Gale Encyclopedia Of American Law 3Rd Edition Volume 7 P22 ppsx

competition.” The Senate eventually approved the bill by a margin of seven votes. NIRA was divided into three sections, or titles. Title I promoted centralized economic planning by instituting codes of fair competi- tion for industry. Title II provided $3.3 billion for public works projects. Title III contained minor amendments to the Emergency Relief and Construction Act of 1932 (47 Stat. 709). Title I of the act declared a “national emergency productive of widespread unemploy- ment and disorganization of industry, which burdens interstate and foreign commerce, affects the public welfare, and undermines the stan- dards of living of the American people.” To correct this situation, NIRA proposed to “remove obstructions to the free flow of interstate and foreign commerce, to elimi- nate unfair competitive practices, to increase the consumption of industrial and agricultural products by increasing purchasing power, to reduce and relieve unemployment [and] to improve standards of labor.” NIRA was designed to accomplish these goals through the codes of fair competition, which were essentially sets of rules created on an industry- by-industry basis governing wages, prices, and business practices. The codes were intended to arrest the downward spiral of the economy in which high unemployment depressed wages, which decreased public purchasing power, thus leading to lower prices and profits (as desperate businesses tried to undersell one another), putting further downward pressure on wages. It was hoped that organized coopera- tion between business and government would correct what some perceived to be waste and inefficiency in the free-market economy. NIRA created the NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMIN- ISTRATION (NRA) to oversee the drafting and implementation of the codes of fair competi- tion. The agency was modeled, in part, after the War Industries Board, which had operated during WORLD WAR I. To lead N RA, Roosevelt chose former General Hugh S. Johnson, who had served as a liaison between the U.S. Army and the War Industries Board during WORLD WAR I . NRA began its work with great fanfare and initially received enthusiastic public support. A massive public relations campaign included the largest parade in the history of New York City. Businesses that adopted the codes were encouraged to advertise the fact by displaying the NRA blue eagle logo with its motto, “We do our part.” The NRA worked with businesses to estab- lish the mandated codes for fair competition. Industrial groups then submitted proposed codes to the president for his approval. The president approved the codes only if the submitting organization did not restrict mem- bership and was representative of the industry, and if the codes themselves promoted the policy of the act. Although the codes were exempt from antitrust laws, they were neither to foster monopolies nor discriminate against small businesses. Once appro ved, the codes became legally enforceable standards for that trade or industry. Under Section 3(c) of the act, federal district courts had jurisdiction over code violations, and U.S. district attorneys were given authority to seek court orders to compel violators to comply with the codes. Section 3(f) provided that any violation affecting interstate or foreign com- merce was to be treated as a misdemeanor for which an offender could be fined not more than $500 for each offense. Under Section 7(a), industry codes were required to include provisions for the protec- tion of labor. For example, provisions for minimum wage s and the right to COLLECTIVE BARGAINING were to increase workers’ deflated purchasing power, and limits on the number of work hours were to increase employment by spreading the available hours of work among more employees. Section 7(a) also provided that an employee must not be required to join a company union or be prevented from joining a union as a condition of employment. Section 7(a) had such far-reaching conse- quences that some labor historians have called it the MAGNA CHARTA of the labor movement. Nationwide, union membership grew dramati- cally. The Amalgamated Clothing Workers, for example, doubled its membership from 60,000 to 120,000 between early 1933 and mid-1934. The United Mine Workers of America quadru- pled its members hip, from 100,000 to 400,000, less than a year after passage of NIRA. Under the supervision of the NRA, several hundred industry code s were rapidly enacted, but public support soon diminished. The codes tended to increase efficiency and employment, GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 198 NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RECOVERY ACT OF 1933 improve wages and hours, prevent price cutting and unfair competition, and encourage collec- tive bargaining. However, they also tended to raise prices and limit production. Businesses found the codes burdensome. More than 540 codes were promulgated, and it was not unusual for one business to be governed by several, or even several dozen, codes. The codes sometimes conflicted with each other, and businesses occasionally had to pay their workers different rates of pay at different times of the day. Laborers were also unhappy with NIRA. In spite of some NRA successes, such as the end of child labor in the textile industry, many in the labor community alleged that the NR A’s interpretation of the labor provisions favored employers. In addition, labor was dissatisfied with the activities of the NRA regarding unions. It appeared that Congress had intended Section 7(a) of NIRA to assist employees in self- organizing and to discourage company unions. However, the NRA did not actively seek to prohibit the creation of company unions, nor were NRA representatives available to protect individuals from being