In June 2012, Hammer sent a survey on behalf of the NRA and the United Sportsmen of Florida to sheriffs candidates around the state of Florida. One question about Florida’s first-in-the-nation “Stand Your Ground” law asked, “Do you agree that no victim of crime should be required to surrender his life, health, safety, personal dignity, autonomy, or property to a criminal, nor should a victim be required to retreat in the face of attack from any place he or she has a right to be?” There were two possible answers: “Yes, I believe the ‘Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground’ is appropriate and victims have a right to fight back without a duty to retreat,” or “No, I oppose the ‘Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground’ and believe victims should surrender to criminals or retreat to avoid fighting back.” Another question asked whether candidates support a law that would allow someone with a concealed weapons permit to openly display a gun. Those in favor could answer, “Yes, I support open carry…as a means to stop harassment by those anti-gun law enforcement officers [who question or arrest individuals who openly carry guns in public].”

Several other survey questions addressed the NRA’s goal of prohibiting sheriffs from lobbying for gun safety legislation. One question asked, “Do you believe it is appropriate for a sheriff to lobby or use deputies and/or their deputies to lobby against the Second Amendment rights of the law-abiding citizens they are sworn to serve?” Another question asked, “Do you believe it is appropriate for a sheriff or any of his deputies or employees to lobby on issues against the constitutional rights of law-abiding firearms owners , in the name of the Sheriff, Sheriffs department or any Organization or Association in any official law enforcement capacity?” The two possible answers were: “No, I would not allow it. Our duty is to respect and serve our community and uphold the law and the Constitution,” or “Yes, I would allow it if it makes things more convenient for law enforcement.” Commenting on the issue, Hammer stated, “We don’t believe it’s appropriate for any law enforcement agency to be lobbying against the Second Amendment rights guaranteed by the constitution of the citizens they were elected to protect and represent.”

The cover sheet attached to the four-page survey warned in bold letters, “No endorsement or support will be provided to a candidate who fails to return the questionnaire.” Hammer said about the survey, “Voters have a right and a responsibility to know who they are voting for. I’m not apologetic if that offends the Florida Sheriffs Association and anti-gun sheriffs.” Florida Sheriffs Association Executive Director Steve Casey responded that sheriffs are neither “pro-gun” nor “anti-gun.” “They’re pro public safety,” he said. Volusia County Sheriff Ben Johnson stated that the NRA “doesn't want the sheriffs to be in Tallahassee to work on any kind of legislation, which we have taken for years...to try and work for good laws for the state of Florida such as narcotics laws, pill laws, traffic safety.” Johnson, a longtime NRA member, added that it is “sad to see [the NRA] take such a hard line on it.”

On March 20, 2012, Hammer responded to the controversial shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin by concealed handgun permit holder George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida. The shooter, who was not arrested, claimed that he acted in self-defense under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law. Hammer, the NRA lobbyist who championed the law in the Florida state legislature, stated, “So for law enforcement to rush to judgment just because they are being stampeded by emotionalism would be a violation of law. This law is not about one incident. It's about protecting the right of law-abiding people to protect themselves when they are attacked. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the law. And if the [Republican] governor [Rick Scott] wants to waste time looking at it he can knock himself out.” Since its enactment in 2005, the “Stand Your Ground Law” has been tied to a number of shootings that involved the questionable use of deadly force.

During the 2011 legislative session in Florida, Hammer lobbied for a bill to prevent Florida doctors from asking their patients if they own a gun and counseling them about firearms safety. Hammer claimed that such questions violate the privacy of gun owners and “offend common decency.” "They are entering that information into medical records on laptop computers which greatly concerns parents because anything you put in a medical record they fear can be accessed by insurance companies or the government and used against ‘em," she explained. "Doctors should not ask you how much money you have in your checking account, whether or not you own diamond cufflinks or your wife owns a diamond necklace. They should not be asking whether or not you own guns."

Hammer said that gun-owning parents in Florida had complained to her for many years about pediatricians’ inquiries about firearms; but could only produce one specific example of this occurring.

