10/98 Hit RNC Regarding Smith Amdt.

Vote On Smith Anti-Brady Amendment Could be Tomorrow
— Time to Push the RNC Button

by Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
703-321-8585   fax 703-321-8408

(Tuesday, October 13, 1998) — Well, it turns out that the full (Sen. Bob) Smith language is NOT included in the Commerce-Justice-State conference report which will probably be sent back to the House and Senate for final consideration tomorrow.

On Friday, Gun Owners of America sent a communication to legislators on the Hill asking them to vote against the Commerce-Justice-State bill, as a protest against the corrupting of the Smith Anti-Tax and Registration amendment.

The conference version has dropped an extremely important part of the Smith amendment which would allow aggrieved private citizens to sue the FBI, and to collect monetary damages, including attorney’s fees. As we noted last week, deleting this language from the bill means that gun owners may have to rely upon Janet Reno to rein in FBI officials who illegally retain gun owners’ names– an outrageous scenario.

GOA is also dismayed that the provision requiring the “immediate destruction” of all gun owners’ names has been deleted. Allowing the FBI to keep gun owners’ names for 24 hours represents the first time in federal history that government officials would have explicit permission to retain gun owners’ names for a period of time– albeit a brief period.

GOA on the Hill

Gun Owners of America has been working through the leadership offices of both houses to get the full Smith amendment restored. We have also drafted letters for House Representatives to send to their leaders, such as Speaker Gingrich, demanding that the full amendment be added to the bill.

Senator Smith himself has also been lobbying to get his amendment restored. GOA would ask that you keep trying to leave your opinions with the leadership offices if you haven’t already. Many of you have not been able to get through by fax. But realize that when this happens, it is a GOOD sign. If their fax machines are not answering, it usually means that their paper trays have been emptied by gun owners.

HERE’S WHAT TO DO

* If you’ve already contacted the leadership offices, turn your “guns” (so to speak) on the Republican National Committee (RNC). The Republican leadership is prepared to cave in to Bill Clinton’s threatened veto of the Appropriations bill if it contains the Smith Anti-Brady amendment.

* It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Republican, Democrat or Independent. Tell the RNC that if the Smith amendment is weakened in any way, they can kiss your financial support good-bye!

* Also, ask them why the Republican leadership would water down a pro-gun amendment like the Smith amendment, when they did nothing to weaken anti-gun legislation like the Lautenberg and Kohl gun bans.

* These two gun bans– which were added to appropriations legislation during the last Congress– were not removed or significantly watered down one bit during the conference committee process. But now, the Smith amendment (which is the best piece of legislation that gun owners have seen in a LONG time) has been trashed by the conference committee, even though it passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with a veto-proof majority! What’s wrong with this picture?

HOW TO CONTACT THE RNC

* Contact Jim Nicholson, Chairman of the RNC, in the following ways:

Phone: 202-863-8500 or 202-863-8700
Fax: 202-863-8774 or 202-863-8820
Email: [email protected]

Pre-written text is provided below.

* The RNC is telling people that they are in support of the Smith Amendment. This is not enough. We want more than their support. We want the FULL Smith amendment; and not just support for a desecrated version of it!

**** Pre-written text ****

Dear Chairman Nicholson:

I cannot believe that the Republican leadership is watering down the Smith Anti-Tax and Registration amendment!

As you may know, the FBI has issued regulations stating their intent to register and tax gun owners. Senator Bob Smith offered an amendment to put a stop to this– and the amendment passed overwhelmingly with 69 votes back in July.

However, the appropriations conference committee has dropped an extremely important part of the Smith amendment which would allow aggrieved private citizens to sue the FBI, and to collect monetary damages, including attorney’s fees. Deleting this language from the bill means that gun owners may have to rely upon Janet Reno to rein in FBI officials who illegally retain gun owners’ names– an outrageous scenario.

And, the provision requiring the “immediate destruction” of all gun owners’ names has been deleted. Allowing the FBI to keep gun owners’ names for 24 hours represents the first time in federal history that government officials would have explicit permission to retain gun owners’ names for a period of time– albeit a brief period.

Why would the Republican leadership water down a pro-gun amendment like the Smith amendment, when they did nothing to weaken anti-gun legislation like the Lautenberg and Kohl gun bans? These two gun bans– which were added to appropriations legislation during the last Congress– were not removed or significantly watered down one bit during the conference committee process.

But now, the Smith amendment (which is the best piece of legislation that gun owners have seen in a LONG time) has been desecrated by the appropriations conference committee, even though it passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with a veto-proof majority! What’s wrong with this picture?

I hope you will pass on my views to House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. I want the FULL Smith amendment passed as part of the omnibus spending bill.

But if the Republicans are going to sell out my gun rights and continue to water-down the most significant pro-gun vote in the Senate for more than a decade, don’t bother to ask me or any other gun owner for a contribution this year because we will send it to people who truly care about our rights as gun owners.

You’ve taken gun owners for granted one time too often.

Sincerely,