coerced into joining company unions. Title II of NIRA created the Public Works Administration (PWA) to award $3.3 billion in contracts for the construction of public works. (The government did not directly employ workers on PWA projects, as it did in a later New Deal program with a similar name, the Works Progress Administration (WPA).) Secre- tary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes ran the PWA. Ickes was scrupulously honest in choosing projects and awarding contracts, and he insisted that funds not be wasted. He was successful in that respect. However, the result was that the benefits of the public works provisions of NIRA were realized too slowly to have much immedi- ate effect on national recovery. Nevertheless, the PWA did oversee an enormous number and variety of public works projects, including schools, hospitals, post offices, courthouses, roads, bridges, water systems, and waste-treatment plants. Its two most prominent projects were the construction of the Tribor- ough Bridge in New York City and the com- pletion of the Boulder Dam (now called the Hoover Dam) on the Colorado River in Arizona. Ultimately, the PWA completed more than 34,000 projects around the country. In spite of the gradual success of the Public Works Administration, the NRA continued to lose the support of the public and its govern- ment sponsors. Three weeks before NIRA’s two-year expiration date, the Supreme Court unanimously declared it unconstitutional in Schechter Po ultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495, 55 S. Ct. 837, 79 L. Ed. 1570 (1935). The Court held that the act impermissibly delegated legislative power to the NRA and that the application of the act to commerce within the state of New York exceeded the powers granted to the federal government under the COMMERCE CLAUSE of the U.S. Constitution. The Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate commerce between states, but not within an individual state. In response to Schechter and to other decisions invalidating New Deal legislation, Roosevelt delivered a famous speech on May 31, 1935, in which he criticized the Supreme Court for employing “the horse and buggy definition of interstate commerce.” Subsequent New Deal legislation incorporated some ele- ments of NIRA, most notably the labor pro- visions of Section 7(a), and ultimately survived the scrutiny of the Supreme Court. FURTHER READINGS Badger, Anthony J. 2002. The New Deal: The Depression Years, 1933–40. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee. Leuchtenburg, William E. 2009. Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, 1932–1940. New York: Harper Perennial. Powell, Jim. 2003. FDR’s Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression. New York: Crown Forum. Rauchway, Eric. 2008. The Great Depression and the New Deal: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. Shlaes, Amity. 2008. The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression. New York: Harper Perennial. CROSS REFERENCES Labor Law; Labor Union. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM The National Intelligence Program is the umbrella organization for all U.S. intelligence operations, including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the four major intelligence agencies of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and other government departments and agencies. It is headed by the director of National Intelligence (DNI). U.S. intelligence failures that led to the SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, ATTACKS, shook the confidence GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM 199 of government leaders. The 9-11 commission that reviewed what went wrong concluded that the CIA, the FBI, and military intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA) did not share information and lacked overall direc- tion. It recommended the creation of a director of National Intelligence who would oversee the National Intelligence Program and who would be the key intelligence advisor to the president and the NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL.TheIntelligence Reform and TERRORISM Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA), 50 U.S.C. 403, implemented this recommendation among other intelligence com- munity reforms. The president appoints the DNI, who is a member of the cabinet, with the advice and consent of the SENATE. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) coordinates intelligence gathering and analysis with a variety of groups. These include the Joint Intelligence Community Council, the National Intelligence Council (NIC), the Information Sharing Envi- ronment (ISE), the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), the National Counterprolifera- tion Center (NCPC), and the National Coun- terintelligence Executive (NCIX). The DNI coordinates intelligence matters related to the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE with the under secretary of defense for intelligence. This person serves both in that role, reporting to the DNI, and as the under secretary of defense for intelligence, reporting to the secretary and deputy secretary of defense. FURTHER READINGS National Intelligence Program. Available online at www. intelligence.gov (accessed January 6, 2010, 2009). U.S. Government Manual. Available online at www.gpoac cess.gov/gmanual (accessed January 6, 2010). CROSS REFERENCES Central Intelligence Agency; Federal Bureau of Investigation. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT See LABOR LAW; LABOR UNION. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The National Labor Relations Board is a federal administrative agency charged with administer- ing and enforcing provisions of the National Labor Relations Act that apply to unfair labor practices and union representation. Congress enacted the most important piece of labor legislation in U.S. history in 1935 with the approval of the WAGNER ACT, also known as the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq. In this act, Congress created the National Labor Relations Board to administer and enforce provisions applying to UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE and union representation provisions. Under the act, the NLRB has two principal functions. First, the board is responsible for preventing and remedying unfair labor prac- tices, whether these practices were committee by labor organizations or employers. Second, the board has the power to establish whether certain groups of employees want to be repre- sented by a labor organization. If so, the board decides which union should represent these employees. Although the jurisdiction of the NLRB applies broadly to private sector employers and the U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, it significantly does not have jurisdiction over labor disputes involving employees of airlines, railroads, or governments. In carrying out its functions, the NLRB may exercise overlapping powers. The board may issue legislative rules, which are administrative regulations that have the same weight and effect as statutes. These rules generally govern union activities. The NLRB also has the power to adjudicate claims between employees and labor organizations. An administrative law judge presides over these adjudications, and the full board can review the judge’s findings. The board additionally has power to make prosecu- torial decisions in cases involving unfair labor practices. History The years prior to the Great Depression were marked with serious labor strife, leading to calls for the development of a national labor policy. As part of the NEW DEAL to address the depression, President FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT estab- lished the National Labor Board to conduct union representation elections and to handled violations of codes established under the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), Ch. 90, 48 Stat. 195. The National Labor Board, chaired by Senator ROBERT WAGNER, lacked real power, however, and its authority expired in 1934. Nevertheless, the experiment with the board led Wagner to propose legislation that GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 200 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT would establish a new board. Months after the National Labor Board expired, Congress approved a resolution calling for the develop- ment of a body called the National Labor Relations Board. This board (known as the old NLRB) served functions similar to the National Labor Board until the Supreme Court in Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (295 U.S. 495, 55 S. Ct. 837, 79 L. Ed. 1570 [1935 ]) ruled that the NIRA was unconstitutional. Wagner persisted with his efforts to pass legislation establishing an agency to enforce national labor policy, which led to the enact- ment of the NLRA in 1935. Section 7 of the act provided that “Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of COLLECTIVE BARGAINING or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all of such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment.” The act established the new N LRB as an independent agency, with three members selected by the president and approved by the Senate. Roos evelt appointed J. Warren Madden, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, to serve as the first board chair. The board’s first budget was established at $659,000 with 196 employees. Almost immediately, parties challenged the constitutionality of the NLRB. In fact, the American Liberty League advised employers to disregard the act based on belief that it was unconstitutional. However, between the time that the Court decided Schechter Poultry Corp. and the time the Court reviewed the NLRA, Roosevelt had famously proposed his court- packing plan, under which the president would add members to the Supreme Court so that he could achieve a majority. The Court reversed its position on the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce and upheld the NLRA in National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (301 U.S. 1, 57 S. Ct. 615, 81 L. Ed. 893 [1937]). The NLRA was the source of criticism, as was the NLRB during its early years. Members of Congress submitted about 150 proposals to amend or repeal the Wagner Act, with many of these proposals focused on the authority of the NLRB. The original NLRA only applied to the activities of employers. In 1947, however, Senator Robert Taft and Representative Fred A. Hartley Jr. sponsored the LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS ACT (LMRA; ch. 101, 61 Stat. 136), which prohibited unions from engaging in unfair labor practices. The act most significantly restricted the ability of unions to strike, giving the NLRB general counsel auth ority to seek injunctions against either employers or unions for violations of the act. The act prohibited unions from engaging in secondary boycotts, through which a labor organization attempts to convince others to stop doing business with a particular firm. Under the amended NLRA, the general counsel was required to seek an INJUNCTION to prohibit a SECONDARY BOYCOTT. The LMRA increased the size of the board from three members to five members, which was its size as of 2010. Prior to the act, the board had appointed the general counsel. However, the act expanded the role of the general counsel and called for the position to be filled by the president. The board’s case load increased dramatically after passage of the LMRA, and many of the cases were heard by panels of the board rather than the full board. Structure and Procedure in the Early 2000s The NLRA has been amended several times since passage of the