She also drew broader theories about doctors' motives: “This is a campaign that started eight to ten years ago by the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics and they decided to join the gun ban crowd," Hammer said. "They give pediatricians advice to give to parents and that’s not to buy a gun and if they own guns to get rid of ‘em. So when they start giving that advice to pediatricians and your very Liberal, anti-gun pediatricians start taking that advice, then we have problems ... We don’t want to pay to sit there and be lectured by a pediatrician or a GP telling us that guns are bad and giving erroneous statistics like they have on their website that if you have a gun in the home it’s 43 times more likely to be used on you than not. I mean, this is nonsense ... It’s about carrying out a gun ban campaign and it has to stop.” Hammer decried: "It's about politics. Pure, raw, anti-gun politics being imposed on patients when they are most vulnerable, when they are sick or hurt and need help."

The Florida Medical Association strongly opposed the bill, telling their members: “This legislation criminalizes doctors who ask their patients about gun ownership to ascertain accurate and complete patient history as well as advise patients on gun safety ... This is an inappropriate intrusion of government into the bond that exists between doctors and their patients ... Legal measures are already in place to ensure that the information patients share with physicians will be kept confidential.”

The bill, which originally fined doctors $5 million for asking patients about gun ownership, was amended to create a tiered fine system for violators. An offending doctor would be charged $10,000 for the first offense, at least $25,000 for the second offense, and a minimum of $100,000 for the third offense.

After the legislation was passed by the Florida state legislature, the American Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics and other groups sent Republican Governor Rick Scott a letter asking him to veto it. Hammer accused them of an intimidation campaign, saying, “They sent a letter that was a blatant threat. They attempted to intimidate and coerce the governor by telling him that they would sue him and other state officials if the bill became law. Now, that tells you the type of people you’re dealing with. To threaten a governor in that manner is just uncalled for.” In June 2011, Governor Scott signed the legislation into law.

On September 14, 2011, a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction on the law. U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke reasoned that the law "chilled" free speech and wrote in her decision: "The law curtails practitioners' ability to inquire about whether patients own firearms and burdens their ability to deliver a firearm safety message to patients ... Information regarding firearm ownership is not sacrosanct. Federal and state statues heavily regulate firearm ownership, possession and sale and require firearm owners to provide personal information in certain circumstances."

Hammer was the primary lobbyist for a bill introduced in the Florida state legislature in January 2011 that sought to force the state’s colleges and universities to allow guns on campus. Under SB 234, anyone with a concealed handgun permit recognized by Florida would have been able to carry a loaded gun onto a college campus—including into classrooms and dormitories.

The bill was introduced just days after Florida State University sophomore Ashley Cowie, 20, was accidentally shot and killed at a fraternity party by fellow student Ryan Wilhelm, who discharged his semiautomatic AK-74 assault rifle while showing it off. Wilhelm had a blood alcohol level of approximately .10 at the time of the shooting and had also been smoking marijuana.

Commenting about the shooting, Hammer emphasized it happened off-campus in a fraternity house where guns are banned. “With shootings on campus, they are essentially a gun-free zone and in a gun-free zone the good guys don’t have a chance,” she said.

When asked why SB 234 was necessary, Hammer replied, “There’s a lot of safety by allowing guns on campus. That’s how a lot of us protect ourselves because law enforcement can’t be there when we need them. Law enforcement is not stopping rapes on campus, and not stopping a lot of crimes ... "Nothing about a university or college campus should take away an individual's right of self-defense."”

In response to those who questioned the wisdom of arming young people in an academic environment often characterized by stress and heated debate, Hammer made the following argument: “In order to qualify for a license, a person has to be 21 years of age or older. We’re not talking about teenage freshmen or underclassmen, so folks shouldn’t let anybody put that false image in your head However, we need to remember that this country asks 18 year olds to go to war and die for this country but we don’t let ‘em carry firearms until they’re 21 years of age or older and the reality is when we do let ‘em carry, we currently are denying that right if they decide to go to college and get a better education and make a better life for themselves.”

The police chiefs of Florida’s states universities came out in unanimous opposition to SB 234. The Florida Police Chiefs Association also opposed SB 234.

