webforms that are provided to you below.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

(1) Senator Lamar Alexander

Webform: http://alexander.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home
Phone: 202-224-4944, or call the Capitol switchboard toll-free at 1-877-762-8762

(2) Senator Bob Corker

Webform: http://corker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInformation.ContactMe
Phone: 202-224-3344, or call the Capitol switchboard toll-free at 1-877-762-8762

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

Dear Senator:

You may be the pivotal vote in determining whether:

* My most private medical records are placed in a health/anti-gun database operated by the federal government;

* Most Americans lose their current insurance coverage due to HHS-drafted standards that their current insurance fails to comply with [sections 123 and 124 of the House Obamacare bill; section 143 of the Kennedy-Dodd bill].

So it is particularly alarming that Tennessee Congressman Bart Gordon voted for a face-saving do-nothing "compromise" which allowed the massive health abomination to pass out of Energy and Commerce Committee and go to the House floor after the August recess.

I urge you to stand firm against government-controlled medicine, and to not follow Gordon's cowardly betrayal of his Tennessee constituents.

Sincerely,

House Passes Cap and Trade

Formally known as H.R. 2998 - American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, was passed by the house 219 to 212 this afternoon.

Here are a couple of articles you might want to review:

Market Watch: Not The Answer to a Secure Energy Future

Bloomberg: Update: House Passed Climate Change Plan

Ron Paul's Blog: 8 House Republicans Helped Pass Cap and Trade

Final Roll Call on Vote to Pass Cap and Trade

Cap and Trade Update

This update I received today via email from Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) regarding the Cap and Trade vote:

Friends,

The floor fight on Cap and Trade is underway. We have had our first vote on the rule that will govern debate. The rule only allows for one Republican amendment on the bill. 30 Democrats voted against the rule, far more than expected. That is an indication that the Majority may not have the votes they need for this massive energy tax.

An amendment I proposed would force the government to disclose who gets carbon credits, and what is done with the funds that purchase them. The Democrat controlled committee that decides which amendments can be considered decided mine wouldn't make it to the floor.

You can watch what I had to say in speaking against the rule here.

Last night, the Democrats added about 300 new pages to this bill. That means that we are considering a bill in excess of over a thousand pages that no one can have read completely. I am sure you remember that the last time the House passed a thousand page bill without reading it, AIG executives wound up with more bonuses (I voted “no” on that by the way). Today’s debate and the 300 new pages of legislation were the topic of this debate on CNBC today .

The Heritage Foundation estimates that Tennessee will lose 33,000 jobs in 2012 because of this energy tax. Tennessee will lose an average of 25,600 jobs per year from 2012-2035. Need I say more?

My Best

Marsha

Follow the debate on C-SPAN

Cap and Trade This FRIDAY!

Sent to me in an email update from Representative Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) is the following regarding Cap and Trade that will hit the floor on Friday, 26 June 2009:

Friends,

The Cap and Trade bill will be on the floor tomorrow. I will update you through the day on its progress as we fight to stop this massive new energy tax. Until then I thought I would pass along this article from today's Wall Street Journal.

My Best,
Marsha

The Cap and Tax Fiction: Democrats off-loading economics to pass climate change bill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has put cap-and-trade legislation on a forced march through the House, and the bill may get a full vote as early as Friday. It looks as if the Democrats will have to destroy the discipline of economics to get it done.

Despite House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman's many payoffs to Members, rural and Blue Dog Democrats remain wary of voting for a bill that will impose crushing costs on their home-district businesses and consumers. The leadership's solution to this problem is to simply claim the bill defies the laws of economics.

Their gambit got a boost this week, when the Congressional Budget Office did an analysis of what has come to be known as the Waxman-Markey bill. According to the CBO, the climate legislation would cost the average household only $175 a year by 2020. Edward Markey, Mr. Waxman's co-author, instantly set to crowing that the cost of upending the entire energy economy would be no more than a postage stamp a day for the average household. Amazing. A closer look at the CBO analysis finds that it contains so many caveats as to render it useless.

For starters, the CBO estimate is a one-year snapshot of taxes that will extend to infinity. Under a cap-and-trade system, government sets a cap on the total amount of carbon that can be emitted nationally; companies then buy or sell permits to emit CO2. The cap gets cranked down over time to reduce total carbon emissions.

