proposed laws

PA Bill Number: HB1751

Title: In firearms and other dangerous articles, providing for identification required for purchase of firearm ammunition.

Description: In firearms and other dangerous articles, providing for identification required for purchase of firearm ammunition. ...

Last Action: Referred to JUDICIARY

Last Action Date: Jul 30, 2021

more >>

upcoming events

Firearms Law Seminar - 08/7/2021
Wicen’s Shooting Range 3179 Mozart Road, Furlong, PA


FOAC Monthly Meeting - August - 08/8/2021
Online only 515 Millers Run Road, Morgan, PA


FOAC Monthly Meeting - September - 09/12/2021
Online only 515 Millers Run Road, Morgan, PA

More events

decrease font size   increase font size

FOAC's Weekly Message For Sunday June 27th 2021 :: 06/27/2021

On June 23rd President Biden renewed his attack on the 2nd Amendment by saying, “If you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.” That isn’t how Biden began his remarks on crime and guns yesterday, but it was the most eye-popping statement he made in an anti-Second Amendment speech littered with falsehoods and blunders.

As if to justify his attack on tens of millions of American 2nd Amendment advocates, Biden went on to say; “The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own. You couldn’t buy a cannon.

Those who say the blood of lib- “the blood of patriots,” you know, and all the stuff about how we’re going to have to move against the government. Well, the tree of liberty is not watered with the blood of patriots. What’s happened is that there have never been — if you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.

The point is that there has always been the ability to limit — rationally limit the type of weapon that can be owned and who can own it.”

Fact-check: False. Misleading. Missing context.

See a short history of Biden’s Lunacy on 2nd amendment Issues: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/06/a-short-history-of-joe-bidens-insanity-on-guns/

Noted author and 2nd Amendment expert David Harsanyi rebuked Biden for a similar lie back in April. Of American gun laws prior to 1986, he explained, “I wrote a book on the history of American guns, and never once did I run across any law that restricted Americans from owning any weapons they desired (unless we’re talking about blacks or Indians; because most gun restrictions in U.S. history have been employed to unarm the people who need weapons most).”

Also, the “blood of patriots” quote Biden so badly mangled was from Thomas Jefferson: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” Biden curiously leaves out the words “and tyrants” when he utters this line. He might not remember, but Jefferson was the author of, you know, the thing — the Declaration of Independence. So, after a year of promoting violence and advocating for defunding police departments in urban centers perennially controlled by Democrats, apparently Joe Biden and his Democrat Party hacks are now SHOCKED to learn violent crime is continuing the surge they refused to acknowledge last summer.

Even the New York Times noted, "Across 20 major cities, the murder rate at the end of June was on average 37 percent higher than it was at the end of May." Of course, they blamed the surge on the pandemic. By August, a Wall Street Journal report on homicide found "double-digit increases in 36 of 50 biggest cities amid pandemic."

While the FBI's 2020 crime data will not be released until the end of July, the preliminary report indicates murder rates swelled by 25% — meaning the number of homicides would exceed 20,000 for the first time since Bill Clinton was blaming guns back in 1995. Aggravated assaults increased by 10% in 2020.

Based on data from the first quarter of 2021, homicides are up again, a whopping 20% over the same period in 2020.

Democrat political fortunes tend to suffer when crime surges, especially when there are countless examples of Democrats, in effect, advocating lawlessness in the cities where those surges are occurring. Clearly, Biden and his Demo cadres are guilty, at a minimum, of criminal negligence.

A quick search of MSM propaganda platforms returned the following predictable parrot-media "gun crime" headlines: "Biden's plan to ... tighten gun regulations" (Washington Post); "Biden to Speak on Gun Violence" (New York Times); "Biden set to announce his gun crime prevention strategy" (CNN); "Biden plans new steps to combat gun violence" (Reuters); "Biden to ... focus on gun violence" (The Hill); "Biden to Launch Gun Crime Strategy" (Bloomberg); "Biden's strategy to combat violent crime will focus on guns" (CNBC); "Biden to launch national effort to fight gun violence" (CBS). Ad infinitum — ad nauseam!

