Why doesn't NRA actively rate congress"men" like GOA does?

[guntime22]

I've always wondered this because it's so simple yet so helpful.

[Ratings for the wonderful club that is the U.S. house of "representatives"] http://gunowners.org/110hrat.htm

[For the tyrants in the U.S. Senate] http://gunowners.org/110srat.htm

[Redworm]

Helpful, certainly. However I still voted for my D- (D) representative because the other guy was just a moron.

[Eghad]

They do grade them.

http://www.nrapvf.org/elections/

[guntime22]

They do grade them.-Eghad

We would greatly appreciate it if you would read the original post before commenting. I said actively, to which you post a link to a page that doesn't even work. That page says "2007 candidate grades and endorsements will be posted at a later date." Your link is only accurate right before an election, and only contains grades for CANDIDATES at the time. It isn't updated AFTER the election concerning who won.

[Mike Irwin]

I'm not seeing any indication that GOA updates these ratings "actively."

There's no time frame discussed for how often they're updated, and I have to wonder, what is the purpose of updating them every few days as opposed to updating them just before an election?

I also have to wonder why Jim Webb of Virginia has a NR rating if GOA updates its lists actively. He's been in office for 3 months, and he's certainly talked about the gun issue both during the election and while in office, not to mention that he has a Virginia CCW.

[TimRB]

"We would greatly appreciate it if you would read the original post before commenting. I said actively, to which you post a link to a page that doesn't even work. "

Actually, you said "acively". Now that you've clarified, however, I guess I wouldn't have known what you meant by "actively", either, since the NRA clearly DOES rate candidates.

Edit: Ah... So it's *after* the election we're worried about. Wouldn't it be too late by then?

Tim

[Eghad]

We would greatly appreciate it if you would read the original post before commenting. I said actively, to which you post a link to a page that doesn't even work. That page says "2007 candidate grades and endorsements will be posted at a later date." Your link is only accurate right before an election, and only contains grades for CANDIDATES at the time. It isn't updated AFTER the election concerning who won.

and?

What difference does actively make? They serve for a set term and only come up for election once during that term. What they do in between being sworn in and the election is pretty much out of our hands.

The NRA does send out legislative alerts which are on a continous basis.

[Fremmer]

Why doesn't GOA have an "Eddie Beagle" safety mascot, or something like the NRA does?

[Mike Irwin]

Why doesn't GOA have an "Eddie Beagle" safety mascot, or something like the NRA does?


They tried one, but it was kind of unweidly...

Hey, Kids, let's meet 'Gary the "Don't you touch that gun you little bastard or I'll blow your head clean off" Educational Panther!'

[johnbt]

"We would greatly appreciate it if you would read the original post before commenting."

We? Who is we? Are you are a group of official GOA representatives and/or spokespersons?

John

[Fremmer]

LOL Mike!

I figured that GOA's mascot would be a squib round or something like that.

[Eghad]

Short Round?

[jnojr]

Because the NRA is most concerned with their record of having backed winning horses. That's tough to do if you rate candidates before an election.

[gc70]

Maybe GOA likes to irritate members of Congress throughout their term in office rather than only taking a stand before elections like the NRA.

[Real Gun]

I believe the GOA ratings are updated after the yearly session. It certainly isn't dynamic, day to day. I would be guessing but would expect ratings to also be updated before an election, which would be November of 2008. The Congress, certainly the House, all standing for reelection every two years, is effectively done for that year by that time anyway.

Why can't it be acceptable that the GOA ratings are updated when it seems like a good idea to do so? I rely most on GOA because NRA ratings are hard to find when I want them, but they do show up before an election. I found only a few meaningful differences between GOA and NRA ratings in the last election. GOA is tougher.

One would do well to keep track of how their own reps and Senators are voting. I get that as a regular report from Congress.org.

[Rembrandt]

Having helped grade the candidates for the NRA, let me add this. Grades are based on several criteria....
- Answers to questionaire sent to each candidate.
- Voting record (if incumbent)
- Prior statements or actions regarding firearms

Effect of the grades have the maximum impact just before an election.