To get support for his bill, Mr. Waxman was forced to water down the cap in early years to please rural Democrats, and then severely ratchet it up in later years to please liberal Democrats. The CBO's analysis looks solely at the year 2020, before most of the tough restrictions kick in. As the cap is tightened and companies are stripped of initial opportunities to "offset" their emissions, the price of permits will skyrocket beyond the CBO estimate of $28 per ton of carbon. The corporate costs of buying these expensive permits will be passed to consumers.

The biggest doozy in the CBO analysis was its extraordinary decision to look only at the day-to-day costs of operating a trading program, rather than the wider consequences energy restriction would have on the economy. The CBO acknowledges this in a footnote: "The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap."

The hit to GDP is the real threat in this bill. The whole point of cap and trade is to hike the price of electricity and gas so that Americans will use less. These higher prices will show up not just in electricity bills or at the gas station but in every manufactured good, from food to cars. Consumers will cut back on spending, which in turn will cut back on production, which results in fewer jobs created or higher unemployment. Some companies will instead move their operations overseas, with the same result.

When the Heritage Foundation did its analysis of Waxman-Markey, it broadly compared the economy with and without the carbon tax. Under this more comprehensive scenario, it found Waxman-Markey would cost the economy $161 billion in 2020, which is $1,870 for a family of four. As the bill's restrictions kick in, that number rises to $6,800 for a family of four by 2035.

Note also that the CBO analysis is an average for the country as a whole. It doesn't take into account the fact that certain regions and populations will be more severely hit than others -- manufacturing states more than service states; coal producing states more than states that rely on hydro or natural gas. Low-income Americans, who devote more of their disposable income to energy, have more to lose than high-income families.

Even as Democrats have promised that this cap-and-trade legislation won't pinch wallets, behind the scenes they've acknowledged the energy price tsunami that is coming. During the brief few days in which the bill was debated in the House Energy Committee, Republicans offered three amendments: one to suspend the program if gas hit $5 a gallon; one to suspend the program if electricity prices rose 10% over 2009; and one to suspend the program if unemployment rates hit 15%. Democrats defeated all of them.

The reality is that cost estimates for climate legislation are as unreliable as the models predicting climate change. What comes out of the computer is a function of what politicians type in. A better indicator might be what other countries are already experiencing. Britain's Taxpayer Alliance estimates the average family there is paying nearly $1,300 a year in green taxes for carbon-cutting programs in effect only a few years.

Americans should know that those Members who vote for this climate bill are voting for what is likely to be the biggest tax in American history. Even Democrats can't repeal that reality.

Testing the CRC Waters - Time To Respond!

*****See Important Update at End of Post*****

I received this update this morning from Parental Rights.org - a wonderful organization that works to keep parental rights where they should be - with parents; and is working hard to fight against the U.S. ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

The administration is now "testing the waters" (as they indicate in this update) to see if they are going to draw much opposition for ratifying this treaty - and we need to work quickly and loudly to make our voices heard that we do not support the US ratifying this treaty.

If you are not familiar with the UN Convention, it is most urgent that you take the time to visit Parental Rights website and get educated about this convention and all it does to TAKE AWAY rights of parents.

The threat is real, it is huge, and judges throughout this nation are already using parts of the CRC to make legal rulings regarding families. You can visit this link THE THREAT to see real examples of rulings that are using CRC to break apart families and undermine parental wishes.

I urge you to keep abreast of developments regarding this treaty; in addition to taking away parental rights it is another example of taking a UN Treaty that once ratified, becomes the overwhelming law of the land here.

Here is the update I received this morning - please read and take action:

Dear Friend of Parental Rights,

Monday in a Harlem middle school, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice told a group of 120 students that administration officials are actively discussing “when and how it might be possible to join” (that is, ratify) the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). As before, she also communicated what a disgrace it is that the U.S. would stand with only Somalia against such a widely-accepted treaty.

This is the first direct public statement by the Obama administration that it will seek ratification of the UN CRC.

In my 30 years of political involvement, I have learned to recognize this as what is called a “trial balloon.” Like in World War I trench warfare, our opponents have “sent up a balloon” to see if it will draw fire. If things remain quiet, they will proceed with their plans to push for ratification of the CRC in the U.S. Senate.

