Im not sure I understand this whole article, but I copied it with permission off another forum.... Im not sure I like the idea of not being informed. Its almost as if congress doesnt want to hear what we have to say..... I dont understand how they can do all this.
OK, I know this isn't nutrition related per se, but I want to make sure everyone sees this. This is an email I just received, and since it's dealing with grass roots efforts, I feel kind of obligated to do my part. So, without further adieu ....
We all need to go to this link and send emails bombarding our
senators about this Senate Bill 1--Section 220. Basically, the
congress is tired of receiving our phone calls and emails and
they are trying to pass a bill that would keep grassroots
organizations, such as the Weston Price Foundation, from
alerting us to various issues...many of which have to do with
raw dairy. This is an easy link to follow....the AFA sent out the
same alert as the Weston Price Foundation. I included the
AFA link because it has a great interface for sending emails
to your senators, but below is the actual WAPF alert. Cut and
paste it into your browser if you need to.
Urgent Calls Needed to Protect
Grassroots Lobbying from Federal Control
We need you to call your U.S. senators to fight efforts to place
federal control over virtually all grassroots lobbying activity. This
means that all organizations and groups that encourage people to call
their congressmen, including activist groups such as ours, will be
subject to registration and reporting to Congress.
Section 220 of Senate Bill 1 (S. 1), the "Legislative Transparency and
Accountability Act of 2007," redefines lobbying to include "paid
efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying." Organizations that engage
in grassroots lobbying will have to comply with all federal lobbying
disclosure laws, including registration with Congress and the filing
of quarterly reports to Congress. Failure to comply would result in a
fine of up to $100,000.
Currently, organizations do not need to report grassroots lobbying,
which is when they contact their membership and the public or engage
in some action that encourages people to call their federally elected
officials. However, if Section 220 is included in S. 1, federal
lobbying laws would apply to all groups that spend money to reach more
than 500 people with a message urging them to contact their elected
officials. For example, if a grassroots group has a
paid employee who emails more than 500 people asking them to call
Congress about some issue, or puts an article on the Internet that is
likely to reach more than 500 people, the organization would be subject to federal
Senate Bill 1 is a bipartisan bill and contains much-needed
congressional reforms. Section 220, however, is not needed. It is
unacceptable for Congress to attempt to require groups that encourage
grassroots lobbying to be subject to registration and reporting to
Senator Robert Bennett has introduced an amendment cosponsored by
Senator Mitch McConnell to strike section 220 from S. 1. The
amendment could come up for a vote on the floor of the Senate as early
as next Tuesday. Please call your U.S. senators and urge them to
support the Bennett amendment (amendment 20) to S. 1.
Your message can be as simple as: "I am very concerned about the
grassroots lobbying provisions in section 220 of Senate Bill 1, the
'Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007.' Please
support the Bennett amendment to remove section 220 from S. 1.
Organizations should not have to register with Congress in order to
ask citizens to contact their elected officials."
Back to top
__________________ God is and all is well
~John Greenleaf Whittier~
I got this email this morning from someone who use to be a member of the old forum..... I am finding this very scary!!!
New Congress Proposes Drastic Legislation to Impact Churches
Nancy Pelosi hasn't been Speaker of the House for two weeks yet and there is already proposed legislation which would be the most significant encroachment ever into the affairs and ability of churches and other organizations to communicate. Under the guise of lobbying reform, Speaker Pelosi and others have proposed legislation greatly expanding the scope of lobbying regulation which would have a significant impact on churches, pastors, religious denominations, public interest organizations, civic organizations and other nonprofit groups. Even private individuals who voluntarily pay for media to distribute important messages to the general public on political matters would be impacted.