Election cycles are every two years, giving a grade to someone who may not run in the next election or knowing who their replacement may be is beyond the crystal ball capabilities of the NRA.

[applesanity]

Successful lobbies make lots of powerful friends, while keeping their enemies fearful.

Just about everyone fails the GOA's no-compromise test. Lots of alienation right there. Since the GOA isn't some giant behomoth like the NRA, they don't have the sway to put the fear of 3.x million gun-toting, voting citizens into the hearts of their enemies.

(okay okay, somebody's gonna say, "but Ron Paul...." I get it.)

If you're gonna make a "gun-rights scoresheet," obviously an A+ means a guy who wants the good ol' days where you can buy a rifle in your montgomery wards catalogue, or a snubbie at the gas station. 99% of politicians aren't like that. The inevitability is that you're gonna give all your enemies - and pretty much all your friends - really, really bad grades. That's not very wise. If you have no friends, then the size of your massive lobby won't count for much.

[Mike Irwin]

"Because the NRA is most concerned with their record of having backed winning horses. That's tough to do if you rate candidates before an election."

I guess that's why, before every general election cycle, NRA sends to all of its members listings of how friendly politicians are to Second Amendment causes.

In other words, NRA does exactly what you apparently think that they don't.

[cuate]

Holy Moses, don't you ever read the magazine?














/

[mooreshawnm]

I do like that GOA rates the vast majority as either A or F. No messing around, they are either with us or against us!

[Mike Irwin]

"Holy Moses, don't you ever read the magazine?"

Who, me?

[Real Gun]

If you're gonna make a "gun-rights scoresheet," obviously an A+ means a guy who wants the good ol' days where you can buy a rifle in your montgomery wards catalogue, or a snubbie at the gas station. 99% of politicians aren't like that. The inevitability is that you're gonna give all your enemies - and pretty much all your friends - really, really bad grades. That's not very wise. If you have no friends, then the size of your massive lobby won't count for much.

I read that as a strawman, because it is not what an A+ rating means and it is not how scoring is done.

I do like that GOA rates the vast majority as either A or F. No messing around, they are either with us or against us!

That's not the reality. GOA uses the full range of scoring. Look it up. It is based on voting record and how GOA thinks the votes should go.

[applesanity]

I read that as a strawman

In the sense that, were the NRA were to give a report card to politicians, how many NRA backers are going to get an "A" review? Imagine if Delagate John Smith from the state of ____ has been a long-time NRA member and supporter, gets a grade of "C-" from this lobby because there was this one time when Johnny voted for the NFA, or background checks, or against rifles with 10-inch barrels?

I thought the NRA was for all gun owners and enthusiasts. Introducing a scorecare inevitably creates polarization, "with us or against us," where only the most hard-core, no-compromises politician will come out on top. The rest are alienated.

[Mike Irwin]

"In the sense that, were the NRA were to give a report card to politicians, how many NRA backers are going to get an "A" review? Imagine if Delagate John Smith from the state of ____ has been a long-time NRA member and supporter, gets a grade of "C-" from this lobby because there was this one time when Johnny voted for the NFA, or background checks, or against rifles with 10-inch barrels?"


You don't think that has ever happened?

Quite a few "friends" of the NRA were downgraded following the machinations surrounding the 1994 'assault weapons' ban.

[Real Gun]

In the sense that, were the NRA were to give a report card to politicians, how many NRA backers are going to get an "A" review? Imagine if Delagate John Smith from the state of ____ has been a long-time NRA member and supporter, gets a grade of "C-" from this lobby because there was this one time when Johnny voted for the NFA, or background checks, or against rifles with 10-inch barrels?

I thought the NRA was for all gun owners and enthusiasts. Introducing a scorecare inevitably creates polarization, "with us or against us," where only the most hard-core, no-compromises politician will come out on top. The rest are alienated.

You seem to be discussing this without any real familiarity with the actual ratings. The ratings are as objective as anyone could expect and are assigned with little attention paid to hurting someones feelings. The ratings create no leverage unless they constitute playing hardball.

Gun advocate groups are special interest groups, and the ratings serve to measure to what extent a politician serves those interests. Making the ratings public holds the politician's feet to the fire.