August 1 NEAL KNOX SPECIAL REPORT — NRA members’ strong voices are clearly heard in the halls of Congress, but not headquarters.

Or so I’m told in countless letters and phone calls from members angry or irritated about excessive fundraising letters, legislative positions, improperly graded political candidates,
instructor certification problems, undelivered hats and a string of other important and trivial issues.

I’ve opened one such letter, and received one such call in just the last half hour.

A call I received last month was from a guy who lives in the same town as an influential NRA Director; I suggested that perhaps he should talk to him about the problem.

My caller exploded. He said he’d been talking to that Director about the same problem for two years, and though the Director agreed that the problem could and should be corrected, nothing has happened. “Now he refuses to talk about it, saying I should call HQ. My anti-gun Congressman pays more attention to me than my Director does.”

I told him I was working on something that might solve his problem.

That “something” is one of the two NRA Bylaws mendments that Dr. Bill Davis and I are circulating petitions to put on next winter’s mail ballot.

The first Bylaw Amendment would create representational government in NRA by modifying the way Directors are elected.

It calls for 50 of the 75 NRA Directors to be elected for one year terms by members from their states of residence.

To provide appropriate representation for the states with larger population, 24 Directors would be elected At Large as at present, except their terms would be for two years instead of
three, to keep them “closer to the people” (as the Founding Fathers said about the U.S. House of Representatives).

One Director would continue to be elected each year by all members at an annual meeting.

The idea of State Directors has been floating around for over 20 years that I know about.

What it would do is assure that most voting members in a state would be choosing someone that they actually knew.

In every other state, the members of those states would also be choosing people _they_ knew — either from their state association, or the Friends Dinners, or through a grass roots
legislative group, or at the gun shows.

That alone would have a whale of an impact on the makeup of the Board, for at least two thirds of the Directors would reflect the views of the members of his or her state.

But it would also guarantee that each State Director — who would be running again the following year — would pay careful attention to the reasonable requests of NRA members, and make sure the NRA staff paid attention. Congressmen call it “constituent service.”

I will guarantee you that if we get the required 500 validated NRA Voting Member signatures on our petitions by Sept. 1, the Board will oppose it.

One argument will be that it’s too complicated and costly. Nonsense. Only minimal changes would be needed in the ballots and the dBase computer program to count a candidate’s vote from within
his state.

Another argument will be that the State Director Bylaw would result in over-representation of smaller states. But for several years the tiny state of Rhode Island — with probably the smallest NRA membership per capita of any state — has had two Directors.

Over one-third of the larger states, some with an unusually high percentage of NRA members, have no representation on the Board.

The other proposed bylaw amendment would provide reasonable restrictions against NRA employees and contractors funding, or otherwise being involved in NRA internal elections (except for employees the Secretary assigned to help conduct the elections).

The Board will oppose that one, too, for in the last three election cycles — when no one except nominees of the Board-elected Nominating Committee have been elected — many or most of those elected paid only a small portion (or none) of the heavy costs of their campaigns.

I have reason to believe that most of the $40,000 or so in advertisements directing members “Do Not Vote For” certain people (including me, twice) were paid by NRA vendors and contractors. They also, I believe, paid most of the cost of the mailings, flyers and election handouts that may have cost another $40,000.

I have no reason to doubt that those vendors sincerely like NRA E.V.P. Wayne LaPierre, who approves their contracts.

But it’s worrisome to think that outside commercial interests may be influencing NRA elections — and therefore, NRA policies.
And I hope I’m wrong.

Putting this difficult-to-enforce Bylaw on the books would at least make it clear that the membership doesn’t want it to happen.

According to the Bylaws, if Bill and I deliver 500 properly identified valid signatures of voting members by Sept. 1, we will also get to write a 500-word statement which will be printed in the
election issue of the NRA magazines, which the opposing Board can also match.

Approval will require a majority vote of the members voting. No previous Bylaw amendment opposed by the Board has been approved.

But I think the members will like these amendments — which should have the support of every state association, collector organization and other member affiliation in every state, for it
will make it possible for them to elect at least one Director they want.

These Bylaw Amendments would assure that the voices of the members are heard in the Board meetings — and in the Blue Palace on Waples Mill.

To help make it happen, start by pointing your web browser to:

http://www.NealKnox.com/NRA2001/petitions.

Read our cover letter and each of the petitions, which you can print out on legal sized paper with a click of the button. Get as many voting member
signatures — and NRA identification numbers — as you can, and send to Bill at the address indicated.

Neal Knox

P.S. If you can’t download, contact Bill at

[email protected]