# NRA donations to politicians



## Don M. (Jun 22, 2016)

I've noticed several comments, in recent days, about how the NRA contributes Vast Sums of money to our politicians...SO, I decided to look it up.  I referenced OpenSecrets.org, which keeps track of the money donated according to records at the FEC (Federal Election Commission)...which All politicians are legally obligated to report to.  Their latest summary is from the 2014 cycle...which is probably indicative of most election cycles.  

In 2014, the NRA donated about $810,000 to over 100 members of Congress...House and Senate.  This is a drop in the bucket compared to the 100's of millions that are contributed in an average election cycle.  Here are the numbers, and the politicians the NRA donated to....no more than $9900 to any one politician.

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?cycle=2014&id=D000000082

The "Myth" that the NRA "Buys" our politicians is just that...a Myth, fostered by those who really don't know what they are talking about.  

The "Truth" is...the NRA doesn't need to influence the politicians with Money.  The NRA is the ONLY advocate for the 10's of millions of responsible gun owners in the U.S., and the ONLY organization that counters the Knee Jerk reactions of the Anti-Gun crowd.  As such, it heavily influences the votes cast by the gun owners...and counters the money, and propaganda generated by the Anti-Gun advocates.

And, NO, I am NOT a member of the NRA...but I Do own firearms, and I Do Vote.


----------



## Ruthanne (Jun 22, 2016)

I really wonder if the NRA doesn't threaten to shoot people who don't comply with what they want but how could I find stats on that?


----------



## WhatInThe (Jun 22, 2016)

Everyone screams NRA that evil NRA big bad NRA etc. 

But it's not the NRA the politicians fear or that is causing them consternation it is the public via feedback and watching them going on record buying sprees anytime gun control comes up. There were gun shops since the Orlando shooting that have broken records with AR-15 sales and that wasn't even the weapon used which was a Sig Sauer. They see the fear that a ban on sales then possesion is a worry of the law abiding public. As many that want gun control, especially with polls taken shortly after an incident/shooting just as many are leery of any gun control legislation.


----------



## Don M. (Jun 22, 2016)

Ruthanne said:


> I really wonder if the NRA doesn't threaten to shoot people who don't comply with what they want but how could I find stats on that?



Have you been drinking??


----------



## jnos (Jun 22, 2016)

DonM said:
			
		

> The NRA is the ONLY advocate for the 10's of millions of responsible gun owners in the U.S


 I was under the impression is the NRA's mission is an advocate for gun manufacturers--thus the donations.  "Advocate of responsible gun owners" is a great tag line though! And, personally, I think $9900 is quite a bid from one source in house and senate races.


----------



## Don M. (Jun 22, 2016)

jnos said:


> I was under the impression is the NRA's mission is an advocate for gun manufacturers--thus the donations.  "Advocate of responsible gun owners" is a great tag line though! And, personally, I think $9900 is quite a bid from one source in house and senate races.



If you go to this same Opensecrets.org web site, and look up the donations being made to the various politicians, $9900 IS a paltry sum.  For example, George Soros...One Person...gave Hillary Clinton over 7 Million Dollars for her current campaign.  

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?cycle=2016&id=N00000019&type=f


----------



## Ruthanne (Jun 22, 2016)

Don M. said:


> Have you been drinking??


It is what I have been thinking for a long time.  So many are so scared of them.  Maybe they are threatening people.  Whether I am drinking or not has nothing to do with this.epper:


----------



## Shalimar (Jun 22, 2016)

Don M. said:


> Have you been drinking??


So, a woman who disagrees with your premise on NRA is deemed a possible drunk? That is patronising, sexist, and totally unacceptable. Not the behaviour of a gentleman.


----------



## Ruthanne (Jun 22, 2016)

Shalimar said:


> So, a woman who disagrees with your premise on NRA is deemed a possible drunk? That is patronising, sexist, and totally unacceptable. Not the behaviour of a gentleman.


