|
The Facts About NRA and CARA
|
"...NRA would not attach its name and support to a bill
if its effect was to infringe upon any of our members' Constitutional
rights...." |
|
Rep. Young (R-AS) |
In July, the House Resources Committee favorably reported H.R. 701, the
Conservation and Reinvestment Act known as CARA. Because the bill is
expected to be brought to the House of Representatives for a vote
sometime in the Fall, the NRA has received inquiries regarding its
position on H.R. 701, specifically with respect to the perceived impacts
of CARA upon private property owners. We are happy to set the record
straight regarding NRA support of CARA so that our members will be
informed of NRA's views.
NRA has supported CARA since it was first introduced in 1998 by
Congressman Don Young (R-Alaska).
All national conservation and hunting
organizations are on record in support of CARA. NRA's support for CARA
is tied to Title III, which provides additional funds to state fish and
wildlife agencies through a trust account Congressionally established in
the 1930's with the strong backing of sportsmen. The
Pittman-Robertson
trust account assists states in conserving and restoring wildlife and
habitat.
The issue over CARA that has been brought to NRA's attention, however,
is over Title II, which creates a land acquisition trust account for the
federal land management agencies. Property rights groups claim that
Title II will give the federal government unfettered powers to seize
property owned by our citizens, and they have rallied grassroots efforts
to have NRA withdraw its support for CARA.
We are very sensitive to the fears expressed by some of our members
that CARA is a threat to private property owners. Congressman Young has
endeavored to construct Title II in a manner that addresses and
alleviates these fears. However, we doubt that any private property
protections built into CARA will satisfy those of our citizens who
oppose any further land acquisition and expansion of the federal estate.
In that context, while we have waged many battles over land acquisition
and land transfer/exchange proposals when such actions pose a threat to
hunting opportunities, the NRA has no position with respect to federal
land acquisition, per se, due to our single issue charter.
Rest assured that NRA would not attach its name and support to a bill
if its effect was to infringe upon any of our members' Constitutional
rights.
Again, our support for CARA is tied to Title III, which is one
title of ten in the bill. On the other hand, property-rights groups
oppose a different title of the ten. Professional observers understand
the legislative process is one of debate and amendments, and concerned
individuals would be better served by an action plan to amend the bill
rather than ad hominem attacks on
groups such as the NRA who are simply fulfilling their mandate to serve
their own constituencies. We suggest you inquire of those who are
provoking these attacks what their legislative plan of action may be.
The contact information for the individual responsible for launching
this irresponsible diversion, Mr. J. Zane Walley, is (505) 653-4024;
e-mail : frc@pvtnetworks.net, and we suggest you contact him
posthaste.
Related Stories...
More Info About Federal Issues
Nov. 2001 - NRA Board Issues Policy Statement on CARA
NRA-ILA's Baker Hails Passage of Pittman-Robertson Reform Bill
Pittman-Robertson Reform Bill Introduced in the Senate
NRA Testifies on Pittman-Robertson Reform Bill
|
