Well trying to get used to a new browser, I inadvertently replied just to
Gold.

Post as best I can remember it follows

While in my "reading room" this Am, I picked up the March Issue of the boat
US Mag.

Note all content summarized and paraphrased

On the cover ----Sen Breaux bids adieu

page 4 Behind the buoy ---- Sen Breaux is a good guy

Page 7 Breaux's legacy in pearl -- dealing with a $500 Mil trust fund for
boating

Page 8 Manatee Deaths up ---- But not because of boats

Page 10 California Budget Woes --(complete with a Pix of Arnold who is going
to divert boat fuel tax to other than boat uses

Page 11 SC Sky-High Tax -- Personal property tax on boats is bad

Page 12 Boat Liability Insurance --- Might be a good thing

Pages 20-21 Profile of NTSB Chairwoman

Pages 28-29 Fuel tax -- how states use it

Page 32 Fl has no lemon law for boats --- Bad

So which (if any) of these are political? (suggest you read your own copy
before replying) You ARE members aren't you?




"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Spending money is one thing -- but what about saying "Mr. Smith is a good
guy, and we think he will work in our best interests" in their
newsletter?

If BOAT/US, or anybody else, felt it was important for the membership to
understand the differences in candidate's positions on certain issues that
might effect something of interest to organization members, it would be
more
appropriate to make a certain amount of space available in the newsletter
for
the candidate to say his piece. It would also be fair (although there are
fewer
rules requiring fair play these days) to allow the opposition an equal
amount
of space.

Far too much editorializing gets shoveled under the crack in the door when
a
newsletter editor makes a recommendation to the membership.

Whether it's Marine Trade Association, the
Yacht Brokers Association, Boat/US, or whatever....the main purpose of
those
and similar organizations should be promoting the best interest of the
entire
membership on a non-partisan basis. Not diverting membership dues to
political
campaigns on *any* side of the spectrum.
Not even using the membership roster as a "mailing list" to pressure
members to
contribute to the campaign of some gool ol' boy or another.