So draconian is the proposed Lobbying Reform Bill that it would actually impose registration and reporting requirements on churches and other nonprofit organizations. This is because the definition of "lobbyist" and "lobbying firms" includes specifically grassroots-organizing efforts. Under this broad-based regulatory scheme that Nancy Pelosi is advocating, many churches, especially larger churches with TV and radio ministries, would be subject to registration as a lobbying organization. Failure to comply with these lobbying requirements could result in fines and even criminal sanctions. Churches and their pastors who address the social issues of the day and encourage members and non-members alike to mobilize for action, including communications with Congress, would be required to make certain initial and quarterly disclosures to the United States Congress about their activities.
Under the House version of the Bill, a church or organization would be considered a "grassroots lobbying firm" subject to this law if the group attempted to influence the general public to voluntarily contact federal officials in order to express their own views on a federal issue. Furthermore, many large churches and ministries utilize mass media to communicate their message. Under this House Bill by Nancy Pelosi, these communications, as long as they are directed to at least one person who is not a member of the church, would fall under this new Bill. Finally, if the church spends an aggregate of only $50,000 or more for such efforts in a quarterly period, they are now required to register as lobbyists. Many ministries spend $50,000 or more a month for air time.
This attempt to slip in this onerous requirement on churches and other organizations must be stopped. The rationale behind Speaker Pelosi and others' desire to silence churches is obvious. Pastors addressing the moral issues of the day have been able to mobilize tens of thousands of individuals to speak out on various issues. But under this proposed legislation, if a church or denomination spent $50,000 of its own resources on air time to encourage people to support the confirmation of federal judicial nominees or to lend its support to a federal marriage amendment, then that church or denomination would be classified as a grassroots lobbying firm. This is one of the most significant violations of free exercise of religion and the freedom of political speech in our Nation's history. Some have said that this plan is the most comprehensive regulation of political speech that has ever been put forward by Congress.
As one of the lawyers who argued against the campaign finance law at the Supreme Court of the United States, I can tell you that this increased government regulation of churches is not only unwarranted but also unwise. In my argument before the Court, I asserted that a prohibition on minors contributing to a political campaign was unconstitutional, and that students have fundamental rights of freedom of speech and freedom of association. A unanimous Supreme Court agreed with me. The same is true here. Lobbying reform can be put forward without impacting the ability of pastors and churches to speak out on the moral issues of the day, which is part of their prophetic responsibilities. The First Amendment of the Constitution provides for the right of the citizens to "petition the government for a redress of grievances." Previous lobbying legislation recognized this right to petition the government and specifically carved out exceptions in the law. Unfortunately and not surprisingly, Speaker Pelosi's proposals have no such protection for the ability of our citizens to petition the government. In essence, this proposed legislation attempts to override the United States Constitution.
This is not the way our Republic is structured. Congress has no authority to amend our United States Constitution on its own accord. If the Freedom of Speech and the Free Exercise of Religion Clauses mean anything, they mean that church leaders and other citizens have the right to address the moral issues of the day and encourage participation of the citizenry in support of or opposition to legislative initiatives. Nancy Pelosi's proposed legislation would have stopped Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. from gathering support for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In fact, as he addressed the social issues from the pulpit of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, GA, he might well have had to register as a lobbyist.
What we need to do now is exercise our existing First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of association and the ability to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Our grievance is simple: Congress cannot silence churches and other organizations from grassroots involvement in critical issues of our day. Let us now petition the government aggressively and support an amendment to this proposed legislation by Senators Bennett, McConnell, Kyl, and Cornyn that would eliminate the provisions of this lobbying reform dealing with grassroots efforts. This way we can ensure that churches and many other public interest organizations would not have to register as lobbyists. Click here to sign the petition.
__________________ God is and all is well
~John Greenleaf Whittier~
Let me see if I understand this. We have a representative form of government thus I have the right to tell my representative what to do.
But I don’t have the right to tell my neighbors to tell our representatives what they should do?
Something just doesn’t quite “sound” right about this.
I can see why they aimed this at churches. But using that same logic could they just as easily say the same thing about radio & TV? Any program that brings up a political topic could be said to be unduly influencing people to contact their representatives. Thus we would be forced to watching reruns of American Idol, Jeopardy and the weather channel. :x
An "uninformed" electorate is job security for the politician.