To discourage them from doing so, we need to make sure that our voices are heard with unmistakable clarity. We must let the Obama administration know that we oppose this anti-family, anti-American treaty.

Here’s what we need you all to do:

1. Call the White House comments line at 202-456-1111. Tell them you heard the administration wants to ratify the CRC, and you strongly oppose this giving away of U.S. sovereignty to the UN. Also keep in mind that this treaty gives the government jurisdiction to override any decision made by any parent if the government thinks that a better decision can be made—even if there is no proof of any harm.

2. Call Ambassador Susan Rice’s office at the United Nations. Tell her that you want her to represent the United States to the world rather than trying to get the United States to go along with international treaties.

UPDATE: It turns out Susan Rice's name is not in the automated directory. However, there are three options to fix this. Please dial ONE of them, and deliver the message that you oppose the CRC, and that she should represent Americans to the United Nations rather than push a UN agenda on our country.

1. Dial the main line at 1-212-415-4000, and dial 6 to leave your message; OR

2. Dial the Public Diplomacy Office at 1-212-415-4050 and leave a message; OR

3. Dial her office directly at 1-212-415-4404. Again, you will need to leave a message.

This is not a message they want to hear, so do not expect a cordial reception. The important thing is to get the message through.

3. Contact your Senators and urge them to oppose ratification of this treaty. (Find your Senators’ contact information by typing your zip code into the box here.) Ask them also to defeat it once and for all by cosponsoring SJRes 16 – the Parental Rights Amendment.

It is very important that we speak up right now. Please call before you close this email!

Sincerely,
Michael Farris

Find this letter online.

UPDATE from ParentalRights.org: Congratulations!

The office of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice has been inundated with calls! The first phone line we sent out has been completely shut down, and the voice mail system for all of their lines has been crashed.

This means you can't likely get through, so what do you do?

You no longer need to call the U.S. office at the U.N. Instead, please contact the White House comment line at 202-456-1111. It may be busy - we have kept it busy all day -- but keep trying. It is only open from 9 to 5 (EDT), so time is limited. However, you can also send them a message online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/.

Also, contact your Senators. Their offices also close at 5 (EDT), so try to get to them quickly - or call tomorrow!

International Laws are U.S. Laws?

I received this email update today from ParentalRights.org, where I have an email subscription for their updates. They are an organization that belives children are protected when parents are empowered to rear and educate their children without interference from government.

They have an update from 16 June 2009 entitled: International Law versus Army Recruiters - here's the quote from their site:

A U.S. District Court in Oakland last week declined to hear oral arguments in a case pitting international law against U.S. military policy. Judge Saundra Armstrong announced Tuesday that she would decide the case based on briefs and other documents presented to the court for that purpose. “No matter the outcome,” Arcata counsel Brad Yamauchi says, “we’re going to appeal to the 9th Circuit and possibly the Supreme Court.”

At the heart of the case are local ordinances from Eureka and Arcata, two northern California cities, which would prohibit U.S. armed services recruiters from initiating contact with youths under 18, anywhere within city limits. The U.S. Department of Justice first filed suit against the towns, claiming that these Youth Protection Acts fail under Article VI of the Constitution, which makes federal law supreme over contradictory state or local legislation.

In response, the cities filed countersuits claiming that current military policy violates the Convention on the Rights of the Child’s Optional Protocol on Children in Armed Conflict, which the U.S. ratified in 2002. (This is a separate but related treaty to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC); the U.S. has not ratified the main CRC.) “When the government enters into an international treaty or protocol, that becomes the law of the United States,” says Yamauchi, also citing Article VI. The cities claim that the U.S. military is in violation of the Protocol’s prohibition on the recruiting of children for military service. Current federal law allows representatives of the armed services to educate high school and college students on military career options, alongside other educational and vocational recruiters at job fairs and the like. To actually enlist, however, one must be 18, or close to 18 with parental consent. This countersuit constitutes the first time since the 2002 ratification of the protocol that the federal government’s compliance with the treaty has been legally questioned.

Judge Armstrong’s decision to forgo oral arguments is widely considered favorable to the federal government’s case. “[I]f anything, it is a negative sign for us because we obviously have the steeper hill to climb,” admits Eureka City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner. However, Armstrong’s decision, which could come at any time, is not likely to be the end, nor is it safe to guess how the 9th Circuit might rule if the case is appealed.

