As we await the beginning of October and the promised revelation of candidate grades from NRA's Political Victory Fund, there is a way to determine who the association is supporting in a most important way--with that life's blood of politics, money. And while we've learned from the situation with Harry Reid that contributions don't necessarily equate with formal endorsements, a testimonial to the media and a hefty check don't exactly hurt, as this statement from Reid campaign manager Brandon Hall demonstrates:
"The NRA’s relationship with Sen. Reid has been long-standing and productive and – unlike for Sharron Angle – they’ve put their money where their mouth is this cycle. Along with their financial support, the declaration of NRA head Wayne LaPierre that Sen. Reid is 'a true champion of the Second Amendment' and that 'no one has been a stronger advocate for responsible gun ownership than him' shows beyond a doubt that the NRA believes Sen. Reid to be a strong advocate for Nevadans’ Second Amendment rights in the US Senate."
One gets the feeling if certain parties were winking any harder at each other, their faces might seize up.
So how can we figure out who else NRA is giving money to? I ask, because a New York Times analysis from Aug. 2009 told us:
The National Rifle Association is pouring money into the effort to oust Gov. Jon S. Corzine of New Jersey.
Yeah, we knew Corzine sucks on guns--but how was his opponent, Chris Christie any better? Click here to go to the New Jersey Coalition for Self Defense website to see a Christie campaign mailer that not only attacks his opponents' "radical plan to legalize assault weapons," but actually exploits the Violence Policy Center "confusion" about them, characterizing them as "automatic."
Here's where the "rules" come into play, where the indirect path from donor to beneficiary also provides a degree of plausible deniability:
The Republican Governors Association, which has spent nearly $3 million already in support of Christopher J. Christie, the former federal prosecutor who is challenging Mr. Corzine, has raised $90,000 from the National Rifle Association since December.
The Republican group says the rifle association donates about the same amount every year.
So they don't give directly to the anti-gunner--they give to a group that portions out the spoils, and that includes sending money we donate to anti-gunners?
As an aside, that reminds me of the old National Republican Senatorial Committee Gun Owners Task Force, that sent out solicitations to prospective "founding members" (and where they got their mailing list from is a good question I have no answer to) under the theme of protecting gun rights, but somehow neglected to explain exactly how donations would be routed exclusively to deserving recipients, as opposed to divvied up as the GOP saw fit.
So is there a way to figure out--now--who NRA--and others--are giving money to directly?
Everybody is aware of OpenSecrets.org, right? If you're interested in "guard[ing] with jealous attention the public liberty," you should be.
Here are NRA "2010 Cycle" contributions to federal recipients.
I haven't had time to get up to the elbows in this, but do note something that immediately stands out for me: I don't see either Ron Paul or Rand Paul on the recipient list. But I do see some names that don't don't stand out here or here.
My recommendation for political contributions is to cut out the middleman and give directly to candidates who have earned your support. Otherwise, there's no guaranteeing where your donation will end up.
------------
More on gun-tracing mor...uh...mayors
It's Wednesday, so that means there will be a new Trigger Sports Live! show.
Host James B. Towle and I will be talking about Bloomberg's new gun tracing report at Noon PST.
------------
Help wanted--inquire within
Regular readers: Please help me spread the word by sharing Gun Rights Examiner links with your friends? And get more commentary on the gun rights stories of the day at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.
Comments
Other questions one might ask, regarding the 501c3 NRA Foundation, of which monies in 2008, the latest data available, according to their IRS returns, nearly 10% of monies raised went to line the pockets of Wayne La Pierre and the Treasurer. About $2 million dollars out of $20 million.raised. I'm beginning to wonder what kind of racket is going on, and what I've helped raise money for.
IRS returns for tax exempt organization can pe
Ires returns can be found on www.guidestar.org for 501c3 tax exempts..enlightening..
I have to agree with sniper310, Mr La Pierre has turned the NRA into his own little cash cow. I would assume Mr Cox is learning too. We all receive ballots to vote for board members, but we are never given the right to change/remove such people as La Pierre. The NRA has lost focus. As to giving to politicians, the money should be given after they are elected. As we all know a politician would sell their own mother or tell anyone anything to get a buck. All one has to do is look at Reid.
David the NRA has lost all credibility with me.
They are NOW supporting HR5667 a bill that will fund a study to determine if a cheap and effective microstamping technique can be found.
Add in statements like Harry Reid is a strong supporter of law abiding gun owners and the word vomit comes into play.
And yes the NRA does not support Ron or Rand Paul or any other candidate that might actually repeal gun control.
The NRA leadership sees its members and the 2A as a cash cow!
Codrea may have forgotten, or not known, that there was another gubernatorial race last year with a clear contrast between the opposing candidates -- Bob McDonnell versus Creigh Deeds in Virginia. Could it be that the RGA went to support the pro-gun candidate in that race?
Congressman Dan Boren introduced H.R. 5667 calling for a study on this issue so that states considering such microstamping (and there are several) would not pass such restrictions and defer to a federal study.
This same legislative tactic -- a federal study on ballistic imaging -- was used after the "sniper shootings" in the DC area made this gun control du jour an issue in Congress and surrounding states. The study bill never passed and neither did ballistic fingerprinting of firearms -- the right result.
Finally, Ron Paul was one of the four Republican congressmen -- Mike Castle, Mark Kirk and Chris Shays being the others -- who voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that shut down bogus lawsuits attempting to bankrupt the gun industry. Ron Paul also did not sign the pro-gun amicus brief in the McDonald/Chicago case stating that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right protecting all Americans.
I don't know what any of this has to do with refuting the core point made here--if you want to donate money to a candidate, you are better off doing it directly. Even your Ron Paul example, and I understand the principles he explains that by and disagreed with him on that point on WarOnGuns, supports my contention--giving political campaign money to orgs that support him will work against your personal convictions--so rather than give to a group where you don't control all disbursements, support those candidates you approve of directly.
Note none of this is saying don't support groups--they by law must keep their political money collecting efforts separate from,other activities.
I don't send money to NRA/PVF , for the same reason I don't contribute to the United Way -- they take a cut before my money OSTENSIBLY goes to the causes I want to support.
Re David's comment "I don't know what any of this has to do with refuting the core point made here--if you want to donate money to a candidate, you are better off doing it directly"
I agree 100%, stop supporting groups led by those who line their own pockets with volunteers help and contributions. And the IRS 990's prove my point. Would be interesting how much of a cut the PVF takes, but that isn't publically available information, like the 501c3 arm of the NRA, the NRA Foundation is.
If one's concern is about "lining the pockets" of someone else, many consultants and vendors make tens of thousands of dollars each year when contributions are made to political candidates. Let's not be so naive.
Also, all expenditures of PACs must be reported to the Federal Election Commission. Any "cuts" taken are public. I suspect that a higher percentage of the money contributed to the NRA-PVF goes to the candidates that it supports and to independent expenditures supporting those endorsed candidates or opposing anti-gun candidates than nearly all other political action committees.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!