Saturday, December 7, 2013

How Pro-Gun Are You If You Get Money From Gabby's New PAC?

Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) is not doing too well with North Carolinians right now. The latest Elon University poll from late November reports that only 37% of registered voters approve of her job performance. By contrast, 43.5% of registered voters disapprove of her job performance. Much of this is related to her support for ObamaCare.

This may explain why she wants to be identified with hunters and anglers. In early November she introduced S. 1660 which is "To protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes." Interestingly, 4 of the 5 co-sponsors are Democrats facing tough re-election fights in 2014. The bill actually does some good stuff such as exempting excise tax trust funds from budget cuts and providing money for public shooting ranges.

Hagan makes a big point about coming "from a family of lifelong hunters" as if this assures voters of her support for the Second Amendment. Hagan voted in favor of the Manchin-Toomey amendment back in April. As I said then and I will say again, any Red State Democrat who says they support the Second Amendment and then voted for Manchin-Toomey is lying to you.

As reported yesterday in Politico, USA Today, and Shall Not Be Questioned, the former Gabby PAC has been renamed the Rights and Responsibilities PAC. The PAC is funded with nearly $300,000 from her old campaign account. The goal of the PAC is to funnel campaign money to both Democrats and Republicans who "share her views on gun control" according to a story from late yesterday in USA Today. Of course, whether Gabby has the wherewithal to form her own views is an issue for another day.

So who is one of the first to get money form the Rights and Responsibilities PAC?
Giffords' Rights and Responsibilities PAC is funded by money left over in the Arizona Democrat's campaign account. The new PAC will start by contributing to the campaigns of Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., Sen. Sue Collins, R-Maine, and Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., said Pia Carusone, a senior Giffords adviser.

All supported a measure fashioned by Toomey and Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., that would have required background checks on all commercial sales of guns. That provision and other major gun-control measures failed to pass Congress this year, despite widespread calls to overhaul the nation's gun laws after 26 children and adults were gunned down last December at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
So how pro-gun are you really if you get money from Gabby's gun control PAC? I think the answer is obvious - not much. Just like Hagan lied about you getting to keep your old health insurance, her support of the Second Amendment is also suspect. The only question in my mind is when soon-to-be former Mayor Bloomberg digs into his own deep pockets and contributes to Kay Hagan.


  1. $300k seems a bit light for a PAC doesn't it?

    1. I'd look at it as seed money. American for Responsible Solutions got a few $1 million donations after they started. I would not be surprised to see the PAC get a number of contributions as well.

    2. $300k is a VERY significant size for a PAC, especially for a single issue organization.

      These are based on 2012 election year figures:

      It would easily be the largest GUN CONTROL PAC. The only competition was Brady's $4k PAC. Interestingly, you have to go back to the 2000 election (Bush v Gore) to find any Gun Control PAC with $300k on hand (Handgun Control Inc had $375k then).
      On the Pro Gun side, it would rank #3 behind the NRA PAC ($987k) and the Safari Club ($380k)

      Beyond gun control though, even among other special interest causes, $300k is still huge. For instance, if Gabby decided she really was pro-life (and not just pro Democrat politics) that $300k would be by far the largest Largest Anti Abortion PAC

      And if she was trying to improve the US economy overall, rather than attacking the Constitution, as an industry PAC $300k is still very formidable.

      No one would suggest that the Ag Lobby is anything but powerful and well connected in DC. Yet, $300k would not only be the third largest livestock PAC but (not counting the Fanjul family and their massive efforts to maintain the present sugar quota system) it would be the second largest crop PAC, behind cotton but larger than corn.

      It would be the 4th largest Internet PAC
      The 3rd Largest Telecom Pac
      The 2nd largestNews/Printing Industry PAC (and 3x larger than the 3rd largest)
      The 8th largest TV/Movie broadcasting PAC (Disney, is ninth largest)
      3rd largest Construction PAC
      4th largest Aeropsace Defense PAC
      And the 7th largest Insurance PAC

  2. how can i get money from gabby's new PAC Can you explain me? Here i got some useful information about different cases along with suggestions also.
    Corporate Lawyer