That this case exists at all is evidence of the threat that international law presents to our American way of life. Should the full CRC be ratified, not only federal law, but even state, local and individual family decisions will come under the authority of the United Nations when children are involved. The Parental Rights Amendment is the only guaranteed method to permanently stop international law from interfering with family and state laws.

This case is very important for us to watch, because at the heart is the argument that part of an international treaty that was ratified by the U.S. in 2002 is now law of the land here. And all the more reason why we parents need to fight with all we have against allowing the U.S. to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights Of The Child. You can read more about the UN Convention on the Rights of The Child at the link and find out for yourself exactly how dangerous this treaty is to dissolving your parental rights.

IF THIS isn't enough, Britain is using the same UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to argue for an END to homeschooling for British parents - something that could very well happen in the U.S. if the Convention is ratified here. Those of you who homeschool are well aware of the opposition we have out there and this Convention, if ratified, would indeed be used against us by the NEA and others to take away our homeschooling rights. You can read more about what's happening in Britain here: UN Treaty Jeopardizes Homeschool Freedom in Britain.

Stay alert, stay informed.

No Federal Regulation of Firearms in TN??

This is almost to good to be true, but it is. Apparently, Tennessee is considering following the actions of Montana and possibly Texas in telling the Federal Government they can keep their hands off our guns.

Tennessee legislators are considering new legislation that would essentially state that any firearms manufactured and sold within the State of Tennessee would not be subject to Federal gun laws.

In April of this year, Montana passed a law that guns manufactured in Montana and sold in Montana to people who intend to keep their weapons in Montana are exempt from federal gun registration, background checks and dealer-licensing rules because no state lines are crossed.

Tennessee is considering similar legislation called the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act. You can read more of a story about this here: Fox 17/Nashville - Bill Would Prevent Federal Government from Regulating Firearms in TN - by John Dunn

Time to call your legislators and let them know how much you support this bill!

CyberSecurity???

Funny, I don't feel any safer after reading this information. Two bills, both introduced by Senator Jay Rockefeller, are being started in the Senate as part of the Cybersecurity Act of 2009: S. 773 and S. 778. The text of these bills is not available yet on GovTrack, but I'll keep looking for it so I can read the text in its entirety. But here's the premise:

S. 773: A bill to ensure the continued free flow of commerce within the United States and with its global trading partners through secure cyber communications, to provide for the continued development and exploitation of the Internet and intranet communications for such purposes, to provide for the development of a cadre of information technology specialists to improve and maintain effective cybersecurity defenses against disruption, and for other purposes.

S. 778: Bill to establish an Office of National Cybersecurity Advisor

A summary can be found here: Cyberbill Summary

According to a news article by WorldNetDaily, after viewing a working copy of the bills, they can:

"First, the White House, through the national cybersecurity advisor, shall have the authority to disconnect "critical infrastructure" networks from the Internet – including private citizens' banks and health records, if Rockefeller's examples are accurate – if they are found to be at risk of cyber attack. The working copy of the bill, however, does not define what constitutes a cybersecurity emergency, and apparently leaves the question to the discretion of the president.

Second, the bill establishes the Department of Commerce as "the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information," including the monitoring of private information networks deemed a part of the "critical infrastructure."

Third, the legislation proposes implementation of a professional licensing program for certifying who can serve as a cybersecurity professional."

This is definitely something for us to keep track of. For those how-to articles and bookmarked sites that you love - you might want to consider having a copy on your hard drive!

Action Updates

A quick post about some updated news is needed today:

~ The uproar about the possibility of forcing Veterans to pay for their own medical treatments apparently did not fall on deaf ears and it has been reported that the President has now decided not to pursue such a plan:

Controversial Health Care Plan for Veterans Dropped

~ The directive to destroy once-fired military brass for scrap instead of selling it for possible reloading benefit has also been reversed

Reversal of Decision to Destroy Military Brass

Good news on both fronts - so don't ever get discouraged that your voice is not heard. Yes, sometimes it is a difficult road, but you have to remain diligent and keep going forward on those things that you feel passionately about.