LMRA, but the board’s basic structure remains the same as it was after the LMRA was passed. The board consists of five members, who are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate for five-year terms. As a matter of practice, three of the members may be from the president’s own party, while the other two are selected from the opposing party. The term of one member expires each year (though as of early 2010, the board had three vacancies). The General Counsel is appointed by the president to serve a four-year term. Representation Cases When an employee wishes for a union to represent him or her or to cease representation, the employee files a petition for an election with the NLRB. The board assigns a field agent to process the petition. The field agent conducts a poll to determine whether at least 30 percent of employees at a workplace wish to be repre- sented collectively by a union or by some other labor organization. If so, the agent holds a secret GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 201 ballot election. If a majority of employees vote in favor of representation, the NLRB may certify that the union or other labor organization may bargain collectively on behalf of the employees in the unit. Unfair Labor Practice Cases Charges of unfair labor practices are handled initially by regional office of the NLRB. If a regional director determines that a charge lacks merit, the charge will be dismissed. The party seeking to make the charge may appeal the dismissal to the General Counsel’s Office in Washington, D.C. About 65 percent of unfair labor practice charges are withdrawn or dismissed due to lack of evidence. If a regional director determines that a charge has merit, however, the NLRB gives its reasons to the charged party and will give the charged party an opportunity to voluntarily settle the case. If a charge goes to trial, the case is heard by an administrative law judge, and the decision of this judge may be appealed to the full board. The board’s decision is subject to review by a U.S. court of appeals. Of the meritorious cases filed each year, more than 90 percent are settled. Criticisms of the NLRB The NLRB is frequently the source of criticism by both management and unions. During the presidencies of Republicans RONALD REAGAN, GEORGE H. W. BUSH, and GEORGE W. BUSH , unions decried the appointment of anti-union mem- bers on the board. Conversely, employer repre- sentatives criticized Bill Clinton’s appointment of union lawyers to the board. During the mid-2000s the board issued a series of decisions that generally favored management. The backlash over these decisions caused then-NLRB chairman Robert J. Battista to engage in public debate with Democrats over the implementation of the NLRA. Ohio State University law professor James J. Brudney noted: “The act is supposed to protect the right to organize and engage in collective bargaining. But if the agency charged with supervising and enforcing the act is perceived as part of the problem and not the solution, then that’sa dangerous development for the future of the agency.” With the presidential election of BARACK OBAMA in 2008, pro-labor supporters expected the appointment of more labor-friendly Demo- crats to the NLRB. However, one year after Obama took office, the board had three vacancies, with the other two position s held by one Democrat and one Republican. The delay in the appointments w as reportedly the result of political battles taking place behind the scenes. FURTHER READINGS Freeman, Sholnn. 2007. “Labor Board under Attack.” Washington Post. December 14. National Labor Relations Board. Available online at www. nlrb.gov (accessed January 26, 2010). CROSS REFERENCES Labor Law; National Labor Relations Act. NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD The Nati onal Mediation Board (NMB) is a three-person board created in 1934 by an act amending the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C.A. §§ 151–158, 160–162, 1181–1188 ) to resolve disputes in the railroad and airline industries that could disrupt travel or imperil the economy. The board also handles railroad and airline employee representation disputes and provides administrative and financial support in adjusting minor grievances in the railroad industry. At the time the board was created, railroads were the dominant carriers of passen- gers and commercial goods. Railroad strike s were common, which disrupted travel and the national economy. In addition, friction between railroad companies and the railroad LABOR UNIONS made negotiation of employment issues difficult. The NMB was created to address these issues, first for railroads and later for commer- cial airlines. The board’s major responsibility is the mediation of disputes over wages, hours, and working conditions that arise between rail and air carriers and the organizations represent- ing their employees. The board also investigates representation disputes and certifies employee organizations as representatives of crafts or classes of carrier employees. The board may become involved in media- tion when the parties fail to reach accord in direct bargaining. Either party may request the board’s services, or the board may become involved on its own. Once the board has entered the process, negotiations continue until the board determines that its efforts to mediate have been unsuccessful, at which time it seeks to induce the parties to submit the dispute to GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 202 NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD ARBITRATION. If either party refuses arbitration, the board issues a notice stating that the parties have failed to resolve the dispute through medi- ation. The notice triggers a 30-day cooling-off period, after which either side may avail itself of SELF-HELP, which may include an employee