SB 234 was amended to remove the guns on campus provision on March 9, 2023 after Dr. Robert Cowie—the father of slain student Ashley Cowie and a registered Republican—testified against the bill in front of the Senate Florida Criminal Justice Committee. “Allowing guns in an atmosphere of college parties puts everyone involved at increased and undue risk,” he told committee members. "I challenge anyone present today in this room who is a parent—or for that matter any voter in this state that is a parent—to come forward to meet me eye to eye and comfort me with the thought that our campuses will be better and safer places if the possession of firearms is permitted by anyone other than a law enforcement officer ... If you wish to see further evidence of what a weapon on campuses can do, I invite you to attend my daughter's memorial service. " After the bill was amended, Dr. Cowie commented, “If my making a statement would possibly prevent another family from going through what we did, I knew I'd make the effort. I think Ashley would be proud of me."

While lobbying for legislation that sought to ban adoption agencies from asking would-be parents questions about firearms ownership, Hammer claimed that any request about gun ownership from an agency connected with government was tantamount to establishing a private gun registry. “Gun registration is illegal in Florida,” said Hammer. “An adoption agency has no right to subvert the privacy rights of gun owners.'' Hammer never specified exactly how gun owners’ rights would be subverted either by questions about gun ownership or registration.

During the 2007 legislative session, a bill was introduced in the Florida state legislature to prevent private businesses from prohibiting employees from keeping guns locked in their cars in company parking lots. While lobbying for the bill, Hammer commented to the Associated Press: “[Private businesses] ought to be tickled to death for getting immunity from things that are happening in their parking lots. This bill codifies longstanding public policy and constitutional guarantees. It could not be simpler.” She did not provide an explanation, however, of where in the Second Amendment a right to take guns to one’s workplace is granted. Hammer also added, Big corporations want property rights for themselves but not for their customers or employees. “This bill is about people. And people are more important than a chunk of asphalt in a parking lot.”

Mark Wilson, the vice president of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, had a different take on the legislation, saying, “This is the biggest assault on private property rights and the employer-employee relationship that this Legislature has ever heard ... Some of our members are dumbfounded that you can be smart enough to be in the legislature and still consider this bill seriously.”

In April 2007, a survey was released by Tel Opinion Research. The survey indicated that “80% of Floridians [thought] businesses and homeowners should decide what things are brought onto their property” and “56%...said business owners should be able to expressly bar their workers from having guns in the vehicles.”

During the 2006 legislative session in Florida, Hammer lobbied for a bill that sought to create a public records exemption for concealed handgun permits and rejected permit applications—thereby barring Florida residents from knowing which individuals in their communities had obtained permits, and preventing them from independently auditing the permitting process to ensure public safety. When the legislation was signed into law by then-Florida Governor Jeb Bush in June 2006, Barbara Petersen, the president of the Florida First Amendment Foundation, commented, “I think this exemption makes a mockery of the constitutional right of access. The stated purpose of this bill is protect sensitive information. What is sensitive about your name? These are a privileged class of people who are allowed to carry a concealed weapon. They have to jump through some hoops. [But] we have absolutely no opportunity for oversight.” [Source: Palm Beach Post, “Bush Signs Gun-Related Bills into Law,” June 8, 2023]

Hammer was the primary lobbyist behind a “Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground” bill that aimed to eliminate Florida’s common law duty to use every reasonable means available to retreat from a conflict prior to using deadly force, which the state's Supreme Court had legitimized by explaining, “Human life is precious, and deadly combat should be avoided if at all possible when imminent danger to oneself can be avoided.” The bill, SB 436, stated that any individual who is in a place where he/she has a legal right to be, and who is “not engaged in an unlawful activity...has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” Individuals using lethal force in this manner were to be granted immunity from both criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits. Critics labeled SB 436 “Shoot First” legislation.

Hammer explained her reason for pushing the bill as follows: “Through time, in this country, what I like to call bleeding heart criminal coddlers want you to give a criminal an even break, so that when you're attacked, you're supposed to turn around and run, rather than standing your ground and protecting yourself and your family and your property. [I] started thinking then that the day will come when we will have to do some serious thinking about changing this … Taking away the rights of law-abiding people and putting them in jeopardy of being prosecuted and then sued by criminals who were injured when they were committing crimes against victims is wrong.”