So, in that light, let's don't forget about those issues still at hand as referenced in my post here: News You Need - HR 875 and its threat to the family garden; HR 645 and HR 45 are just a few - others will be coming I'm sure and we'll do our best to keep you updated here.

G.I.V.E. Set to Pass

Latest news is that the House of Representatives is set to pass the G.I.V.E. legislation - read more here:

Fox News: House Readies Passage of Volunteerism Bill Critics Call Pricey, Forced Service

There is growing concern about a portion of the bill that tasks a commission to "exploring a number of topics, including "whether a workable, fair and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the nation."

No estimate has been given yet regarding how much this legislation will cost the taxpayers, as service members are often given college scholarships or stipends when they finish their term of service.

Brass Back In Action

According to this report at JFPO, the DOD order to have once-fired brass destroyed has been reversed! Thanks to all of you who made your voices heard on this one.

Reloading Brass-Call To ACTION!

Here's another issue that requires our prompt and constant pressure on our elected representatives to get this directive reversed!

The Defense Logistics Agency has issued a directive that all once-fired military brass now has to be DESTROYED (demilitarized) instead of sold. Once-fired military brass is commonly sold for the reloading market and sells at prices around $2.00 per pound. In its destroyed state, the brass is worth 35 cents or less per pound.

There is already a shortage of ammunition being noticed across the United States and those who reload ammunition have also noticed a shortage in virtually all reloading supplies. This directive will serve to essential shut-down reloading in this country as we know it.

So here we are, in a time of economic downturn, and our government has decided that it won't sell (recycle) a valuable resource, which will in turn cause the cost of ammunition to rise even further. The directive orders that even for current contracts for once-fired brass that have not yet been delivered the brass is to be destroyed prior to delivery.

This is nothing short of a back-door attempt by our current administration to curtail 2nd amendment rights and we should not stand for it.

Please contact your Senators and Representatives TODAY and keep the pressure on to have this directive reversed; I also sent a letter to Senator Baucus, the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.

Write your Representatives here: Contact Elected Officials

Here is additional information, as well as a copy of the letter I sent. You are free to use and/or alter the letter that I sent as you desire.

Additional information: Government Destroys Once-Fired Brass, AR-15 Forum Information

Here's the letter I sent today:~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dear Senator / Representative XXXXX:

I am truly shocked to hear about the latest Defense Logistics Agency requirement that all once-fired military brass now be DESTROYED (demilitarized) instead of made available for sale for reloading purposes.

This is nothing more than a back-door attempt by this current administration at restricting my 2nd amendment rights to keep and bear arms and it is appalling.

Not to mention the impact this will have on the availability of firearms classes being taught throughout the United States due to the already well-known ammunition shortages.

With the current ammunition shortage, that once-fired brass easily sells for over $2.00 per pound, but the destroyed brass is practically worthless at only about 35 cents per pound.

What happened to our government's concern for how our tax-payer dollars are spent during this economic downturn; not to mention positive aspect of recycling a re-usable product???

I urge you, as I am urging other Senators and Representatives, to act quickly to implement a reversal of this DLA directive immediately.

Please see the copy of the message below that demonstrates the current DLA requirement that is in place:

-------------------
-----Original Message-----
From:

SurplusNews@govliquidation.com

SurplusNews@govliquidation.com
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 5:34 PM
To:
Subject: Important Notice to Scrap Metal Buyers!

http://www.govliquidation.com

Dear Valued Customer:

Please take a moment to note important changes set forth by the Defense Logistics Agency:

Recently it has been determined that fired munitions of all calibers, shapes and sizes have been designated to be Demil code B. As a result and in conjunction with DLA's current Demil code B policy, this notice will serve as official notification which requires Scrap Venture (SV) to implement mutilation as a condition of sale for all sales of fired munitions effective immediately. This notice also requires SV to immediately cease delivery of any fired munitions that have been recently sold or on active term contracts, unless the material has been mutilated prior to sale or SV personnel can attest to the mutilation after delivery. A certificate of destruction is required in either case.

Thank you,

DOD Surplus
15051 N Kierland Blvd # 300
Scottsdale, AZ 85254

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I appreciate your urgent consideration and action on this issue at hand.

--------------------
Okay folks, time to get busy calling, writing and faxing!

