In Monday's Star Tribune, J. Patrick Coolican reports in At Minnesota Capitol, support for guns is deeply ingrained:
The National Rifle Association has no full-time Minnesota lobbyist. Why? It doesn't need one.
Ruud, like many of her fellow Republicans and more than a few DFLers, helps illustrate the long-standing legislative dominance of the gun rights movement at Minnesota’s Capitol, where the National Rifle Association doesn’t even have a single lobbyist solely assigned to the state. Instead, the movement has counted on dozens of lawmakers who come from areas where firearms are deeply woven into family and community traditions, underpinned by a philosophy of self-reliance and self-defense. . . .
It's a good read, However, not everything about gun legislation in Minnesota can simply be attributed to family and community culture.
The National Rifle Association does have a place at the table of two groups advocating for outdoors enthusiasts. Take this list of members of the influential Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Alliance (MOHA MN), distributed at the group's 2018 Legislative Banquet on March 7, 2018:
The National Rifle Association is there, right between Muskies, Inc. and the National Turkey Federation.
The group's website (screengrab at top) includes a linked image for the Sportsmen's Caucus as well as a menu bar item for the Sportsman's Caucus Events. Both take viewer's to the same page:
Officially recognized by the NASC (National Assembly of Sportsmens Caucuses) and the CSF (Congressional Sportsmens Foundation), the Sportsmen's Caucus is a bipartisan group of legislators from both the MN Senate and House who have an interest in issues that are important to the sportsmen and sportswomen of Minnesota.
Caucus membership requires a legislator to sign a general statement in support of hunting and fishing traditions. As a member of the Caucus, a legislator will attend at least 2 caucus meetings during the legislative session and one outdoor-associated banquet during the year. Members are not bound to particular votes, however.
The Sportsmen Caucus meets biweekly with the MOHA to gather support for key issues. During the general session, the Sportsmen's Caucus provides an opportunity for sportsmen and sportswomen to come together with MN Legislators to discuss issues important to hunting and fishing communities.
And what might those issues be? One state level issue is the Modern Sporting Rifle:
Summary
The modern sporting rifle is widely misunderstood throughout the country because they are aesthetically similar to military rifles. However, these rifles do not function the same as military firearms and have distinctly different practical uses and technical specifications. Efforts to ban modern sporting rifles often focus on emotion, cosmetics, and appearances, yet ignore the technological differences. Today, modern sporting rifles are commonly found in the hands of hunters and recreational shooters throughout the nation who value them for their durability and reliability.
Introduction
The modern sporting rifle, based on the AR-15 platform, is widely mischaracterized. Confusion exists because while these rifles have a similar appearance to military rifles, they do not function in the same way. Groups wanting to ban modern sporting rifles have, for many years, spread misleading information about the AR-15 to support their cause.
The AR platform is a semi-automatic rifle, most often chambered in 5.56 NATO/.223 Remington, .308 Winchester, and other varieties of calibers. This platform is designed for versatility and made to accommodate a vast array of modifications and accessories including: scopes, sights, slings, lights, and many other practical hunting tools. Folding and telescoping stocks as well as pistol grips can customize cosmetic appearance, but the core function of the firearm remains identical to traditional semi-automatic rifles.
Modern sporting rifles and their accessories are a booming trend within the firearms industry. Sales figures are difficult to report accurately because many manufacturers are privately held companies, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) statistics do not distinguish between rifle types. However, anecdotal evidence is plentiful. Firearms manufacturers across the nation are working to meet growing customer demand, with modern sporting rifles at times outselling traditional rifles. . . .
And there's this on Standard Capacity Magazines:
Summary
A standard capacity magazine generally means any detachable ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Some state laws, created after the 1993 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, limit the number of rounds a magazine can legally hold, generally to ten or less. Such restrictions come at high costs to firearm manufactures and consumers, with little to no evidence indicating a reduction in crime.
Introduction
A standard capacity magazine generally means any detachable ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the standard magazine for many types of semi-automatic handguns and rifles often exceeds 10 rounds and can sometimes contain anywhere between 15-30 rounds of ammunition.
In 1993, President Clinton signed the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which made it illegal to either manufacture or sell ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The Federal Ban expired in 2004; however, several states presently have similar bans in place with allowable capacities varying from state to state.3 A peer reviewed study by Koper and Roth in 2004 from the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania, found “no evidence of reductions in multiple-victim gun homicides or multiple-gunshot wound victimizations” as a result of the federal ban on standard capacity magazines.
Who funds the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus Foundation? Under "Our Partners and Sponsors," one finds retailers like Cabelas--and gun manufacturers and the National Rifle Association. In 2013, Mike McIntire reported in the New York Times Charity Takes Gun Lobby Closer to Its Quarry:
On a Monday evening in early February, two months into a national debate over gun violence after the massacre at a Connecticut elementary school, representatives of the firearms industry were wining and dining lawmakers in Washington.
The occasion was the “Changing of the Guard” reception and dinner for the incoming leadership of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, which counts more than 250 members in the House and Senate. Hosting the gathering was a little-known but well-connected organization, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation.
Despite its low profile, the foundation has close ties to members of Congress, allowing its donors, who give as much as $100,000 a year, to mix with lawmakers at shooting contests, banquets and wine tastings. The food and drink at last month’s gathering were paid for in part by
the National Rifle Association and the trade group for the gun industry.
Over the past year, sportsmen’s caucus members have clinked glasses and puffed cigars at a “Wine, Wheels and Wildlife” fund-raiser at a North Carolina vineyard, a “Whiskies of the World” and cigar reception on Capitol Hill, and a “Stars and Stripes Shootout” in Tampa, Fla., where the top shooting awards went to a Republican congressman and a lobbyist for the N.R.A. Such events provide the firearms industry and other foundation donors with a tax-deductible means of lobbying the elected officials who shape policies important to their businesses.
A private charity not affiliated with the government, the foundation carries the cachet of its relationship with the sportsmen’s caucus in Congress, which it provides with research on policies affecting hunting and fishing. But while ostensibly focused on those outdoor pursuits, it also presses issues important mainly to the gun industry, which is one of its largest contributors.
The foundation opposes restrictions on high-capacity ammunition magazines, a ban on military-style AR-15 rifles and the imprinting of bullets with traceable serial numbers to help solve crimes. All of those proposals have surfaced in the current legislative debate, which is expected to continue Thursday when a Senate Judiciary Committee considers a bill to curb illegal gun trafficking.
The foundation says its positions fit naturally with its mission “to work with Congress, governors and state legislatures to protect and advance hunting, recreational angling, and shooting and trapping.” . . .
In 2015, MinnPost's Sam Brodey reported about The fight for the soul of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus delineating the tensions that rise between those lawmakers backing conservation measures and the policy objectives of the gun rights crowd and the moneyed industries that love the later. The article is also of interest since Tim Walz, who has backed away from earlier cavorting with the NRA as he seeks the DFL's endorsement for governor, is quoted exhaustively in the article, given his position at the time as the co-chair of the congressional members of the group.
While both the New York Times and the MinnPost articles stress the federal activities of the group, it's not limited to influencing and feasting federal lawmakers. The Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation's page for Minnesota sports a bipartisan leadership team:
Whether one favors gun rights or more oversight and restrictions on firearms, one takeaway is on the pervasive power of money and banquets in policy making.
Photos: screen grabs from CSF webpages.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the paypal subscription button.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.
Comments