I’m worried we’re seeing a repeat of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court endorsements, where NRA’s endorsement differs from that of other pro-gun groups. In 2007, NRA endorsed Michael Krancer, while other groups endorsed Maureen Lally-Green. The end result was neither of them making it onto the Supreme Court, and the seat going to Debra Todd. Gun owners lose.
In the race between Jason Altmire and Melissa Hart, gun owners win no matter which way this race goes. That’s always a good position to be in. But it is making me wonder exactly what FOAC endorsement policies are. I know NRA has gotten a big of flack for their incumbent endorsement policy, where given two roughly equal pro-gun candidates, the endorsement goes to the incumbent by policy. This is smart politics because ninety percent of all incumbents are re-elected. The reason to make it a policy is so everyone expects it, and no one holds it against you. Politicians also know that they are sure to benefit in keeping their seats if they keep their records good, even if they are up against a pro-gun challenger. Overall, the policy raises the value of NRA’s endorsements.
Don’t get me wrong, I like Melissa Hart, and if I lived in her district, she could count on my vote. However taking off my voting citizen hat, and putting on my second amendment activist hat, I have to see things pretty differently, because I don’t see much to be gained alienating Jason Altmire, especially when he’s leading in the polls. The fact of the matter is, Jason Altimire has been good to gun owners. It might be true that his party hasn’t, but do we want the gun rights movement to be a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party, or do we want there to be a bipartisan consensus? I think it’s pretty clear under which situation our rights would be more secure.
It’s true that the 110th Congress hasn’t provided as much opportunity for Jason Altmire to stand out compared to Melissa Hart, but on the important issues, he’s been with us. He signed the Congressional Brief favoring Heller. He signed on to BATF reform, concealed carry reciprocity, national park carry, and preempting DC Council from regulating guns. I would say he’s been a leader on our issue.
Now, I’m certainly not saying NRA never makes mistakes in their endorsements. They do. Nor am I saying that every pro-gun group always has to get behind NRA’s endorsements. There have certainly been times where I have felt candidates got the endorsement when they didn’t deserve it, but if that’s the feeling with Congressman Altmire, I’d really like to understand what that’s based on. I’d like to develop a better understanding of what FOAC, and other pro-gun groups in Pennsylvania consider when it comes to endorsements. Obviously key votes, and details of what go into any individual endorsement aren’t something that needs to be shared, but I think the overall process needs to be reasonably understood. I can certainly understand why folks want to support Mellisa Hart, both as a citizen and a gun owner, but the message gun owners are sending to Jason Altmire is that it doesn’t matter how much he supports them, it’ll never be enough. In the 111th Congress, what incentive does he have to remain so receptive to the concerns of gun owners, when they tried to help unseat him? As gun rights activists, we must be cautious of letting our own personal political preferences get in the way of what’s best for the overall movement. The smart move here, even if you disagree with NRA’s endorsement of Altmire, would be to issue no endorsement at all.
