MONTANA SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION
2014 CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE
United States Senate
(MUST be returned by 5PM, March 31st, for any candidate with
a Primary challenge)
1. RKBA standard of review.
In his majority Opinion for the USSC in D.C. v. Heller, Justice Scalia settled that the
Second Amendment reserves and secures an individual right.
In that Opinion, Justice Scalia also declared that the right
reserved is a fundamental right, and because of that a rational
basis will no longer suffice as a standard of review for
governmental curtailment of this right. Scalia left open
what standard should apply. Some argue that the proper
standard of review for the right to keep and bear arms (RKBA) is
contained within the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,
"shall not be infringed." Do you agree that this qualifying
clauses should be looked to in determining an appropriate
threshold, a judicial standard of review for government
curtailment of this fundamental right.
( ) Agree
( ) Disagree
( ) Other (please explain)
2. Strength of RKBA
prohibition asserted. Some argue that the restraint
on government curtailment of the RKBA found in the Second
Amendment's "shall not be infringed" (as with the "shall not be
called into question" in the Montana Constitution) is the
strongest language of prohibition the drafters could conceive and
use while still maintaining decorum and appropriate phraseology of
constitutional language. Do you:
( ) Agree
( ) Disagree
( ) Other (please explain)
3. RKBA outside one's home.
D.C. v. Heller held that
a person has a fundamental right to keep a firearm in a person's
home, but did not address issues about firearms outside of a
person's home, that is, the right to "bear" arms. However, a
U.S. district court judge in Maryland recently addressed this in Woollard
v. Sheridan when he said, "In addition to self-defense, the
right was also understood to allow for militia membership and
hunting. See [Heller]. To secure these rights, the Second
Amendment‘s protections must extend beyond the home: neither
hunting nor militia training is a household activity, and
―'self-defense has to take place wherever [a] person happens to
be.' [Masciandaro]" Do you agree that the rights
reserved by the Second Amendment extend outside of a person's
home?
( ) Agree
( ) Disagree
( ) Other (please explain)
4. Gun laws generally.
It is said that U.S. has among the least restrictive gun laws in
the World. Do you believe U.S. gun laws:
( ) Are a lot too loose and need to be seriously strengthened.
( ) Are just a bit too loose and need some tweaking.
( ) Are just about right and ought to be left alone.
( ) Are still too restrictive and should be relaxed.
( ) Other (explain)
5. Prior restraint.
Prior restraint describes both a governmental action, and a
doctrine that has evolved concerning First Amendment intrusions by
governmental entities. In short, the doctrine holds that
government entities may not prevent in advance the exercise of a
constitutionally-reserved right, but before resorting to any final
course of prior restraint (with narrow exceptions) a governmental
entity must either avail itself of all alternate remedies (e.g.,
sequestering a jury), or must rely upon punishing afterwards any
abuse of rights. If prior restraint is allowed at all, it
must be narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government
purpose. Do you think the concept of limiting prior
restraint of a fundamental right should also apply to the
fundamental rights reserved under the Second Amendment?
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Other (please explain)
6. Constitutional conflict
resolution. There is an ancient principle of law
that if there is a conflict between two provisions of a co-equal
body of law, the most recently enacted must be given deference as
the most recent expression of the enacting authority.
Without this principle, no law, once enacted, could be amended or
even repealed. Many alleged federal intrusions into the
rights of states and of people of the states are done under the
assumed authority of the Interstate Commerce Clause, buttressed by
the Supremacy Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause.
However, it is recently argued that prior commerce court decisions
must yield to the new argument that the Interstate Commerce
Clause, the Supremacy clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause
were ALL amended by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments - that the
Ninth and Tenth actually affected and changed - amended - all
parts of the underlying Constitution, and that congressional power
asserted under the Interstate Commerce Clause must fail if that
power is in conflict with either the Ninth or Tenth
amendment. Do you:
( ) Agree
( ) Disagree
( ) Other (please explain)
7. Remedies for
federal/state conflicts. When there are conflicts
between what a state wishes to do and what the federal government
wishes to impose upon a state, there are a variety of remedies
available. A state, for example, may pass a resolution
protesting against a federal mandate or incursion. Or, a
state may ask its congressional delegation to introduce and enact
legislation to address or moderate the conflict. One
commonly-understood remedy is for a state to sue the federal
government in federal court, asking that the judicial branch of
the federal government restrain the executive and legislative
branches of the federal government. While that may sometimes
be a fruitful remedy, some observers express concern that lawsuits
in federal court are inadequate as an ultimate remedy for
federal/state conflicts, because that remedy depends upon an agent
(federal courts) for one party (federal government) to a conflict
to resolve a conflict in favor of the other party (a state) to the
conflict. This may leave the party whose agent is not
deciding the outcome (a state) at a distinct disadvantage.