Indeed, the Biden administration just released his "fact sheet" on his "Comprehensive Strategy to Prevent and Respond to Gun Crime" — the plan for his "gun problem" solutions. It asserts, "Biden believes that the surge in gun violence that has affected communities across the country over the last year and a half is unacceptable." Well, that is just special. Did he come up with that all by himself?

As we have said before, and according to the FBI's latest national crime statistics regarding interracial crime between Blacks and Whites, Black people committed 90% of interracial felonies despite representing just 13% of our population.

And of course, there is no mention of the fact that in cases where the victim's race was known, in 88% of murdered Black people, the suspect is also Black.

Further, this racial disparity is also true in other crime categories, which dispels the assertion that somehow prisons have more Black inmates because of "systemic racism." America is no more besieged by systemic racism than it is besieged by white supremacists.

FACT: If you don’t have a violent criminal record, or have ties to drugs or gangs, the probability of your being murdered in the US is virtually identical with other developed nations where most types of firearms have been banned for decades.

All of Biden's proposed "solutions" are just temporary salves for the symptoms of the disease. Nothing he is proposing will treat the core disease that underlies urban violence, because that would require a massive shift in the Democrat Party's race-hustling social policies.

The fact is, violence is a Democrat-induced culture problem, not a "gun problem." Criminals commit crimes, and until Democrats reverse course on the social policies that have devastated American families and communities for decades, the consequential violence will continue. But Democrats never miss an opportunity to focus on their favorite whipping post, the 2nd Amendment, instead of doing their job and focusing on holding criminals accountable.

California Assault Weapons Ban Struck Down – 3rd Circuit Issues Stay

A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay that will allow the state to enforce its ban on “assault weapons,” including the AR-15, while it appeals a lower court ruling. The court said the lower court ruling striking down the law as unconstitutional would be stayed until a separate pending case against the law is decided.

On June 4, Judge Roger Benitez ruled California’s ban violates the Second Amendment. He argued the law runs afoul of precedent established in the landmark Supreme Court ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller because it bans popular guns commonly used for sport shooting and home defense.

“This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection,” Benitez wrote. “The banned ‘assault weapons’ are not bazookas, howitzers, or machineguns. Those arms are dangerous and solely useful for military purposes. Instead, the firearms deemed ‘assault weapons’ are fairly ordinary, popular, modern rifles.

“This is an average case about average guns used in average ways for average purposes.”

Benitez granted a temporary stay to allow California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D.) to appeal the decision, which the state took advantage of almost before the ink was dry. Twenty-two Republican attorneys general then filed a brief asking the Ninth Circuit not to stay the ruling, ultimately to no avail.

Louisiana Governor Veto’s Constitutional Carry, Veto Override Possible

Louisiana Gov. Edwards vetoed Constitutional Carry that passed by a bipartisan group of state lawmakers that would have ended the permit requirement for carrying a concealed handgun.

The governor, a Democrat, said he’s a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and an “enthusiastic outdoorsman and hunter,” but he can’t support permitless concealed carry.

“I simply cannot support carrying a concealed carry firearm without proper education and safety training,” he said in a statement. “Our current system strikes the right balance of ensuring that people can bear arms while also keeping reasonable permitting and training processes in place … Simply put, it is not too much to ask that a person who wishes to carry a concealed weapon in public be required to attend basic marksmanship and safety training so they understand the regulations associated with such an action.”

“For these reasons, I have vetoed the permitless carry bill,” the governor added.

The bill, Senate Bill No. 118 (pdf), would allow any resident who is 21 years of age or older and who is not prohibited from owning a firearm by state or federal law to carry a concealed gun without a permit.

The bill also requires the state Department of Public Safety and Corrections to provide a free 60-minute online concealed handgun education course.

The scope of the online training includes sections on concealed handgun basics and nomenclature, firearm-free zones, use of deadly force, and interactions with law enforcement officers.

However, the course is not required for concealed handgun carry.

The bill was passed in the state Senate and House with bipartisan support. The legislature appears to have enough votes to override the governor’s veto as it was passed in the state House and the Senate by 73:28 and 27:9 votes respectively.

2nd Amendment Wins of this past Week: June 24 - SB 565 - Constitutional Carry Passes PA Senate Judiciary Committee

Thank you to ALL who helped in so many ways!