:notfair:


----------



## Bobw235 (Jun 23, 2016)

Interesting thread.  I think the real power comes from the NRA's ability to lobby and either support or attack campaigns through their PAC.  While individual contributions may be low, their membership ranks and the ability of their political action committee make them a powerful force.  I suspect many members of congress are concerned about crossing them because the NRA can come after them with attack ads during an election season.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Jun 23, 2016)

The motto should be the same as for alcohol:  Drink responsibly.  Shoot Responsibly.  But many do neither...


----------



## Bobw235 (Jun 23, 2016)

For those that might want more info about why the NRA is so powerful, here's an article by the BBC from January this year.

*US gun control: What is the NRA and why is it so powerful?*


Three paragraphs from the article:
The NRA spends about $250m per year, far more than all the country's gun control advocacy groups put together. But the NRA has a much larger membership than any of those groups and disburses funds for things such as gun ranges and educational programmes.

In terms of lobbying, the NRA officially spends about $3m per year to influence gun policy - the recorded spend on lobbying in 2014 was $3.3m. That is only the recorded contributions to lawmakers however, and considerable sums are spent elsewhere via PACs and independent expenditures - funds which are difficult to track.

Analysts point out that the NRA also wields considerable indirect influence via its highly politically engaged membership, many of whom will vote one way or another based on this single issue. The NRA publicly grades members of Congress from A to F on their perceived friendliness to gun rights. Those ratings can have a serious effect on poll numbers and even cost pro-gun control candidates a seat.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jun 23, 2016)

Contributions: $984,152; Lobbying: $3,360,000 
Outside Spending (independent expenditures or electioneering communications in the current election cycle): $28,212,718 
Lobbying: $3,360,000 

Contributions to candidates: $810,462 
Contributions to Leadership PACs: $26,900 
Contributions to parties: $141,790 


https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000082


----------



## Jackie22 (Jun 23, 2016)

[h=1]NRA Caught Illegally Funneling Donations To Republican Candidates[/h]http://www.occupydemocrats.com/nra-caught-illegally-funneling-donations-to-republican-candidates/ 

The National Rifle Association, the notorious Second Amendment nonprofit that has become one of the three most politically influential groups in Washington, is apparently being used as a donation fundraising machine for the Republican Party. It is a clear violation of the campaign finance laws which desperately attempt to keep tabs on the billions of dollars that steadily engulf our democracy, eroding it away a little more every election cycle. With the upcoming 2016 election projected to see five billion dollars spent to sway American voters, efforts to keep the process transparent will be much more difficult and yet ever-more important, for the sake of our political integrity. 

Yahoo News recently published a report exposing illegal transfers of funds from the NRA’s nonprofit to their lobbying group, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA), and then to their PAC, the Political Victory Fund. The NRA has been soliciting donations from their members and then funneling the cash into the PAC, using funds which a member may have thought were for funding events but are now being put to use supporting a political candidate with whom he or she may not approve of, which is very illegal.... 

It should come as no surprise that one of the biggest pieces of the Republican propaganda/lobbying/fundraising machine is willfully ignoring the laws that govern its practices. It abuses its tax-exempt status to funnel millions ($37 million in 2014) to political campaigns supporting Republican Congressmen, who in turn keep any laws from passing that might help alleviate America’s epidemic of gun violence, which kills more than 30 people a day. The NRA’s recent mega-convention in Tennessee (sixteen acres of guns!) featured every single major and minor Republican presidential candidate (except Rand Paul, who they don’t like), giving the same tired prattle of Second Amendment rights and jingoistic paranoia about the threat of “Muslim terrorists”. 

Their influence is a blight on American politics and their single-minded fanaticism contributes to millions of deaths every year. It’s about time they got caught doing something like this, and just goes to show how the Republican political machine does business- under the table and in the dark. Now if only someone would do something about it.


----------



## Gemma (Jun 23, 2016)

Check out the interactive table, in the link provided, that shows what gun rights groups have contributed to your senators as of June 13, 2016. 

