I recently sent the following letter to Senators Orrin Hatch (R, UT) and Robert Bennett (R, UT). Replies follow.

Dear Senator:

I urge you to OPPOSE the nomination of Michael J. Sullivan for the head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Under his leadership, the ATF has gone berserk. Sure, the problems at ATF didn't originate with him, but Sullivan has certainly done nothing to put out the fire.

In July, a House committee report on HR 3093 rebuked the ATF for pursuing license revocations and denials against firearms dealers based on "violations that consist largely of [minor] record keeping errors of various types" that are unlikely to impede tracing investigations or prosecution of individuals who use firearms in crime.

Red's Trading Post in Idaho is one of the many gun dealers that have been frequently harassed by the ATF. Even though one ATF agent told the manager that Red's was "one of the best small gun shops" he'd ever seen, the ATF has continued its assault on this gun shop (which has been in business for decades) for minor clerical mistakes and failing to put up a poster.

According to WorldNetDaily, one judge who is familiar with the Red's Trading Post case found "the ATF speaks of violations found during the inspections of 2000 and 2005, but fails to reveal that additional investigations in 2001 and 2007 revealed no violations or problems." The judge also noted the ATF was exaggerating the situation by "double counting" some violations.

Finally, the fact that Ted Kennedy wants to work with Sullivan on gun control is reason enough to find another candidate to head up the ATF. Kennedy said, "We'll miss him in Massachusetts, but he’ll be a strong leader at ATF, and I look forward to working with him on key issues on gun control."

Because of these concerns, I would ask that you please oppose the Sullivan nomination, and instead work with Gun Owners of America and the NRA to find a nominee who will protect the rights of innocent gun owners.

Senator Robert Bennett (R, UT) did not reply.

Senator Orrin Hatch (R, UT) replied that he thinks the "most important criteria is the nominee's qualifications for the specific post [and in] general [he does] not believe that nominees for any position should be held up for purely political reasons."

In other words, someone's blatant disregard for one of the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America is a "political reason" and shouldn't sway his or her nomination and/or appointment to any position within the Executive Branch.

Shame on you, Senator Hatch, for not upholding the oath that you swore to "protect and defend the Constitution" by doing everything in your power to block this nomination.

And shame on you, Senator Bennett, for not caring enough to reply.