Legislative Updates

 SB 1404 –State Intelligence Center Act (Fusion Centers)

o Sponsored by Garcia, Valde (R), cosponsored by Mike Nofs (R), Micheal Prusi (D), and
Alan Cropsy (R).
o Analysis
 This appears to be retroactively giving legislative approval for what is already
being done. There are already at least two domestic spying centers in
Michigan.
 It also provides for unlimited contributions and gifts to the members of the
“Advisory Board”, the group who is supposed to oversee this Fusion Center.
 Campaign for Liberty’s opposition can be found here:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=38501
 Here is a great site for research on Fusion Centers
 Other Resources (the reports are reports coming out of existing fusion centers
and you can see how hostile they are to limited government activists.)
 http://torinmonahan.com/media/Detroit_FC_article.pdf
 MIAC Report (may take a while to open)
 Department of Homeland Security’s report on right wing extremists.
 Domestic Extremism Lexicon report.
 Terrorism and Criminal Terms and Concepts.
o Proposed Action
 Push this out to everyone
 Contact the members of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Emerging Technology and tell them not to forward this out of committee.
o Cameron Brown (C)
(517) 373-5932
sencbrown@senate.michigan.gov

o Valde Garcia (VC)

(517) 373-2420
senvgarcia@senate.michigan.gov
 o Randy Richardville
(517) 373-3543
SenRRichardville@senate.michigan.gov

o John Pappageorge
(517) 373-2523
SenJPappageorge@senate.michigan.gov
o Tupac Hunter (MVC)
(517) 373-0994
SenTAHunter@senate.michigan.gov

o Dennis Olshove
(517) 373-8360
sendolshove@senate.michigan.gov

o Buzz Thomas
(517) 373-7918
senbthomas@senate.michigan.gov

 HJR MMM – Call to National Constitutional Convention.

o Sponsored by Republican Rep. Paul Opsommer, cosponsored by Republican Rep Dave
Agema.
o Analysis
 32 states have already made the call, only 2 more needed to convene the
convention.
 This is a highly irresponsible act by Republicans. The philosophy of limited
government and liberty will not be represented at a constitutional convention
and we would only lose ground. To understand this issue, read Tom DeWeese’s
article on it here.
o Proposed Action
 Push this issue out to everyone.
 Contact the chairman of the House appropriations committee and request that
this bill not be allowed to come up for debate.
 George Cushingberrry (D)
o (517) 373-2276
o georgecushingberry@house.mi.gov
o http://house.michigan.gov/rep.asp?DIST=008
 SB 0212 – Amendment of Michigan Firearms laws. And its sister bill in the
House, HB 6139.
o Senate Bill Sponsored by Roger Kahn (R), cosponsored by Alan Cropsey (R), and Wayne
Kuipers (R).
o House Bill Sponsored by Marty Knollenberg (R), cosponsored by Rick Jones (R), Richard
LaBlanc (D), Joel Sheltrown (D), John Espinoza (D), Matt Lori (R), and Kim Meltzer (R).