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11982428/senate-gun-control-reform-impossible#undefined 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...M/edit?ts=575f2c14&pref=2&pli=1#gid=123416879

I still stand by my previous comment, the NRA has an influence on our Congress!


----------



## tnthomas (Jun 23, 2016)

Bobw235 said:


> For those that might want more info about why the NRA is so powerful, here's an article by the BBC from January this year.
> 
> *US gun control: What is the NRA and why is it so powerful?*
> 
> ...



I know first hand from various gun enthusiast forums that being an NRA member ranks as high(or higher) than does being a human being, and that such forum members are quite highly politically engaged.

I like visiting those forums to talk about guns, however a lot of those members consider guns a religion.     Politically, such forums are just to the [far right] of the far-right; the POTUS is disparaged on so many levels, the filth is horrendous.


----------



## Debby (Jun 23, 2016)

Don M. said:


> I've noticed several comments, in recent days, about how the NRA contributes Vast Sums of money to our politicians...SO, I decided to look it up.  I referenced OpenSecrets.org, which keeps track of the money donated according to records at the FEC (Federal Election Commission)...which All politicians are legally obligated to report to.  Their latest summary is from the 2014 cycle...which is probably indicative of most election cycles.
> 
> In 2014, the NRA donated about $810,000 to over 100 members of Congress...House and Senate.  This is a drop in the bucket compared to the 100's of millions that are contributed in an average election cycle.  Here are the numbers, and the politicians the NRA donated to....no more than $9900 to any one politician.
> 
> ...




I Googled the question, 'how does the NRA influence politicians'.  The BBC did a piece which did mention the relatively small amount of $3.3 million per year being distributed directly to about 240 politicians, but then it went on to say this, which is where the story changes I think:

'...In terms of lobbying, the NRA officially spends about $3m per year to influence gun policy - the recorded spend on lobbying in 2014 was $3.3m. That is only the recorded contributions to lawmakers however, and considerable sums are spent elsewhere via PACs and independent expenditures - funds which are difficult to track.....'


----------



## Debby (Jun 23, 2016)

jnos said:


> I was under the impression is the NRA's mission is an advocate for gun manufacturers--thus the donations.  "Advocate of responsible gun owners" is a great tag line though! And, personally, I think $9900 is quite a bid from one source in house and senate races.




They are an advocate for the gun manufacturers industry.  Business Insider did a piece on what they do for that industry and how much they are paid to do it.

'Since 2005, the gun industry and its corporate allies have given between $20 million and $52.6 million to it through the NRA Ring of Freedom sponsor program. Donors include firearm companies like Midway USA, Springfield Armory Inc, Pierce Bullet Seal Target Systems, and Beretta USA Corporation. Other supporters from the gun industry include Cabala's, Sturm Rugar & Co, and Smith & Wesson.The NRA also made $20.9 million — about 10 percent of its revenue — from selling advertising to industry companies marketing products in its many publications in 2010, according to the IRS Form 990. '   http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-industry-funds-nra-2013-1

That's a big incentive to be the kind of organization that they are.  The article went on to say:

'There are two reasons for the industry support for the NRA. The first is that the organization develops and maintains a market for their products.  The second, less direct function, is to absorb criticism in the event of PR crises for the gun industry.It's possible that without the NRA, people would be protesting outside of Glock, SIG Sauer and Freedom Group — the makers of the guns used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre —  and dragging the CEOs in front of cameras and Congress. That is certainly what happened to tobacco executives when their products continued killing people....'


----------



## Debby (Jun 23, 2016)

Bobw235 said:


> For those that might want more info about why the NRA is so powerful, here's an article by the BBC from January this year.
> 
> *US gun control: What is the NRA and why is it so powerful?*
> 
> ...





You beat me to it


----------



## Bobw235 (Jun 23, 2016)

Debby said:


> You beat me to it



Amongst my many talents, a quick Google finger.