FLASH Alert: GOA - Take Action

Here's the email in it's entirety, so I don't have to give a synopsis. Time to get on the email, phone and fax again folks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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

Monday, March 2, 2009


By a resounding vote of 62 to 36 last week, the U.S. Senate has approved
an amendment, offered by Senator John Ensign of Nevada, to repeal the
D.C. gun ban.

Congratulations!

But the battle is not over.

This week, the House will take up the D.C. voting legislation. And
anti-gun Speaker Nancy Pelosi is angling to impose a "gag
rule" on the
House, so that D.C. gets its unconstitutional representative, while
continuing its draconian anti-gun laws (like microstamping).

So here's the deal: The House will be asked to consider a
"rule" which
establishes the time for debate and provides for which amendments may be
considered -- and which may not.

It is expected that the Pelosi rule will seek to deny the House any vote
on the D.C. gun ban and thereby strip the repeal of the ban from the
House bill.

So what we are asking you to do is to write and/or call your congressman
and demand that he oppose any rule that strips the D.C. gun ban repeal
from the D.C. voting bill.

Just to remind you of how draconian the D.C. gun law is:

* Following the Supreme Court's decision in Heller declaring the law to
be unconstitutional, D.C. made a few cosmetic changes which will, as a
practical matter, allow it to continue to deny its citizens the right to
keep and bear arms.

* Then, the City Council passed a whole series of new anti-gun measures.
These include a requirement that most guns used for self-defense
"microstamp" fired casings in two places with a "unique
serial number."


Aside from being ineffectual with respect to stolen guns or crimes where
the brass has not been left behind, this microstamping provision is
intended to make guns so expensive that they won't be available anywhere
-- including your state.

ACTION: Write your Representative and urge him or her in the strongest
terms to oppose any rule which will strip the gun ban repeal from the
D.C. voting bill.

You can go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative a
pre-written e-mail message.

You can also call him or her toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

~~~~end of alert~~~~

GOA Flash: Take Action!

Two pro-gun amendments are being offered in the Senate - addressing the "microstamping" issue and national conceal-carry reciprocity. Harry Reid is working hard to shut them completely down using a "cloture" motion to say they are out of order, cut off debate and shut the amendments down.

Voting on this "cloture" motion could come today, but most definitely by tomorrow (27Feb09).

TIME TO get thyself to the Gun Owners of America website by clicking the link in blue, read all about it and take action calling, email and faxing your representatives.

Yes, those standard form letters we seem to get in response are annoying and can be discouraging. But it is our right and DUTY as Americans to let our chosen leaders know where we stand on the issues that are important to us.

Get busy!

FLASH - Take Action

Forwarding another Take Action email from Tennessee Firearms Association.
~~~~~~~~~~start~~~~~~~~

Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc.
Legislative Action Committee

CALL YOUR PERSONAL LEGISLATOR AND URGE THEM TO SPEAK WITH THE MEMBERS OF THIS SUBCOMMITTEE

http://www.capitol.tn.gov/house/members/

---

STATE OF TENNESSEE

106th General Assembly

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Criminal Practice and Procedure of JUD

Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - HHR31 - 12:00 PM

Watson, Chair; Sontany, Vice-Chair;

Bass, Camper, Faulkner, Matheny

1. HB 0082 by *Shaw (*SB 0019 by *Gresham, Ford, O.)

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, authorizes current and retired judges who possess a handgun carry permit to carry a firearm under same circumstances and conditions as law enforcement officers and correctional officers. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

Fiscal Summary: MINIMAL

TFA OPPOSES THIS LEGISLATION. TFA OPPOSES any legislation which has the effect of granting special privileges to civilians depending on work related criteria and/or prior service (e.g., retired officers, former military). If “current and retired” judges need to carry when they are not working as a judge, then they need to obtain a civilian permit.

2. *HB 0411 by *Pitts (SB 0383 by *Barnes)

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, creates Class A misdemeanor offense of attempting to buy firearm when prohibited by law from possessing firearm and attempting or selling firearm to person known to be prohibited by law from possessing firearm. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

Fiscal Summary: Increase Local Revenue - Not Significant

Increase Local Expenditures - Not Significant

Increase State Revenue - Not Significant

Increase State Expenditures - Not Significant

TFA OPPOSES THIS LEGISLATION. It proposes to create a new crime which, according to the fiscal summary, has no apparent costs related to enforcement which means that it would not be applied. Federal law already adequately deals with purchases and attempted purchases by prohibited persons.