strike. The board must notify the president when the parties have failed to reach agreement through the board’s mediation efforts and when the labor dispute, in the judgment of the board, threatens substantially to interrupt interstate commerce to a degree that would deprive any section of the country of essential transportation service. In such cases, the presi- dent has the discretion to appoint a Presidential Emergency Board (PEB) to investigate and report on the dispute. In such situations self- help is barred for 60 days after the appointment of the emergency board. Between 1934 and 2008, presidents have established a total of 242 PEBs, including 207 in railroad cases and 35 in airline cases. Between 1998 and 2008, presidents only established eight PEBs. If a carrier’s employees cannot agree on who will represent them, the board must investigate the dispute and determine by a secret ballot election or other appropriate means to whom a representation certificate should be issued. In the course of this process, the board must determine the craft or class in which the employees seeking representation properly belong. Disputes in the railroad industry concerning rates of pay, rules, or working conditions are referred to the National Railroad Adjustment Board. This board has four divisions, each one consisting of an equal number of representa- tives of the carriers and of national organiza- tions of employees. In deadlocked cases the NMB is authorized to appoint a referee to sit with the members of the division for the purpose of making an award. No national adjustment board has been established in the airline industry. Air carriers and employees have established bargaining relationships that create a GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE with a board to resolve the conflicts. The NMB is frequently called upon to name a neutral referee to serve on these kinds of boards when the parties cannot agree on such an appoint- ment themselves. In the late 2000s the NMB was involved in some contentious disputes involving airlines and their employees. For instance, the NMB was involved in a merger of Delta Airlines and Northwest Airlines in 2008. The merger was criticized because of sharp differences between the two companies. Part of the difficulty in the merger was because Northwest employees were more unionized than the Delta counterparts. The NMB oversaw efforts to unionize Delta flight attendants, a move that Delta opposed. Delta’s criticism of NMB’s procedures led the House Transportation and Infrastructure Com- mittee in 2008 to conduct a hearing about NMB’s procedures. As of May 2009, Congress had not forced NMB to make changes pursuant to these hearings. In 2005 the NMB created an online public information service known as the NMB Knowl- edge Store. By 2009 this system had incorpo- rated more than 100,000 documents, including PEB Reports, NMB Representation Determina- tions, NMB Annual Reports, Airline and Rail- road Labor Contracts, and Arbitration Awards. In 2007 NMB became the first completely paperless federal agency when it completed implementation of its all-electronic records management system. The board consists of a chair and two other members. Its headquarters are in Washington, D.C. FURTHER READINGS Knibb, Shaunta M. 1997. “The Jurisdictional Shadowland between the NLRB and the National Mediation Board: Who’s in Charge?” Washington Law Review 72 (January). National Mediation Board Website. Available online at http://www.nmb.gov/ (accessed May 17, 2009). Newman, Todd A. 2000. “A Suggested Approach to Applying the National Mediation Board’s Railroad Merger Procedures.” Labor Lawyer 15 (winter-spring). U.S. Government Manual Website. Available online at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/gmanual (accessed May 17, 2009). CROSS REFERENCE Labor Law. NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR THE REFORM OF MARIJUANA LAWS The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) is a nonprofit public-interest lobby organization dedicated to the legalization of marijuana. Founded in 1970, NORML has been a leading national advocate for legalization since its inception. NORML, which believes that private adult use of marijuana should be legal, seeks the repeal of GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR THE REFORM OF MARIJUANA LAWS 203 federal anti-marijuana laws. Repeal would allow states to experiment with different models of legalization. During the 1970 s, NORML led the successful efforts to decriminalize minor mari- juana offenses in 11 states and to lower penalties significantly in all others. During the 1980s, however, the decriminalization movement lost political appeal when presidents RONALD REAGAN and GEORGE H.W. BUSH committed their admin- istrations to the War on Drugs. NORML has a staff at its national head- quarters in Washington, D.C. It is governed by a board of directors that includes prominent attorneys, scientists, and researchers. NORML provides information to the national news media for marijuana-related stories and lobbies state and federal legislators to permit the medical use of marijuana and to reject attempts to treat minor marijuana offenses more harshly. NORML also functions as the umbrella group for a national network of activists committed to ending marijuana prohibit ion. NORML also assists those who are arrested on marijuana charges through a legal committee (NLC) consisting of more than 350 criminal defense attorneys. The NLC also sponsors NORML legal seminars, notifies NORML of important judicial decisions and law enforce- ment trends, and provides NORML with copies of briefs and other legal docume nts. These lawyers regularly defend victims of marijuana prohibition and sometimes set important legal precedents. The NORML AMICUS CURIAE committee files amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs in important or novel marijuana-related lega l actions at the APPELLATE court level. This com- mittee, which consists of experienced NORML criminal defense attorneys from around the country, gives NORML the opportunity to contribute its point of view in cases that may be of national importance. In 1997 NORML established the NORML Foundation, a nonprofit organization that sponsors public advertising campaigns to edu- cate the public about the costs of marijuana prohibition and the benefits of alternative policies. In 2001 the organization adopted a mission statement declaring that its purpose was to “educate the public about the costs of marijuana prohibition and the benefits of alternative policies, to undertake research into various aspects of marijuana and marijuana policy implication, and to provide legal support and assistance to victims of the current laws.” NORML has actively supported efforts to legalize the medical use of marijuana for those patients suffering from serious illnesses and medical conditions, including glaucoma, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, quadriplegia and paraplegia, and the side effects of chemotherapy, despite the fact that federal law still prohibits such use. As of 2009, fourteen states including Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington have legalized medical marijuana to one degree or another FURTHER READING National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. Available online at www.norml.org (accessed July 28, 2003). CROSS REFERENCES Drugs and Narcotics; Drug Enforcement Administration. NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN The National Organization for Women (NOW) is the largest organization of feminist activists in the United States, numbering more than 500,000 members. A nonpartisan organization, it has more than 500 chapters in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It receives its funding from membership dues and private donations. NOW has used both traditional and nontraditional means to push for social change. Traditional activities have included extensive electoral and LOBBYING work, and the filing of lawsuits. NOW also has organized mass marches, rallies, pickets, counter-demonstrations, and nonviolent CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. Its headquarters are located in Washington, D.C. NOW was established in 1966 in Washington, D.C., by people attending the Third National Conference of the Commission on the Status of Women. Among the 28 NOW founders was its first president, BETTY FRIEDAN, author of The Feminine Mystique (1963). In its original statement of purpose, NOW declared to “take action to bring women into full partici- pation in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all privileges and responsibi- lities thereof in truly equal partnership with men.” GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 204 NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN As part of its efforts to pursue economic equality and other rights for women, NOW launched a nationwide campaign in the 1970s to pass the EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution. Though the ERA ultimately failed to be ratified, NOW efforts helped the organization. NOW became a huge network of more than 200,000 activists and began operating with multimillion-dollar annual budgets. Lea- ders organiz ed POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES, NOW/PAC and NOW Equality PAC, that raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for pro-ERA candidates. NOW priorities are promoting economic equality, including an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that will guarantee equal rights for women; championing ABORTION rights, repro- ductive freedom, and other women’s health issues; opposing racism and opposing bigotry against lesbians and gays; and ending violence against women. The organization has proved effective in many of these areas. NOW seeks sweeping changes that will put more women in political posts; increased educational, employ- ment, and business opportunities for women; and the enactment of tougher laws against violence, SEXUAL HARASSMENT, and DISCRIMINATION. During the 2000s Wal-Mart became the target of NOW’s protests. After receiving complaints about Wal-Mart’s allegedly discrim- inatory employment pract ices, NOW named Wal-Mart a “Merchant of Shame” and demanded that Wal-Mart change its business practices. Among NOW’s demands were that Wal-Mart reverse its policy of refusing to carry emergency contraceptives. Its 1992 “Elect Women for a Change” campaign sent an unprecedented number of feminist women and men to the U.S. Congress. NOW has combated harassment and violence by organizing the first “Take Back the Night” marches. In 2004 NOW organized the March for Women’s Lives in Washington, D.C., which drew a record 1.15 million people. The organization has established hotlines and shel- ters for battered women. It has also successfully challenged antiabortion groups that bombed and blocked clinics and laws that deprived lesbian women of CUSTODY of their children. NOW has also consistently sought economic equality for women in the workplace, empha- sizing that women are paid only three-quarters of what men make, whereas minority women make even less. NOW was openly critical of President GEORGE W. BUSH and many of his policies. When SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR announced her retirement from the SUPREME COURT in 2005, NOW orga- nized a letter-writing campaign asking her to remain on the court. The organization later opposed the nomination of SAMUEL ALITO to the court, expressing concerns about his record related to WOMEN’S RIGHTS. NOW endorsed HILLARY CLINTON during the 2008 Democratic primary, and the organization later endorsed BARACK OBAMA during the presi- dential race. FURTHER READINGS Friedan, Betty. 