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/RCC/PUBLIC/listVoteSummary.cfm?sYear=2021&sInd=0&chamber=S&cteeCde=39&theDate=06/24/2021&RollCallId=433

Is Owning Your Own Cannon Legal? Biden Lies Again About History AND Current Law

So, what were the laws on owning your own artillery piece in America? It was perfectly LEGAL! Read this article on the laws, then and now: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/actually-mr-president-you-can-own-a-cannon/#axzz6z0v3fI00

Spotlight on Legislation: HB 1077 - Voluntary No-Guns Government List?

Legislative efforts to specifically target those with mental health issues and experiencing an apparent suicidal crisis are rapidly expanding. One of these “solutions” involves an individual voluntarily adding themself to a government self-exclusion list which is defined by the specific legislative measure in question.

Washington state passed a voluntary self-exclusion list in 2018. It entails a 7-day waiting period. When checked in 2020 only 13 individuals had utilized this option.

Virginia just recently passed their legislation which entails entering oneself on the do not sell list for 21 days.

In PA, there is a bill currently HB1077 which defines voluntarily making oneself a prohibited person with the PSP for a pre-defined period of 1, 3, or 5 years. https://foac-pac.org/Proposed-Pennsylvania-House-Legislation-HB1077/State-Law/4444

While these governmental prohibition list options are very problematic, HB1077 is particularly more so by its unrealistic time periods which apparently do not recognize that mental health crises, are typically short lived. It is a wonder how anyone would believe this would have any positive effect on mental health issues.

Just some of the problems with these legislative efforts include the following. They do not address the lethal means already in possession of the individual. They identify the person as having a mental health issue – being suicidal – and it is uncertain as to what impact this would have on the individual’s status going forward. We have already seen that the PSP releases information that is considered confidential under law – so who knows what would be done with the list info. Depending on the sign-up process what is to prevent someone being entered on this list as revenge – if the individual then attempts to purchase firearm they can be arrested and prosecuted, facing huge legal fees to prove otherwise. If confidentiality is breached this information could be used against the individual in legal proceedings by the opposition. There is no earlier opt out time provided for should the crisis be quickly resolved and a self-protection need arises. And of course, the most obvious issue being “What firearm owner is going to voluntarily put themselves on the government list?”

Better Option to Government Lists: Hold My Guns

Sarah Joy Albrecht is the Founder and President of Hold My Guns, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization with a mission to connect responsible firearm owners with voluntary, private, offsite storage and education, through a national network of partnering gun shops and FFLs, during times of mental health crisis or personal need. Hold My Guns takes a non-legislative, pro-rights approach to help prevent suicide, accidental shootings, and theft.

The offsite storage option is private and confidential and can be used for a number of confidential reasons. “It is never assumed that the gun owner is struggling with a mental health crisis, although some may choose to store their firearm off-site for this reason. It may be that the owner is choosing to store their firearm to prevent unauthorized access by another member of their household, because there are guests in the home, or to prevent theft while away on vacation or deployment.”

https://www.holdmyguns.org/

Sarah’s testimony to the Senate Judiciary can be read here: https://judiciary.pasenategop.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/42/2019/09/Additional-Testimony-Sarah-J.-Albrecht-SJAHoldMyGuns-Testimony-2.pdf  

Sarah’s effort represents the Firearm Community responsibly offering solutions that do not involve freedom robbing government intervention. HMG respects privacy since no one is given any label as there are multiple reasons for using this service – none of which needs to be disclosed. The storage time is also up to the individual. The larger firearm community needs to be made aware of this option. In addition, more FFL’S need recruited to assist in this process.

PA Appellate Panel Rules Township Ban on Private Shooting Ranges Violates 2A

In a 2-1 decision the PA Commonwealth Appeals Court reversed a lower court decision and maintained that Stroud Twp.’s ban on a private range violated the petitioners 2A rights and that his suit could proceed. https://foac-pac.org/Pennsylvania-Court-Strikes-Down-Towns-Ban-On-Gun-Rages/News-Item/12401 Judges Brobson and Leavitt made up the majority decision. To view Judge Brobson’s 26-page decision see this link

https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/671CD20_5-28-21.pdf?cb=1 Judge Brobson won the nomination for R Candidate for Pa Supreme Court in the recent Primary election.