3. *HB 0959 by *McCord (SB 1126 by *Norris)

Handgun Permits - As introduced, makes information contained in handgun carry permit applications and renewals, information provided to agencies to investigate applicant, and records maintained relative to the permit application confidential and creates Class A fine only misdemeanor of unauthorized publication of permit information or records. - Amends TCA Section 10-7-504 and Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA SUPPORTS THIS BILL.

4. *HB 0960 by *McCord (SB 1518 by *Burchett)

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, authorizes person with handgun carry permit to possess firearm in local, state, or federal parks. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13 and Title 70.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION – No Restricting Amendments!

5. *HB 0961 by *McCord (SB 1519 by *Burchett)

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, authorizes person with handgun carry permit to possess firearm in a refuge, public hunting area, wildlife management area, or on national forest land. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13 and Title 70.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION – No Restricting Amendments!

6. *HB 0962 by *McCord (SB 1127 by *Jackson, Norris)

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, allows person with handgun carry permit to carry in restaurants that serve alcoholic beverages as long as such person is not consuming alcoholic beverages and such restaurant is not an age-restricted venue. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA SUPPORTS BILLS TO ALLOW PERMIT HOLDERS TO CARRY IN RESTAURANTS. This bill has a pending amendment, however, which will defeat this purpose by adding a “curfew” of from 9pm to 11pm on permit holders only relative to eating in such an establishment. The proposed amendment also has a restriction on “age restricted” locations such that permit holders would not be allowed in those establishments no matter what the time may be.

7. *HB 0716 by *Niceley (SB 0976 by *Faulk)

Handgun Permits - As introduced, allows any resident who has a valid handgun carry permit to possess a handgun while within the boundaries of any state park. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13 and Title 70.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA HB 0960 and 0961 as having better language on a similar topic.

8. *HB 0414 by *Windle (SB 0565 by *Yager)

Correction, Dept. of - As introduced, authorizes inmate relations coordinators to carry firearms to same extent as correctional officers. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA neutral so long as is “on the job” only.

9. *HB 0254 by *Casada (SB 0554 by *Norris)

Firearms and Ammunition - As introduced, deletes requirement that the purchaser of a firearm give a thumbprint as part of background check process and that the TBI furnish thumbprint cards and pads to firearm dealers. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17, Part 13.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION!

11. *HB 0070 by *Fincher (SB 0474 by *Berke)

Criminal Procedure - As introduced, deletes subsection in self-defense law providing that a person not justified in use of deadly force to prevent or terminate trespass on real property or unlawful interference with personal property. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 11, Part 6.

Fiscal Summary: Decrease State Revenue - Not Significant

Decrease State Expenditures - Not Significant

Decrease Local Revenue - Not Significant

Decrease Local Expenditures - Not Significant

TFA SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION

12. HB 0615 by *Todd (*SB 0170 by *Ketron)

Public Records - As introduced, makes confidential all information furnished by a witness during the course of certain investigations. - Amends TCA Title 10.

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION

13. *HJR 0032 by *West

General Assembly, Studies - Creates special joint committee to study Tennessee's gun laws. -

