Senate Soon to Vote on Bill to Infringe Upon Your Ability to Stay Informed on Pro-family Issues

By Richard Land - Jan 15, 2007 - 1

The U.S. Senate is presently debating and will soon vote on legislation that would greatly encumber grassroots lobbying. S. 1, the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007, includes provisions that would require grassroots organizations to track and submit to Congress detailed reports of all communication with government leaders and all activities that inform and encourage people to contact Congress.

Section 220, imbedded deep within S. 1, mandates quarterly reporting by grassroots organizations that spend more than $25,000 every three months on activities to inform 500 or more people on public policy. Non-compliant organizations could face stiff fines of $100,000. The costs of tracking and compiling these intrusive reports will certainly be too burdensome for many organizations, forcing them to curb their level of communication with the American people or simply close operations.

Terms and descriptions in Section 220, such as “paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying” and “influence,” are so vague that no one knows for sure who would come under fire. Many believe it could go so far as to require churches that speak on moral concerns such as marriage and the sanctity of life to adhere to this red tape.

Section 220 of what has been dubbed an ethics reform bill is nothing less than an attempt by most Senate Democrats and a few Republicans to hinder grassroots organizations from sharing the American people’s concerns with Congress. And it is an attempt to muzzle grassroots organizations from communicating regularly to their constituents about harmful and helpful legislation.

In short, many members of Congress are tired of hearing the concerns of those who hold traditional family values, and they want to keep them in the dark on what types of legislation they are passing behind closed doors.

Gratefully, Sen. Robert Bennett (R-UT) has recognized the crippling effect of Section 220 and introduced an amendment to strike Section 220 from S. 1. This is a much welcomed step, but now your help is critical.

If you share my concern about the heavy restrictions that would overshadow grassroots lobbying, please contact your senators and tell them to vote for the Bennett Amendment to strike Section 220 from S. 1. I am so concerned about the serious dangers posed by Section 220, that if the Senate fails to strike it from S. 1, the bill is unacceptable in my opinion. I hope you will join me in asking your senators to make sure the Bennett Amendment passes or else do everything in their power to prevent passage of S. 1, including filibustering the bill.

You can call your senators by dialing the Capital switchboard at 202/224-3121. The operator will then connect you to the senator’s office of your choice. If you do not know who your senators are, or if you would prefer to use email, just click here, enter your zip code in the space provided, and email them the suggested letter or one entirely your own.

Thank you for standing up and speaking out to the senators who wish to infringe on your right to stay informed on the issues that matter most to you. Your voice is as important as ever.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Citizenship, Christian Citizenship, Legislation, National

1 comments (post your own) feed

1 On Jan 17th, 2007, at 8:09pm, Reba Moore wrote:

Oppose the bill if fails I am for the ammendent

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com