1963. The Feminine Mystique. New York: Dell. Haney, Eleanor Humes. 1985. A Feminist Legacy: The Ethics of Wilma Scott Heide and Company. Buffalo: Margar- etdaughters. National Organization for Women. Available online at http://www.now.org (accessed May 19, 2009). CROSS REFERENCES Equal Rights; “National Organization for Women Statement of Purpose” (Appendix, Primary Document); Women’s Rights. NATIONAL PROHIBITION ACT See VOLSTEAD ACT. NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION In 1933 the United States was in the throe s of a severe economic depression. Unemployment was widespread, and the economic system was in chaos. An emergency measure was needed to alleviate the situation, and the members of President FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT’s NEW DEAL administration attempted to ease the problem with the passage of the NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RECOVERY ACT (NIRA) (48 Stat. 195). The chief provision of the act was the establishment of business codes to be enforced nationally. The codes included rules regarding fair competition, discontinuance of antitrust regulations for a two-year period, voluntary participation in unions, and establishment of shorter hours and better wage s. In June 1933 the National Recovery Administration (NRA) was created to supervi se the execution of the NIRA under the direction of Hugh S. Johnson. During its first year, the NRA worked on the industrial codes; all GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION 205 participating businesses displayed a blue eagle, a sign of patriotism as well as acceptance of the program. Many people regarded the NRA as too powerful, and in 1935 the U.S. Supreme Court declared the CODIFICATION system of the NRA unconstitutional in SCHECHTER POULTRY CORP. V. UNITED STATES , 295 U.S. 495, 55 S. Ct. 837, 79 L. Ed. 1570, due to the incorrect granting of legislative authority to the EXECUTIVE BRANCH. In 1936 the controversial NRA came to an end. During its brief existence, employment was stimulated, child labor was prohibited, and labor organization was encouraged. FURTHER READINGS Bellush, Bernard. 1976. The Failure of the NRA. New York: Norton. Himmelberg, Robert F. 1993. The Origins of the National Recovery Administration: Business, Government, and the Trade Association Issue, 1921–1933. New York: Fordham Univ. Press. Lyon, Leverett S., et al. 1935. The National Recovery Admininstration: An Analysis and Appraisal. Washing- ton, D.C.: The Brookings Institution. NATIONAL REPORTER SYSTEM See CENTURY DIGEST®; DECEN NIAL DIGEST®; FEDERAL REPORTER ®. NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION The National Rifle Association (NRA) is an organization that promotes the sport of shoot- ing rifles and pistols in the United States. In 2001 the NRA had replaced the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS as Washington’s most powerful LOBBYING group, according to Fortune magazine’s top 25 list. The organization reports a membership of more than four million. Members include hunters, target shoo- ters, gun collectors, firearms manufacturers, and police personnel. From its headquarters in Washington, D.C., the NRA has been a domi- nant voice in the debate over GUN CONTROL. The NRA has an annual budget of more than $200 million, and in 2008 had a budget of $40 million for the presidential election alone. The NRA maintains a strong lobbying machine, which includes as its major branch the NRA Institute for Legislative Action. The lobbying component is complete with an in-house telemarketing department, its own newscast, and one million political organizers at the precinct level. The NRA platform prefers gun safety programs and the intensified enforcement of existing federal gun laws to an increase in the number of restrictions on gun owners. Formed by New York charter in 1871, the NRA defined its original goal to “promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis,” according to co-founder Colonel William C. Church. He and fellow co-founder, fellow Union veteran George Wingate, were dismayed by the lack of sportsmanship shown by Union troops and wanted to set up a rifle range for practice. With contributions from New York State, the new organization purchased the Creed Farm on Long Island in 1872 and opened it to members in 1873 under the name of “Creed- moor,” the first official NRA shooting range. When political opposition to the promotion of marksmanship arose in New York, Creedmoor was deeded back to the state. A new range was established in Sea Girt, New Jersey. The NRA targeted America’s youth from the onset, and by 1903 was promoting shooting sports and competition matches through the establishment of rifle clubs at all major colleges, universities, and military academies. In addition to training and education in marksmanship, the association published The American Rifleman, which helped keep its members abreast of new bills and laws affecting firearms. In 1934 the NRA formed its Legislative Affairs Division, which engaged in direct mail efforts to apprise members of legislative facts regarding and analyses of pending bills. Although it was not involved in direct lobbying efforts at that time, the NRA later formed the Institute for Legisla- tive Action in 1975, organized for the “the political defense of the Second Amendment.” During WORLD WAR II the association offered its shooting ranges to the U.S. government and helped develop training materials for personnel and industrial security. NRA members also volunteered to reload ammunition for those guarding war plants. Through a series of gun control laws enacted between WORLD WAR I and II, Britain found itself virtually disarmed and vulnerable when Germany began its European invasions. The NRA’s efforts to encourage assis- tance