----------



## Debby (Jun 23, 2016)

Jackie22 said:


> *NRA Caught Illegally Funneling Donations To Republican Candidates*
> 
> http://www.occupydemocrats.com/nra-caught-illegally-funneling-donations-to-republican-candidates/
> 
> ...




And they are only one of the lobbyists among many, who do the bidding of the rest of corporate America.  Right here I think, is the single biggest problem with your system.  Those companies who give to both sides mostly, are more influential than you voters.  You folks get to pick between two candidates, but when both candidate got money from Company XYZ and he comes calling to who's ever office, that newly elected 'puppet' is going to nudge things to keep his donor happy because there'll be another election someday.  And before you know it, there have been so many 'nudges' that the system is actually openly skewed in that Company's favour, and the voter is so used to seeing it that way, that it becomes engrained.  Corporations, the bankers who facilitate their progress (and come to you for bail outs) and the military who need wars to make careers!   Is that a recipe for unfairness.  That's my opinion anyway.

I don't think our system is quite as lopsided and maybe another Canadian could chime in and correct me if I'm wrong. I do know that our politicians cannot accept any corporate donations.  Only donations from individuals are allowed.  I believe the current maximum that an individual can donate is $1100.00.   It seems to me that would make a huge difference in a number of ways.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jun 23, 2016)

tnthomas said:


> I know first hand from various gun enthusiast forums that being an NRA member ranks as high(or higher) than does being a human being, and that such forum members are quite highly politically engaged.
> 
> I like visiting those forums to talk about guns, however a lot of those members consider guns a religion.     Politically, such forums are just to the [far right] of the far-right; the POTUS is disparaged on so many levels, the filth is horrendous.



.....I'll bet a high percentage of the members of that forum are from Texas.


----------



## Don M. (Jun 23, 2016)

Debby said:


> And they are only one of the lobbyists among many, who do the bidding of the rest of corporate America.  Right here I think, is the single biggest problem with your system. .



Exactly!  Our US political system is All based upon Money.  Anyone who thinks that the politicians...even at the State and local levels...are there to "serve the people" is Not paying attention.  The overwhelming majority of politicians are highly interested in padding their own pockets enroute to performing their elected duties.  Even someone so seemingly "for the people" as Elizabeth Warren, is a multimillionaire.  The Lobbyists on K Street write most of the legislation that comes before Congress, and the House and Senate members only "Sponsor" that legislation.  

About the Only way that anything resembling Government Of/By/For the people might ever be achieved is if there were NO campaign funds allowed from private or corporate sources, with each candidate given a fixed amount of tax dollars to conduct their campaigns.  Fat chance of something like that ever happening.


----------



## senile1 (Jun 23, 2016)

Don M. said:


> I've noticed several comments, in recent days, about how the NRA contributes Vast Sums of money to our politicians...SO, I decided to look it up.  I referenced OpenSecrets.org, which keeps track of the money donated according to records at the FEC (Federal Election Commission)...which All politicians are legally obligated to report to.  Their latest summary is from the 2014 cycle...which is probably indicative of most election cycles.
> 
> In 2014, the NRA donated about $810,000 to over 100 members of Congress...House and Senate.  This is a drop in the bucket compared to the 100's of millions that are contributed in an average election cycle.  Here are the numbers, and the politicians the NRA donated to....no more than $9900 to any one politician.
> 
> ...







What is not covered here is how much money is donated via 2nd and 3rd party  companies, each company donating the max. One company owning another company, owning another company, the oldest trick in the book.  An example of this is( this is only an example and not an implication that PepsiCo and/or it affiliates supports or donates to NRA) PepsiCo, which own Pepsi, Frito Lay, Gatorade, Quaker Oates, Tropicana*, Cap/n Crunch* Cereal, King Vitamin Cereal, Kretchmer Toasted Wheat Germ.......ect...ect...... Companies owned and operated by NRA supporters may/ do donate to causes they support through companies they own with impunity.