Fiscal Summary: Not Available

TFA SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION

~~~~~end email alert~~~~

FLASH - Take Action!

Just received this email alert from Attorney John Harris with Tennessee Firearms Association and I'm sharing it here. This requires our action immediately! See "red" paragraph below and read on!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc.
Legislative Action Committee

Apparently without notice ascertainable from the State's web site, the House Judiciary had a "Handgun Study Committee" meeting on Thursday February 19, 2009. Rep. McCord, during the meeting which was video taped, stated that this study committee had been in existence for approximately 11 years and that it has been studying these bill issues and generating reports. I have yet to see any of these reports.

One aspect of this that is troubling is the fact that there is no notice or agenda for the meeting. For example, if you pull up the legislative web page for HB0962 (restaurant carry) at http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/BillInfo/default.aspx?BillNumber=HB0962 there is no mention of the bill being assigned to a study committee, there is no evidence that the bill was considered in a study committee on February 19, there is no evidence of the printed "amendment" that they discussed, nor is there is evidence of a report or recommendation on the bill itself. In addition, it is clear from comparing the video to the version of the bill that is on the state's web site that they are not discussing the same language.

The committee video is obtained at this link: http://tnga.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=88&clip_id=314

The committee was chaired by Rep. Joe McCord (R. Maryville) Other members included Rep. Curry Todd (R. Collierville), Rep. Mike Stewart (D. Nashville), Rep. Harry Tindell (D. Knoxville), and Rep. Ulysses Jones (D. Shelby).

The purpose of the committee was to generate a "committee report".

They focused on 4 bills. These were restaurant carry, confidentiality list, wildlife management carry and state parks carry.

Restaurant Carry. HB0962 Much discussion on this issue and the problem in the minds of some of these legislators is again "what is a bar?" The issue they want to focus on is either how to define a bar or how to impose limits that would preclude people from being in restaurants during times that they think are indicative of "bar" and "tavern" problems.

Rep. McCord proposed 2 routes to be used in combination to address the "bar" issue. TFA opposes both by the way.

First, Rep. McCord discusses an outright ban after a certain time in the evening (proposed from 9pm to 11pm). The second part of the bill would ban possession if the establishment is "age restricted" - that is whether the place requires proof of age to enter the establishment.

Rep. Todd stated that he wanted no frame but that an 11pm time frame would be better if there has to be a time frame. Rep. McCord added in to clarify that if the restaurant started carding prior to the time cutoff, then it would automatically become a restricted property which means people would have to get up and leave. Rep. Stewart said that he felt the 11pm deadline was too late and he recommended 9pm (that shows a lot of trust in gun owners now doesn't it?). Finally, Rep. Todd moved to make the cutoff 11pm which carried on a voice vote.

They also discussed what the law should be relative to a hotels (e.g., Opryland) that have restaurants. Rep. Todd expressed the belief that any such hotel is completely off limits, presumably even in the private rooms, but Rep. McCord suggested that this issue be deferred to the full committee.

Confidentiality of Records HB0959 The "Commercial Appeal" poster child. Recommended without debate.

Parks HB0960 Rep. McCord notes that the federal government change encourages this change in the law. Rep. Jones asked about city parks. Recommended without debate.

Wildlife Management Areas HB0961 Similar to the parks bill. Recommended without debate.

Although we have been unable to locate a calendar for the week of February 23, it was announced at the close of the committee meeting that all the "gun bills" would be in the House Judiciary Criminal Practices committee meeting on Wednesday, February 25.

NOW IS THE TIME TO CALL PARTICULARLY ON THE RESTAURANT ISSUE.

Call YOUR House Members. You can look them up at this link: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/house/members/

The principal issue of concern on this list is that this study committee is recommending restrictions on the restaurant bill which we have historically opposed. It is obvious that some House members are in favor of severe restrictions through time limits (e.g., 9pm to 5am) on the restaurants if they support the legislation. They also want to impose restrictions based on whether the restaurant is "age restricted".

TFA historically opposes any such restrictions because the permit holder remains subject to the no consumption rule. For example, what would be the consequence at a New Year's Eve party - are permit holders going to be required to leave by 9pm, 10pm etc.?

Also, what happens if its a busy night - say Valentines - and you get to the restaurant early but there is an hour wait, and then there are delays in the food delivery. Do you have to get up and leave to disarm yourself if the time runs out? Well, based on the comment by Rep. McCord that "carding" would trigger an immediate status change (even if you were unaware) then presumably Rep. McCord would also state that if your meal was delayed past the 9, 10 or 11pm cutoff that you would have to leave the premises or at least leave long enough to disarm and secure your weapon in your vehicle (if you drove).

These types of restrictions are clear evidence that there are still many members of the Tennessee General Assembly who just simply do not want to trust handgun permit holders to behave. We don't need curfews and restrictions and we need to make sure they know that!
~~~~~end of email alert~~~~~

FLASH - Requires Action

Act quickly to let your voice be heard about an Anti-Gun Land Bill that is moving rapidly and expecting a vote in the House this week!

You can quickly send email letters to your representatives by using this service at Gun Owners of America (GOA):

Take Action: Anti-Gun Land Bill