SCOTUS Decision on Warrantless Gun Searches - Caniglia v Strom - Not What You Think!

2A related internet sites were ablaze extolling the virtues of the SCOTUS unanimous decision regarding warrantless searches. The headlines were Warrantless Gun Confiscation Rule Unconstitutional in a 9-0 SCOTUS Decisions. The case involved a man whose guns were seized by law enforcement without a warrant after his wife stated she was concerned he would hurt himself. The individual was taken to the hospital for a mental health admission and after his discharge found that his fire arms had been confiscated while he was hospitalized. The police had told his wife he consented to the seizure – which he did not _ and they proceeded to search the house without a warrant. https://foac-pac.org/Supreme-Court-rules-warrantless-home-gun-confiscation-is-unconstitutional-in-9-vote/Legal-News-Item/1313

SCOTUS held in 1973 Cady v Dombrowski that a warrantless search of an impounded vehicle for a firearm did not violate the 4th Amendment. This was considered a “community caretaking function.” The question presented was quite simple: “whether Cady’s acknowledgment of these “caretaking” duties creates a standalone doctrine that justifies warrant-less searches and seizures in the home?” All the Justices agreed that it did not. Attorney Josh Prince, however does not see this as a ground breaking case as it applies only very specifically to this case and he expresses serious concern about our constitutional rights due to the exceptions stated by the Justices. He states “...why did our Founding Fathers include an amendment process, if the Bill of Rights could simply be amended, modified, or otherwise changed by the whim of the Judiciary? Where exactly does the Judiciary have the power to add exceptions and exclusions to the Bill of Rights? Isn’t it only We The People that have that right, through the amendment process?” “To put it succinctly, our Founding Fathers are rolling over in the graves at the usurpation not only of our Rights but by the Judiciary’s death-grip control over those exact Rights. Instead of lauding this decision, everyone valuing their Rights should be horrified at what additional “exceptions” and application of existing “exceptions” the Court will condone in violation of our Rights.” https://foac-pac.org/SCOTUS-Decision-on-Warrantless-Gun-Seizure-Isn%E2%80%99t-What-It%E2%80%99s-Being-Touted-To-Be%E2%80%A6/News-Item/12339

While the court did not take up the question of red flag laws in this regard, it was mentioned. Perhaps this portends it will be taken up in the future. Based on their reasoning in this case they may end up finding seizure of firearms under ERPO laws is constitutional.        

BATFE – An Agency with a Tarnished Reputation and a History of Abuse of Rights

No one makes a better case for abolishing the ATF than the ATF.

There has never been a federal agency with such little regard for the sanctity of human life, with such a history of failure, with such antiquated duties and responsibilities, with such a propensity to overreact, with such an addiction to good press, with such a willingness to bend over for any politician in charge, and – as we currently see playing out – with such little regard for the constitutional rights of American citizens.

I have known special agents from other agencies – FBI, the U.S. Marshal’s Service, and DEA to name a few – and all of them react the same way whenever the ATF comes up in conversation: “Yeah, well I’m not sure what’s up with those guys.”

Those guys’ leadership is and always has been a sick joke. ATF directors, who are presidential appointees, care more about keeping the White House happy than they do the Constitution, the safety of their agents, or the lives of American citizens.

Joe Biden’s nominee for ATF director, presidential lapdog wannabe David Chipman, will only make things worse if he’s confirmed by the Senate. Chipman – a modern-day Chekist if there ever was one, cut from the same bolt of cloth as “Iron Felix” Dzerzhinsky himself – will transform the ATF into the NKVD for the 21st Century, complete with show trials, midnight renditions, and a total disregard for human rights, as long as he gets regular belly rubs from whoever is actually running things behind the katy-barred doors of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

This toxic little imp of a man has already put the Senate and the entire world on notice that he intends to rip America’s most popular rifle from American hands, and given his history at Waco, if the hands are cold and dead it won’t bother him at all.

