As I noted in the prior post, every resolution submitted by Robert Rhyne was ruled by Charles Cotton to be “out of order.” The next five called for an independent audit, curtailing of waste travel expenses, term limits, legal action on behalf of gun rights, and the ouster of Wayne LaPierre.NRA-res-3
One thought on “Meeting Of Members – Resolutions, Part II”
The audit one is funny because if they went that far back, that could be amazing to see the fallout. It would have the potential to be especially interesting for the woman already a felon for theft from her previous employer who did the same to NRA and Wayne wouldn’t press charges after it was “discovered.”
That said, the salary limit screams of someone who doesn’t know how much it costs to live in Northern Virginia, DC, or even many state capitals. That’s insane and basically says to staff that you are to be (for many roles) underpaid and abused by members who will refuse to raise it in inflation periods. This guy who introduced this $100,000 cap – no matter the market for the role, no matter the expectations of the role, no matter any context whatsoever – in a period he knew there was extreme inflation. I mean, my word, the IT needs of the organization alone mean you’ll need multiple people over that even if they are willingly taking a pay cut to serve the Second Amendment. Anyone serious about the organization has to know that NRA needs way more on IT planning & work given the hack last year.
While I don’t want folks at any nonprofit living it up unreasonably, but to completely forbid funds for use of charter flights no matter the circumstances? Seriously?? That’s nuts. There are times – not many of them – but times that they absolutely are within reason to use charter services – like say the big media splash of endorsements they would sometimes do of a whirlwind tour of campaign stops across the country in states where the NRA support could make a difference. I wouldn’t make it a regular thing, ruling it out forever is just nuts.
Hell, even the wording on the resolution to forbid the use of funds to pay for business or first class travel. That’s an asshole move because the way I read the wording that isn’t targeted at the use of funds on the full price fare, it means you can’t use the funds at all to travel by that way. Does that mean an employee who uses miles earned can’t apply them for an upgrade even if the organization gave the money for economy or economy plus? It’s not out of the question from the wording. It is also very likely a violation of the resolution if an employee used miles to “purchase” the full ticket, but wanted to apply the NRA travel credits to the required fees that come along with many reward redemptions. After all, that is using funds directly for first or business class ticketing, even though it may be cheaper than or similar to a full fare economy. Zero thought went into this resolution, and I hate that these things become distractions and used against serious reformers.
And forbidding the use of funds of more than $200/day for hotels? Have these resolution sponsors ever travelled? To cities. You know, expensive ones. That barely covers the discounted event rate I got in freakin’ Scranton recently. And does it really help to tie the hands of Advancement staff trying to raise big bucks from rich folks if they have to pay more to rent a car, drive to and from the nicer hotels the richer donors are staying at in order to stay at a sketch hotel far away? Would he be okay with NRA staff being constantly late to events or cutting them back drastically because the only way to get under $200/night during Annual Meeting is – for most cities – to stay many miles from the hotel? Actually, the way it’s worded since it’s not about individuals and simply “per day,” it’s not clear that NRA staff could even double up in a more expensive room.
And, hey, if the NRA needs to suddenly set up a field office somewhere to work on a key campaign, no temporary leases or rentals allowed! They’ll need to wait on the next meeting of members to allow them to work on campaigns and issues that will likely be lost by that time. Does this NRA member actually participate in anything the NRA does? Has he never volunteered in a key state where, yes, NRA has at times done short term offices in order to give space for volunteers to phone bank, get signs and materials set up for distribution, and more.
Honestly, as I rip these to shreds and realize how they would cut NRA’s ability to work in highly competitive issues and areas, I have to wonder if this is a set up to make it impossible to do their work. I’m clearly not a fan of NRA’s spending issues and management, but many of these “solutions” are designed to completely lock NRA out of being involved in many campaigns and ballot issues, restrict them from fundraising more efficiently from higher dollar donors, and hire competent staff.
As formally as these appear to be drafted, I’m not comfortable with the “et al” claim for who introduced them. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have all names attached. Given the degree to which these violate bylaws (President has the ability to veto the elected Board & all officers for absolute control?; all members of the Board – including the President – must step down, but the President who is no longer in office can appoint all new people?), restrict NRA involvement in grassroots & politics, and effectively prohibit much of the fundraising services, I really have to wonder who worked with them on this. I’m not sure these were written for the good of the NRA and membership.
Comments are closed.