for Britain in 1940 resulted in the col- lection of more than 7,00 0 firearms for Britain’s defense against German invasion. Following the w ar, the NRA concentrated on the hunting community and i n 1949, in conjunc- tion with the state of New York, set up t he first hunter educ ation program. I n 1973 it launched GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 206 NATIONAL REPORTER SYSTEM its second magazine, The American Hunt er. Although hunter education courses eventually became the assumed resp onsibility of state fish and game departments, the NRA continued to manage its Youth Hunter Education Challenge (YHEC), a program that a s of 2009 wa s active in 28 states and t wo Canadian provin ces, with y outh enrollment of more than 50,000. The NRA considers itself America’s fore- most defender of the SECOND AMENDMENT of the U.S. Constitution, which preserves the right of the people to bear arms. The U.S. SUPREME COURT in 2008 reviewed a handgun ban that had been in place in the District of Columbia since the 1970s. The NRA filed an amicus brief with the court, and the association was outspoken publicly about its position in the case. In a 5-4 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ___, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 171 L. Ed. 2d 237 (2008), the court concluded that the right to bear arms is an individual right rather than a collective right of the people. Since 1956 the NRA has been instrumental in law enforcement training as well. With the introduction of its Police Firearms Instructor Certification Program in 1960, the NRA became the only national trainer of law enforcement officers, and by 2000 more than 10,000 indi- viduals had become NRA-certified graduates. As of 2009 the association employs more than 55,000 certified instructors to train about 750,000 civilian gun owners each year, conduct gun safety programs for children in addition to personal security and protection seminars, and provide marksmanship training for adults. In the 1990s and 2000s the NRA worked to pass state laws that made it easier for gun owners to carry their weapons in public. The “right-to-carry” movement is based on the idea that any trained, law-abiding citizen has a right to get a permit from the government to carry a firearm. As a result of the NRA’s lobbying efforts, a total of 40 states have approved right- to-carry laws. Thirty-six of these states have enacted “shall issue” laws, which require carry permits to be issued to applicants who have met uniform standards established by the state legislatures. The NRA has also fought efforts by city and county governments to regulate firearms. It has lobbied for state PREEMPTION statutes, which declare that only the state government may pass firearms laws. Through its efforts, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and several other states passed preemption laws in 1995. Despite its longtime success in fighting gun control, the increasingly belligerent NRA rhetoric became a problem for the organization in the mid-1990s. Former President GEORGE H.W. BUSH , a lifetime member, resigned from the NRA to protest a fund-raising letter that contained anti-government statements. During the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004, though, the NRA was a significant sup- porter of GEORGE W. BUSH. The association announced the publication of its third periodical, The American Guardian, which proved to be less esoteric in content and catered more to topics such as recreational use of firearms and SELF-DEFENSE. Concomitant with the new publication was an internal effort to purge the organization of radical, right-wing gun enthusiasts and develop a more general appeal. From 1997 to 2003, actor Charleton Heston served as the organization’s president. As of 2009, the NRA president was John C. Sigler. Politically and historically, supporters for both the NRA and the gun-control movement have split along party lines. The NRA essentially backed so-called conservative candidates and views, such as those typically held by the REPUBLICAN PARTY or the LIBERTARIAN PARTY; those who sought stricter limitations on gun owner- ship tended to support Democratic candidates. At the end of the twentieth century the delineation became more nebulous, not only among politicians but also between lobbying groups. In 1994, President BILL CLINTON signed the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which was part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-322, 108 Stat. 1874. The NRA opposed this law, and when the statute was set to expire in 2004, the NRA successfully lobbied a Republican-controlled Congress to let the law expire. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, officials in New Orleans decided to confiscate guns from civilians who remained in the city. The NRA, along with the Second Amendment Foundation, challenged the action in federal district court in New Orleans. The controversy led Congress in 2006 to approve legislation (part of Pub. L. No. 109-295, 120 Stat. 1355) that prohibited this sort of confisca- tion during disaster recovery. While the NRA generally opposes all forms of gun control as abridgements upon individuals’ constitutional rights, many NRA GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION 207 . should be legal, seeks the repeal of GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR THE REFORM OF MARIJUANA LAWS 203 federal anti-marijuana laws. Repeal would allow states. in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all privileges and responsibi- lities thereof in truly equal partnership with men.” GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION 204 NATIONAL. codes; all GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION 205 participating businesses displayed a blue eagle, a sign of patriotism as well as acceptance of the