Kansas Lawmakers Override Governor’s Gun Bill Veto, Lowering Concealed Carry Age to 18

Kansas lawmakers on Monday (5/3/21) voted to override Gov. Laura Kelly’s veto of a gun bill, lowering the minimum concealed carry age from 21 to 18 years of age.

After a short discussion, the House voted 84 to 39 to override the Democratic governor’s veto of HB 2058 that proposes to let more people carry guns if they have a proper permit. The Senate also voted to override the veto 31 to 8.

Republicans currently hold an 84–41 majority in the state’s lower chamber and a 29–11 majority in the state Senate. A two-thirds vote in both chambers is required to overturn a veto. With that achieved, the bill will be enacted without the governor’s signature.

Kelly said previously in vetoing the bill late last month that she supports the Second Amendment but that the bill would allow more guns on school grounds, which would “drive prospective students away from our schools.”

The legislation proposes that Kansans aged 18 to 20 would be eligible to carry concealed guns provided they complete gun training, a background check, and pay the required state fee. Currently, people aged 21 years and above can conceal carry and aren’t required to have a license.

“The governor in her message indicated that she has always supported the Second Amendment,” Rep. John Barker (R-Abiline) said of Kelly’s decision to veto the bill last month. “Well, I find that hard to believe sometimes because we already have 18-year-olds that can carry a gun [openly] in the state of Kansas.”

Critics of the legislation argue that lowering the minimum concealed carry age to 18 has its risks.

“It’s not a bad bill,” said Democratic lawmaker for Kansas City Louis Ruiz. “There’s some good parts to the bill. The part that we had problems with on our side was the 20, 19, and 18-year-olds carrying firearms. Even though they’re trained, the maturity level of the brain lacks.”

Barker, who carried the legislation on the floor, pointed out that the bill requires training for the age group to be eligible to conceal carry.

“This requires them, if they are going to carry a concealed weapon, to get training and to get a permit and to have a background investigation … Any time people can get training, that’s a good thing.”

The protection of Second Amendment rights has drawn renewed scrutiny since President Joe Biden, who has repeatedly called for tougher “gun control” restrictions, took office.

Interesting Videos:

WATCH: Sen. Ted Cruz gets Joe Biden’s ATF Director nominee David Chipman to admit that he wants to BAN the AR-15, the most popular rifle in America.

 Need A Laugh? Check Out The Results of These Anti-Gunners’ ‘Research’

God help us all.

Overall Status of 2nd Amendment Legislation Filed to Date in PA and the US:

2021-2022 Session PA State Bills (updated)

  • Pro-Gun Bills: 23
  • Anti-Gun Bills: 55
  • Unrated (Watching): 13
  • Legislative (gun related) Memos: 116

2021-2022 Session Federal Bills (updated)

  • Pro-Gun Bills: 39
  • Anti-Gun Bills: 75
  • Unrated (Watching): 33

CPRC Update from Dr. John Lott:

Download and review this research here: http://ssrn.com/abstract=3857331

  • Dr. John Lott appeared on Mark Levin’s national radio show (6/25) to discuss Joe Biden’s claims about gun crime. On Wednesday, June 23, 2021, Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland spoke to the nation the administration’s gun crime prevention strategy. They mentioned their push so far on ghost guns, a rule to clarify that pistols equipped with certain stabilizing braces, and their model Red Flag law. The administration “zero tolerance” approach to “rogue gun dealers” who file false reports is to revoke their license after only one violation.

https://crimeresearch.org/2021/06/on-the-mark-levin-show-discussing-bidens-claims-about-gun-crime/

CPRC Selected Media:

Research

Op-ed

Letter to the Editor Submitted - not published

Television/YouTube Show Interviews

Law Enforcement Officers Speak Their Minds: Former Officer Tatum on George Floyd

The BBC tries to manipulate more controversy over the death of George Floyd by interviewing former Tucson police officer, Brandon Tatum. The interview turns into a train wreck when Brandon completely turns the tables on the debate topic!

Self-Defense with a Twist:

In a bizarre encounter in Fort Smith Arkansas last month, a young man attacked his apartment building with a rifle. At first, the attacker called for the tenants to come outside. Then, the attacker demanded people leave and he shot at the building.