She also claimed that during hurricane seasons in Florida, “In a lot of these devastated areas, law enforcement would tell communities, ‘You're on your own, we can't get to you.’ So, we needed to be sure that when people protected themselves, their families and their property, that they weren't gonna be prosecuted by some criminal coddling prosecutor.” Responding to criticism that the "Stand Your Ground" law could be invoked by the perpetrators of violent crime to avoid criminal prosecution, Hammer stated, "We saw a parade of hypotheticals by those who opposed this... What's important is the message it sends, and that's, 'don't attack me.'"

Furthermore, Hammer was unable to produce even a single example of a law-abiding gun owner being prosecuted for using a firearm for legitimate self-defense in the home prior to 2005.

Among those who opposed the “Stand Your Ground” bill were the National District Attorneys Association, the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, and police chiefs from cities including Miami and St. Petersburg. Palm Beach State Attorney Barry Krischer commented, “I dislike the law because it encourages people to stand their ground…when they could just as easily walk away. To me, that’s not a civilized society.” Paul Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, pointed out that the law “give[s] citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review.”

Regarding these concerns posed by critics of the legislation, Hammer said, “It’s nothing but emotional hysterics … Those who like to ban guns attempted to say that this law would allow street gangs because they were legally in the street.”

The Castle Doctrine bill was signed into law on April 26, 2023 by Republican Governor Jeb Bush.

Jeannie Suk, a professor at Harvard Law School, published an analysis of Florida’s Castle Doctrine law and has described it in the following terms: “There is an important change in this law. Even the traditional castle doctrine, which was very protective of people in their homes, and allowed them to shoot in their home without retreating, it still meant that you had to be reasonably afraid of death or serious bodily harm. This was a very important requirement. You don't just let people kill in self-defense and say, oh, you were afraid of being attacked. You actually have to show that your fear was reasonable. And now…you don't have to do that because you don't have to prove that in court. But more importantly, even before the trial stage, what happens is that police officers and prosecutors, it affects their decisions about whether to bring cases, whether to make arrests or to bring a prosecution. I think it's a very big deal.” Duval County State Attorney Harry Shorstein has cited “a lesser sensitivity to gun violence and death” after the law was passed.

The New York Times and others have identified numerous cases of questionable (and unnecessary) homicides where shooters invoked the Castle Doctrine defense. A 2011 analysis by the South Florida Sun Sentinel found that “several…accused murderers have successfully used [Florida’s] 2005 ‘Stand Your Ground’ law to prove they were the real victims.” Bradford Cohen, the president of the Broward County chapter of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, has described the law as “one more tool we can use.”

On February 29, 2008, Keene registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act as a lobbyist for the government of Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Between 2006 and 2007, the Bayelsa government paid Carmen Group—the lobbying firm that employed Keene—over $900,000. The contract stipulated that lobbyists from Carmen were to “gain support for Bayelsa and the Niger Delta from the U.S. government.” The primary focus of Nigeria’s economy is the trade of oil, which account’s for 90% of the country’s exports. A February 2007 report by National Geographic stated, “Oil fouls everything in southern Nigeria [the Niger Delta]. It spills from the pipelines, poisoning soil and water. It stains the hands of politicians and generals, who siphon off its profits … The cruelest twist is that half a century of oil extraction in the delta has failed to make the lives of the people better. Instead, they are poorer still, and hopeless … Where does all the oil money go? That question is asked in every village, town, and city in the Niger Delta. The blame spreads, moving from the oil companies to a bigger, more elusive, target: the Nigerian government … On paper, a mechanism does exist for distributing oil revenues somewhat fairly. The federal government retains roughly half and gives out the rest each month, on a sliding scale, to the 36 state governments. The core oil producers—Rivers, Delta, Bayelsa, and Akwa Ibom—receive the most.” The Nigerian government’s conduct towards oil profits has also been called, “the institutionalized looting of national wealth.” According to the Nigerian government, over 7,000 oil spills occurred in the region between 1970 and 2000 (although some analysts believe the true figure is ten times higher) resulting in an estimated spillage of 1.5 million tons of oil (50 times more than the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster). Williams Mkpa, an Ibeno, Nigeria community leader lamented, “Oil companies do not value our life; they want us to all die. In the past two years, we have experienced 10 oil spills and fishermen can no longer sustain their families. It is not tolerable.” In a high profile incident in the 1990s, the Nigerian government executed a number of anti-oil activists that had protested against Shell’s incursion into their homeland, after convicting the men of murder in a sham trial.