About this concern, do you:
( ) Agree
( ) Disagree
( ) Other (please explain)
8. Contract for statehood -
effect. Article I of the Montana Constitution is
the Compact with the United States. That Compact is a
contract entered into by and between Montana and the other states
in 1889, wherein Congress was acting as the agent for the other
states. This contract declares that it is not subject to
amendment without such change being ratified by the parties to the
contract, and that Montana and its people are also guaranteed by
contract a view of the Montana and U.S. Constitutions as they were
understood and accepted in 1889, at the time the contract was
agreed upon. Do you agree with this view, or do you view the
terms of this contract as having become changed over time, without
overt ratification, but by the flow of time, events, case law
evolution, changing judicial philosophies, and/or enactment of
laws by Congress that effect changes in the original conditions of
the contract?
( ) Agree
( ) The contract or circumstances have changed
( ) Other
9. Who a U.S. Senator
represents. Some Senators believe that, once
elected, a U.S. Senator should attempt to represent all of the
people and interests of the United States to the best of his
ability, even if that may conflict with the interests of the
people of the state from which he is elected. Others believe
that they have a duty to represent the people of the state which
elected them, as far as that is possible, even if that conflicts
with the interests or needs of people of other states.
Others may believe that as U.S. Senator they can be most effective
by advancing the programs and interests of the United States
government. Do you believe a U.S. Senator should:
( ) Represent all of the people of the U.S.
( ) Represent the people and state which elected him.
( ) Advance the interests of the U.S. government as best for all
( ) Other (please explain)
10. Oath of office.
U.S. Senator, to be seated, must take the following oath of
office: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support
and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely,
without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I
will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on
which I am about to enter: So help me God." Do you think
this oath is:
( ) An absolute solemn and binding promise.
( ) A general guideline.
( ) Just a formality.
( ) Can't really apply because constitutional issues are too
complex.
( ) Other (please explain)
11. Voting on large (or
any) bills unavailable to read. Sometimes members
of the House are asked to vote on large and complex bills, often
prepared by the executive branch and sometimes hundreds or
thousands of pages, to which representatives have not had access,
and which representatives have not been able to read and
study. Two examples are the Patriot Act and the Affordable
Care Act. Sometimes such bills contain surprise provisions
that representatives would not favor had the bill been available
with adequate time to review. About voting on bills that
have not been available to representatives to study, do you
believe:
( ) Sometimes the crush of business is just so great that we must
vote on bills we haven't been able to read.
( ) That is just the way things work in the Senate.
( ) A representative should always vote against a bill that has
not been available to study.
( ) Once a bill has passed a committee, it is safe to assume it is
properly vetted.
( ) Senators must trust the executive branch to prepare workable
bills.
( ) People should just wait for bills to be passed to learn what's
in them.
( ) Other
12. Lautenberg repeal.
In 1996, Congress enacted a gun ban known as the Lautenberg
Misdemeanor Gun Ban. Because this ban covers misdemeanors,
it disarms otherwise law-abiding citizens for life – for offenses
as slight as spanking a child or grabbing a spouse’s wrist.
Do you support a repeal of the Lautenberg Misdemeanor Gun Ban?
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Other (please explain)
13. Fast and Furious
Independent counsel. The Justice Department’s “Fast
and Furious” program resulted in thousands of firearms getting
into the hands of dangerous Mexican drug cartels. Several
whistle blowers, including current and former employees within the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, believe that
one purpose of the program was to justify the push for more gun
control in the United States. Would you call for a the appointment
of an independent counsel to investigate possible wrongdoing by
the BATFE, FBI, and the Offices of Attorney General and Deputy
Attorney General in connection with this program?
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) Other (please explain)
14. Judging the Constitution. It has long been
assumed by most that only the U.S. Supreme Court may determine the
powers the states have delegated to the federal government under
the Constitution. However, the principle also exists that
the servant may not judge the powers given to him by his master,
or that an agent may not judge the powers given to him by his
principal. By this standard, only the states may properly
define the powers they have delegated to the federal government
when they created it with the Constitution, and that no branch of
the federal government, including the judicial branch, may
properly or ultimately make that decision. What do you
believe?
( ) By tested tradition, only the Supreme Court may rule on the
U.S. Constitution.
( ) For the states make such decisions would just be unworkable.
( ) The states have reserved sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment
to determine what powers they have delegated to the federal
government in the Constitution.
( ) Because the states created the Constitution and the federal
government, only the states may determine what powers they
delegated.
( ) Other (please explain)
15. Affordable Care Act, Gun Owners, and Privacy.
The Affordable Care Act contains provisions that put at risk the
ability of millions of Americans to legally possess
firearms. The ACA violates gun owners' privacy by requiring
or allowing ACA medical providers to ask questions about patients'
firearms ownership, the answers to which get stored in electronic
databases available to federal enforcement agencies. This
data recording and sharing will, in all likelihood, cause federal
enforcers to make a determination in many cases that patients are
ineligible to possess firearms, which would make them federal
felons for possessing firearms they'd possessed legally before
such bureaucratic determination. Will you commit to fixing
this aspect of the ACA?
( ) Yes.
( ) Maybe.
( ) I can't commit at this time.
( ) No.
The foregoing responses are actually my positions on these issues,
to the best of my knowledge and at this time.
Candidate Signature (electronic signature
accepted) Date
Printed Name, Candidate for the United States Senate