Eighty-seven-year-old apartment resident Lois Hicks came out to try to calm Arnold down then fled back into her apartment after seeing the rifle he was allegedly holding. Arnold allegedly followed her and shot her dead inside her residence.

Fortunately, one of the tenants in the apartment complex recognized the sound of the gunshots. This defender looked out through the curtains and saw the attacker holding a rifle. The defender had a gun of his own and shot the attacker. The attacker’s attempt at mass murder was stopped after one elderly lady was murdered.

https://www.4029tv.com/article/fort-smith-police-on-the-scene-of-a-shooting-at-least-two-dead/36437231

Founding Father’s Statement on Freedom:

In 1843, Mellen Chamberlain, was researching the American War for Independence, and he had the occasion to interview Captain Levi Preston, 91, a veteran of Lexington and Concord.

“Captain Preston,” he asked, “what made you go to the Concord fight?

Captain Preston, bristling at the notion that he was made to fight, replied, “What did I go for?”

The young historian continued, “Were you oppressed by the Stamp Act?”

Captain Preston replied, “I never saw any stamps and I always understood that none were sold.”

“Well, what about the tea tax?” the historian asked.

Captain Preston: “Tea tax? I never drank a drop of the stuff. The boys threw it all overboard.”

Chamberlain: “I suppose you had been reading Harrington, Sidney, and Locke about the eternal principle of liberty?”

Captain Preston:  “I never heard of these men. The only books we had were the Bible, the Catechism, Watts’ Psalms, and hymns and the almanacs.”

Chamberlain:  “Well, then, what was the matter?”

Captain Preston:  “Young man, what we meant in going for those Redcoats was this: we always had been free, and we meant to be free always. They didn’t mean we should.”

The interview with Levi Preston can be found in David Hackett Fischer’s Liberty and Freedom: A Visual History of America’s Founding Ideas.

Closing Thoughts:

The recent troubling video of Loudon County Virginia parents being treated like village idiots by power drunk school board members for daring to reject the socialist ramblings being taught to their kids makes one wonder if a collision is becoming inevitable. Not in the sense of a political one, that is already underway, but in the sense of the kind of confrontation that has the potential to become violent and to set off shockwaves that reverberate nationwide and themselves touch off follow-on events.  The American people can only be pushed so far.

Nowhere is the danger of such a catastrophic event greater, however, than in the arena of the 2nd Amendment. However much the self-appointed elite may wish to transform this right into permission to own a gun for the purposes of hunting, sport shooting, and the like, the 2nd Amendment was clearly and unambiguously drafted to ensure that the citizenry would remain armed so that they could defend all the other freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. Biden may babble on about F-15’s and nuclear weapons all he wants, but the fact is that the Second Amendment is intended, without question, to be a guarantee against government tyranny.

A prudent administration would read the tea leaves, sense which way the wind is blowing, and back off. Prudence and militant revolutionary ideology do not go together, however. The ideologues in power in Washington are on a mission and they intend to employ the full force of the federal government against their enemies.

Stay Free!

Kim Stolfer, President

**As a reminder, all FOAC members and, indeed, every gun owner can participate in the July 11, 2021 FOAC Monthly meeting from any PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android phone by clicking on the link below:

Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android by Clicking the Link Below:

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/4122571099

Meeting ID: 412 257 1099

Password: Sent Upon Your RSVP Request
**OUR MEETING PARTICIPATION RULES ARE BELOW:

To join this membership meeting you must RSVP by sending an e-mail info@foacpac.org and confirm your attendance and the Meeting Password will then be e-mailed to you by one of the officers.

One tap mobile
+19292056099,, 4122571099#,,,,,,0#,,383513# US (New York)
+13017158592,, 4122571099#,,,,,,0#,,383513# US (Germantown)

Meeting ID: 412 257 1099

Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kd2mz5xggE

Remember: FOAC is fiercely independent. We are not affiliated with, nor do we receive any money from, any national organizations. No sugar daddies. No New York billionaires. Memberships and individual donations are our only source of income.

If your friends are not a member - why not? The more members we have committed to making a difference, the greater FOAC’s impact in the legislature. By working together and making our voices heard, not only can we show the billionaires and their lapdogs that they don’t stand a chance in Pennsylvania, we can push through legislation that further restores and protects our rights.