In 2011, Norquist lobbied the U.S. State Department to approve the Keystone XL project, an extension to the controversial Keystone Pipeline that brings oil from Canada into the United States. The Natural Resources Defense Council has said the Keystone XL extension would “lock the United States into a dependence on hard-to-extract oil and generate a massive expansion of the destructive tar sands oil operations in Canada. In addition to the damage that would be caused by the increased tar sands extraction, the pipeline threatens to pollute freshwater supplies in America’s agricultural heartland and increase emissions in already-polluted communities of the Gulf Coast.”

When disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff was convicted of mail fraud and conspiracy in 2006, it was revealed in an investigative report released by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee that Norquist used his tax-exempt Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) organization to help Abramoff funnel money from his clients to conservative causes (ATR kept a small cut of the funds). The Senate Finance Committee reported that, in doing so, ATR “appear[ed] to have perpetrated a fraud on other taxpayers” by “profit-seeking and private benefit behavior inconsistent with their tax-exempt status. And by virtue of the tax benefits, other taxpayers implicitly subsidized this behavior.” Additionally, clients of Abramoff were also directed to give Norquist’s organization money. In an e-mail to colleagues, Abramoff wrote, “I spoke this evening with Grover. He said that, if [the Choctaw Indian tribe] want the taxpayer movement, including him, involved on this issue and anything else which will come up over the course of the year or so, they need to become a major player with ATR. He recommended that they make a $50,000 contribution to ATR.” According to Mark Salter, a top aide to Senator John McCain (R-AZ), “By his own admission, Grover couldn’t be any closer to Abramoff if they moved to Massachusetts and got married.”

Prior to the downfall of corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Norquist promoted the Northern Mariana Islands as a positive example of free enterprise. A 1998 Department of Interior report, however, documented widespread human rights abuses associated with a booming sweatshop industry on the islands (clothing made on the islands carries a “Made in USA” label). The report found that women and children immigrant workers were subjected to forced abortions, sex slavery, and substandard pay and working conditions. The Mariana Islands were one of Abramoff’s biggest clients, paying him over $9 million during the course of their relationship. Abramoff charged his client thousands of dollars for “discussions” with Norquist and Americans for Tax Reform staffers.

In 1997, Norquist founded Janus-Merritt Strategies, a lobbying firm, along with David Safavian. Safavian was later convicted on felony obstruction of justice charges in relation to the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal. The Janus-Merritt clientele included:

• Hamas and Hezbollah supporter Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was later convicted for his role in a terrorist plot and sentenced to 23 years in prison. Alamoudi was also an agent of dictator Muamarr Ghaddafi’s Libyan government. Norquist also helped activist Sami Al-Arian—an associate of Alamoudi—obtain meetings with White House officials during the Bush Administration. Al-Arian was later convicted of conspiring to provide services to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a group designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the U.S. Department of State.
• Mortgage lender Fannie Mae, which paid the firm $160,000 in lobbying fees in 2001 (when the 2008 mortgage crisis occurred, Norquist would nonetheless comment, "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac brought us this collapse … This was criminal negligence on the part of [U.S. Representative] Barney Frank and [former U.S. Senator Chris] Dodd.").
• Corrupt foreign rulers, including former president of Gabon Omar Bongo, who was accused of using his country's budget as a personal slush fund; and exiled former president of the Republic of Congo Pascal Lissouba, who has been convicted in absentia of corruption and treason by his home country. Human rights conditions in Gabon were poor during Bongo's 42 year rule, with a United Nations report citing the "limited ability of citizens to change their government; use of excessive force, including torture toward prisoners and detainees; harsh prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; an inefficient judiciary susceptible to government influence; restrictions on the right to privacy; restrictions on freedom of speech, press, association, and movement; harassment of refugees; widespread government corruption; violence and societal discrimination against women, persons with HIV/AIDS, and noncitizen Africans; trafficking in persons, particularly children; and forced labor and child labor."
• Corporate clients, including Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation (the owner of Fox News), the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (a former Abramoff client), and oil and gas giant British Petroleum.

