Dear Bill,
Knowing of your support for Second Amendment rights and your vote against H.R. 1025, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, in the 103rd Congress, we seek your co-sponsorship for H.R. 1009, the States' Rights and Second and Tenth Amendment Restoration Act.
As you know, last fall during final consideration with H.R. 3610, the Omnibus Appropriations bill (Public Law 104-208), Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey inserted an amendment into Section 658 that bans gun ownership by any person ever convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
Although well-intentioned, there are serious problems with the Lautenberg Amendment. First, the amendment penalizes many now law-abiding Americans who have already faced justice. Second, it runs roughshod over the rights of states and judicial discretion in assessing the appropriate penalties on a case by case basis. Next, it constitutes an unfunded federal mandate by passing the enormous cost of enforcing this provision along to the city, county, and state police offices, and because of this, is virtually impossible to monitor and enforce. Fourth, in our opinion, the amendment does not specifically deal with a subject delegated to Congress under Article 1, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution, and is therefore unconstitutional under the Tenth Amendment as interpreted by United States vs. Lopez. Furthermore, the amendment violates constitutional due process and constitutes an ex post facto law because it imposes a criminal penalty on crimes which were not subject to that penalty at the time H.R. 3610 was enacted into law. Finally, we know you will agree that this is a bad way to pass any sort of legislation. Senator Lautenberg's amendment was slipped in at the last minute into a 2,000 page appropriations bill that we doubt few Members had a chance to fully read and understand the consequences before voting on the bill.
Ironically, this amendment has had the effect of disarming many women who need protection from abusive spouses. Many police departments require officers to charge both parties in a domestic dispute, even if there is no sign of violence and neither party wants to press charges. Some of these cases are uncontested, with both parties paying a simple misdemeanor fine in order to put the incident behind them.
Every one of us believe that the punishment should fit the crime. Crimes that are felonies should be punished as felonies. Misdemeanors should be punished as misdemeanors. If states or judges wish to attach additional penalties to these crimes, it is their prerogative. But deciding at the federal level to establish new punishments for misdemeanors after the fact is just plain wrong.
For these reasons, we have introduced H.R. 1009, the States Rights and Second and Tenth Amendment Restoration Act of 1997, to repeal the Lautenberg Amendment. This bill is supported by many police and sheriffs across the country, and also by women's groups such as the Independent Women's Forum and Concerned Women for America.
If we can think beyond the soundbite, reasonable people will agree that the Lautenberg Amendment is bad law. And bad laws should be repealed. We urge you to join us and many other of our colleagues in co-sponsoring this truly important piece of legislation.
Sincerely,