----------



## Ruthanne (Jun 25, 2016)

Debby said:


> And they are only one of the lobbyists among many, who do the bidding of the rest of corporate America.  Right here I think, is the single biggest problem with your system.  Those companies who give to both sides mostly, are more influential than you voters.  You folks get to pick between two candidates, but when both candidate got money from Company XYZ and he comes calling to who's ever office, that newly elected 'puppet' is going to nudge things to keep his donor happy because there'll be another election someday.  And before you know it, there have been so many 'nudges' that the system is actually openly skewed in that Company's favour, and the voter is so used to seeing it that way, that it becomes engrained.  Corporations, the bankers who facilitate their progress (and come to you for bail outs) and the military who need wars to make careers!   Is that a recipe for unfairness.  That's my opinion anyway.
> 
> I don't think our system is quite as lopsided and maybe another Canadian could chime in and correct me if I'm wrong. I do know that our politicians cannot accept any corporate donations.  Only donations from individuals are allowed.  I believe the current maximum that an individual can donate is $1100.00.   It seems to me that would make a huge difference in a number of ways.


Many people are aware of what corporations and others controlling forces do to campaigns and they are trying to change that.


----------



## Butterfly (Jun 25, 2016)

Ruthanne said:


> Many people are aware of what corporations and others controlling forces do to campaigns and they are trying to change that.



Changing it is going to be a very long row to hoe, in light of the _Citizens United _ruling, a disastrous decision in my opinion.


----------



## suze (Jun 29, 2016)

Why can't we remove money from campaigns?  Give each candidate a series of forums with a serious interviewer asking only about issues and no opponent bashing.  What could be more fair.  Eliminate the special interest groups for good!
it's the only way to get back to what an election is supposed to be.

suze


----------



## Ed Mashburn (Jun 30, 2016)

Good morning to all- I believe the NRA is a dangerous organization. I believe that the NRA leadership has so corralled the discussion of responsible gun control and made it a "They're trying to take my guns!" situation with its members- there's no possibility of rational discussion. And the NRA has tremendous influence on the political system0 both financially and through media manipulation
In my occasionally humble opinion- there's no reason for a civilian to have a fully automatic- or even semi-automatic weapon.  These are military firearms designed and built to kill people.  Those who claim AR-15s and other military weapons are sporting guns are not being honest. These are people killers.
Handguns?  These are not hunting or target shooting guns. These are easy to conceal and carry people killers. But NRA won't allow any discussion of limiting the access and purchase of handguns.  
I realize that our culture is connected to firearms- that's a fact.
But I also realize that a lot of people who should not have access to any implement more dangerous than a butter knife can walk down to the nearest Wal-Mart and buy a handgun or semi-automatic rifle with no difficulty.
That's not right.
NRA is a dangerous organization because there's no discussion with them about guns.  it's "Their way or No way".
Good day to all- Ed


----------



## QuickSilver (Jun 30, 2016)

Ed Mashburn said:


> Good morning to all- I believe the NRA is a dangerous organization. I believe that the NRA leadership has so corralled the discussion of responsible gun control and made it a "They're trying to take my guns!" situation with its members- there's no possibility of rational discussion. And the NRA has tremendous influence on the political system0 both financially and through media manipulation
> In my occasionally humble opinion- there's no reason for a civilian to have a fully automatic- or even semi-automatic weapon.  These are military firearms designed and built to kill people.  Those who claim AR-15s and other military weapons are sporting guns are not being honest. These are people killers.
> Handguns?  These are not hunting or target shooting guns. These are easy to conceal and carry people killers. But NRA won't allow any discussion of limiting the access and purchase of handguns.
> I realize that our culture is connected to firearms- that's a fact.
> ...



The NRA USED to be an organization for gun owners, and promoted responsible ownership and gun safety.  NOW they represent the gun and ammo manufacturers.. and depend on their money to function.  Any legislation that even has the potential of cutting into the profits of the manufacturers is opposed by the NRA.


----------

