I must apologize here to Steve since Steve is NOT John Doyle's Senator. As
John replied to Steve's post:
"Another small victory:
Of the two senators for VA, one has already voted to
defeat the entire bill and the other responded to my
email as seen below.
John"
I then read Steve's post as 'The reply' John got from his Senator.
But my point (or lack there of according to Steve) is still that the
DEMIL section has to be killed in committee. Or say goodbye to your project.
It is not necessary to suggest something, because there is only ONE
solution. Get everyone you know to contact their elected Reps. over and over
again with coherent letters, emails and phone calls about how these vehicles
are JUST vehicles. When your Rep. comes home to his district, find out what
meetings he will be holding and attend them. Go up before and after and talk
to him in person, and express your concern about the bill provisions. Make
an appointment to see him in his office, if possible. Offer to drive him in
your MV in THIS COMING Veterans Day Parade, but make sure he understands
that if the bill passes, he'll have to ride in a plain old Cadillac
convertible.
NRA learned to 'flood' the mail room years ago. So do we.
Again, Steve, sorry 'bout that....
Ron
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven P. Allen" <spallen@rolemail.ccis.edu>
To: "Ron" <rojoha@mediaone.net>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 2:43 PM
Subject: Re: [MV] FW: [MV] S1438 - another small victory
> I was NOT "blowing" anybody "off": I was offering a suggestion, one I'm
> not claiming was perfect, just a start. If you think you can improve on
> it, suggest something. If not, shut the f*ck up and leave me the hell
> alone. Frankly, I'm not sure that your reply is coherent--at least it
> doesn't make any sense to me--but this very small-time HMV enthusiast
> wonders why you're venting on him.
>
> Steve Allen
>
>
> At 12:23 PM 10/8/01 -0400, you wrote:
> >Two very important problems here with the response from your senator:
> >
> >1) He blows you off with "since it seems the
> >passage of this thing is a foregone conclusion, ". Read this as "Yeah,
> >Whatever" not "I will immediately draft a bill, resolution, strongly
worded
> >protest , Talk to my colleagues, mention it at the next cocktail party,
> >write on the wall of the Senate Men's room, etc..."
> >
> >2) He states "to have the term "SME"
> >redefined by Congress to specifically *exclude* HMVs,". Very Interesting.
> >Except that M35's, CUCV's, things still in active use, things less than
25
> >years old, etc, WILL NOT FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY. Items legally bought,
> >registered and restored would still be scooped up. Surplus trucks and
> >vehicles would not meet this criteria.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 00:36:24 PST