A general session of the conference that discussed the history of motorcycle rights was held on the first morning. Rick Gray, one of the founders of ABATE of Pennsylvania, and current chairman of the board of directors of the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA), presented his recollections of the period when we were fighting the diversion of federal highway funds from states that did not have a mandatory helmet law. That issue inserted itself into the bill that became the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA).

The discussion recalled the fight to eliminate that diversion of funds, which was originally set to be 10%. After a bitter struggle waged to eliminate this provision by the MRF, AMA, and numerous state motorcyclist rights organizations, this diversion was drastically reduced. Mr. Gray was quick to point out that state motorcyclists’ rights organizations have accomplished much, but without this reduction, no doubt many states would have enacted mandatory helmet laws. It was the lobbing at the federal level that gave many states a fighting chance to repel helmet laws back home.

Several years latter in the 104th congress (1995-1996) motorcyclists’ were able to remove the transfer penalties entirely. Again, this was due in no small part to the efforts of the national organizations.

From time to time many of us may differ with some of the tactics and policies of the MRF and the AMA. It is of benefit to us all to take pause and reflect on what has been accomplished in the past. Could we have accomplished what we have without a strong presence inside the beltway? Can relationships between some state motorcyclist rights organizations (SMRO’s) and the AMA improve – despite a serious disagreement on emission standards? In some states the relationship between the AMA and the state rights organization has degenerated into open hostility. We must ask ourselves who is the beneficiary of such a situation?

Is their value in our contributions to the MRF that help may us in our efforts to preserve and expand the rider education program? The transportation bill currently being debated in the congress (TEA 03) may turn into a 375 billion-dollar behemoth. Could we snag a few million in federal funds for state run rider education programs without someone working daily on the hill? Is any SMRO capable of going it alone and preserving an “unrestricted motorcycling environment” - as is often stated - without succeeding in Washington?

Nationwide motorcyclists’ are very fortunate to have some highly influential members of congress who support our views. The Honorable Dennis Hastert from Illinois holds the position of Speaker of the US House of Representatives. ABATE of Illinois has a very good relationship with him. J.D. Hayworth from Arizona has sponsored a bill that could stop the EPA chokehold on motorcycles. Ted Strickland from Ohio has championed our issues. Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold is a driving force in the efforts to fix loopholes in HIPPA that could cause riders to be denied health-care benefits under certain conditions.

Different SMRO’s may have good relationships with many of the members of their own states congressional delegation. But, how good of a relationship does Illinois have with people like Bill Thomas of California, who chairs ways and means? Does Arkansas talk to Charles Rangle of New York, who is ranking member on that same committee? Ways and means may deal with insurance discrimination. Have rights activists in California opened a dialog with Billy Tauzin of Louisiana, “the Cajun ambassador to congress”? He chairs energy and commerce, and we will need him in our corner if we hope to stop the EPA chokehold on motorcycles.

During the Meeting of the Minds much was made (for good reason) of the tremendous victory in Pennsylvania, of the repeal of their mandatory helmet law. Would this victory for Keystone state riders have been possible without the efforts of the MRF in Washington?

Without organizations like the MRF and AMA could there possibly be a cohesive lobbing effort in Washington?

Like it or not, if we wish to preserve the freedoms we have, a national effort is a necessity, not an option. Even the most well organized and prosperous SMRO will have little, if any, influence on a member of congress in another state. The money, time, and efforts spent to keep our issues part of the federal legislative agenda will pay dividends for American motorcycle riders for years to come.