o Analysis
 The first thing to understand is that this bill extends the definition of a policing
agency, for the purposes of this section of the law, to the following:
 THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF A CITY, TOWNSHIP, OR VILLAGE.
 THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF A COMMUNITY COLLEGE, COLLEGE, OR
UNIVERSITY.
 A COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT.
 THE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES.
 The second thing to understand is that it extends immunity to the above
policing agencies. The State Police already has immunity.
 Third, you must understand that it adds in the feature that these policing
agencies can now keep the firearms that are confiscated.
 The Fourth thing to understand is the House version contains the phrase “A law
enforcement agency that seizes or otherwise comes into possession of a
firearm”
 This language is completely unacceptable because the language
“otherwise comes into possession” is very vague and leaves it open to
confiscate under spurious pretexts.
 Currently, it is local authorities that confiscate most firearms; it is also local
authorities that deal with folks that are open carrying. In most cases, they are
following the law but if a locality wanted to exercise extraordinary powers and
violate gun owners’ rights, they can be held accountable. This extends the
provisions of selling for revenue, or keeping for their own use to local
authorities. That combined with immunity is a recipe for disaster and abuse.
With immunity there will be a positive incentive to profit off of law abiding
citizens.
 Likely done for the purposes of giving localities, the ability to oppress open carry
and even conceal and carry practitioners.
o Proposed Action.
 Marty Knollenberg (R) has been attacking us on this. Here are two comments
he sent members of ours when they approached him about this. A couple of
notes, we never attacked him, or smeared him, we just had people call him. We
did question his credentials which is understandable with this bill. Mary Waters
came with Gun Owners of America, telling a story about a gun of hers that was
confiscated and she can’t get it back. Lastly, yes what we are doing is educating
and lobbying. And it seems very effective. Mr. Dudenhoefer is the other state
coordinator who was at the committee hearing.
 As an aside, you should really do some research as it relates to this
group and their political credentials. Mr. Dudenhoefer, who is from
Detroit, was seen at the committee hearing working with Mary Waters
(of the Mary Waters and Sam Riddle fame) on this issue.
 It troubles me that the group has not reached out to me so that I could
better explain my intentions but have instead decided to smear my
name and question my party credentials. If this is what the group is
referring to regarding "education and lobbying," it is clearly not
succeeding in that mission. My understanding is that some of the
Republican members attempted to work with him in committee and he
would not listen to them or work with them. And "lobbying" Mary
Waters, who is no longer in the legislature, is not needed and should be
questioned by the group.
 Contact the members of the Senate Judiciary committee and tell them not to let
it out of committee.
 Senators Wayne Kuipers (R) (C), Alan Cropsey (R) (VC), Alan Sanborn (R),
Bruce Patterson (R), Tony Stamas (R), Gretchen Whitmer (D) (MVC),
Hansen Clarke (D), and Raymond Basham (D) .
 Contact the House Judiciary Committee and tell them not to let it out of
committee.
 Mark Meadows (D) (C), Ellen Cogen Lipton (D) (VC), Lisa Brown (D), Pam
Byrnes (D), Bob Constan (D), Marc Corriveau (D), Andy Coulouris (D),
Andrew Kandrevas (D), Betty Cook Scott (D), Rebekah Warren (D), Tonya
Schuitmaker (R) (VC), Justin Amash (R), Joe Haveman (R), Rick Jones (R),
Eileen Kowall (R), Tory Rocca (R).
 Senate Bill 1371 and Senate Bill 1372 (E-Verify)
o Sponsored by Michelle McManus
o These both have to do with E-Verify.
o After our initial statement, Representative Rep Dave Agema put out some misleading
statistics saying that it works 96% of the time when it actually fails 55% of the time
when considering illegals. This information is directly out of the government report on
E-Verify. You can get all the details in our testimony
o Analysis
 Our testimony can be found at the following links. Feel Free to comment if you
would like.
 Initial Testimony
 Follow up testimony (after Rep Agemas comments)
 Michelle McManus’s own testimony against the bill!
o Proposed Action
 Dave Agema has put out a call on Facebook asking for people to call in favor of
this. Click here to go to his Facebook page. Send him a friend request, once that
is accepted, comment on this post and ask him to stop pushing this.
 Call the Senate Commerce and Tourism Committee members and ask them to
not pass this bill out of committee.
 Jason Allen (R) (C), Mike Nofs (R) (VC), Tony Stamas, Hansen Clark (VC),
Tupac Hunter
 Call Michelle McManus and tell her to stand strong against this bill.

 House Bill 6374 – Licensing and continuing education

o Sponsored by Pam Byrnes, No cosponsors from what I can see.
o This has passed the state house. View the votes here.
o It is now in the Senate Economic Development and Regulatory Reform Committee.
o 100% of the Democrats in the house voted for this
o 73% of the Republicans voted for this.
o Analysis
 This is another tax. Mandating continuing education for highly educated people
is nothing but a money grab. The reasoning for this is that the state needs to
protect us.
 There is no need for this. The free market handles this just fine.
 By putting an additional burden on the taxpayer (yes this cost gets past to us) it
drives up cost, and reduces competition.
 From an article on Mises.org
  The stated goals of most such regulation, safety and skills validation, are
legitimate and desirable. The practical and political motivation for
introducing such regulation, however, is typically fees (licensing tax
collection) and trade protectionism (the establishment of technical
barriers to the free migration of trade labor resources across state and
municipal boundaries).
o Proposed Action
 Call the Senate Economic Development and Regulatory Reform Committee and
tell them to vote no on this legislation.
 Alan Sanborn
o (517) 373-7670
o senasanborn@senate.michigan.gov
 Randy Richardville
o (517) 373-3543
o SenRRichardville@senate.michigan.gov
 Jason Allen
o (517) 373-2413
o senjallen@senate.michigan.gov
 Judd Gilbert
o (517) 373-7708
o senjgilbert@senate.michigan.gov
 Buzz Thomas
o (517) 373-7918
o senbthomas@senate.michigan.gov
 Tupac Hunter
o (517) 373-0994
o SenTAHunter@senate.michigan.gov
 Gilda Jacobs
o (517) 373-7888
o sengjacobs@senate.michigan.gov