In 1995, in the wake of the Republican takeover of the U.S. House of Representatives, Norquist, then- House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (who has since been convicted of money laundering), and Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff founded The K Street Project. The goal of the project was to facilitate the hiring of Republicans at top lobbying firms and then reward the firms by offering access to influential GOP officials. The explicit “pay-to-play” nature of the project is now illegal, however, in 2003 Republican lobbyists held 33 of the 36 top-level lobbying positions in Washington. During the midst of the project, Norquist told journalist Elizabeth Drew, “There should be as many Democrats working on K Street representing corporate America as there are Republicans working in organized labor—and that number is close to zero.” Norquist credited Abramoff—who was later convicted of mail fraud and conspiracy charges in a far-reaching political scandal—with “instigating the whole [K Street] project.”

In 1995, Norquist told the National Journal, “What the Republicans need is 50 Jack Abramoffs. Then this becomes a different town.”

On December 3, 2010, Rathner tweeted, “Looks like Campus Carry will be a big issue in AZ this year. Maybe people in these defenseless vicitms [sic] zones will now have some protection.” He was referring to SB 1467, a bill that sought to force the states’ public colleges and universities to allow students and faculty to carry guns on their campuses. After being amended substantially, the bill was passed by the Arizona state legislature and sent to Republican Governor Jan Brewer. She vetoed the legislation on April 18, 2011, however, calling the bill “poorly written.” Among those who opposed SB 1467 were the following: the Arizona Board of Regents; the presidents and chiefs of police of the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, and Northern Arizona University, and; the Joint Council of Presidents of Arizona’s public community colleges and universities. "Guns have no place in schools," said Arizona State University President Michael Crow.

In April 2007, Mark Zachares, a former top aide to Young, pled guilty to bribery charges in connection to the Jack Abramoff scandal. Zachares accepted thousands of dollars in illegal gratuities from Abramoff in exchange for using his employment on two subcommittees chaired by Young to advance Abramoff’s interests.

In 2005, Young secured a $10 million earmark for the improvement of Coconut Road, a street that runs near Fort Myers, Florida. The Republican House Member responsible for the area where Coconut Road is located did not request the funds. Local planning officials rejected the federal money three separate times because they did not want to undertake the project. The connection of the street to Interstate 75 would have been a windfall to developer Daniel Aronoff, who owned a large amount of land near the expansion project. Aronoff, whose lobbyist was to be put directly through to staff whenever he called Young’s office, helped raise $40,000 for Young at a February 2005 fundraiser. Lee County Commissioner Ray Judah (a Republican) stated, “It would appear that Don Young was doing a favor for a major contributor.” Beyond accusations of “pay-to-play” on the part of Young and Aronoff, the Coconut Road project was controversial for a number of other reasons. Environmentalists alleged that the project would threaten protected areas. In 2008, the Senate voted 63-29 to ask the Department of Justice to investigate Young because the earmark was inserted after the bill was finalized by Congress. When a reporter approached Young to discuss the Coconut Road allegations, he responded with an obscene gesture.

Young repeatedly used his position as chair of the House Resources Committee from 1995 to 2001 to oppose applying United States labor and immigration laws to the Northern Mariana Islands, a United States Commonwealth. A 1998 Department of Interior report documented widespread human rights abuses associated with a booming sweatshop industry on the islands (clothing made on the islands carries a “Made in USA” label). The report found that women and children immigrant workers were subjected to forced
abortions, sex slavery, and substandard pay and working conditions. Senator Frank Murkowski (R-AK) expressed outrage after personally meeting individuals forced to work without pay and engage in acts of prostitution and became a strong proponent of reform. In 1995 and again in 2000, Young allowed bills (which were unanimously passed by the U.S. Senate) that would have improved conditions for these workers to die in the House Resources Committee. Later-convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff took credit for the failure of the 2000 reform bill, saying “We then stopped it cold in the House.” Between 1994 and 2001, Abramoff was paid $11 million by the Northern Mariana Islands government to lobby in opposition of these reforms. During one 25-month period, Abramoff employees had over 120 contacts with Young or his staff concerning the Northern Mariana Islands. When term limits forced Young to step down as chair of the House Resources Committee, Abramoff wrote the Northern Mariana Island’s anti-reform governor to say, “The loss of Chairman Young's authority cannot easily be measured—or replaced ... We have lost major institutional memory and friendship.” Mark Zachares, who later worked as an aide for Young before pleading guilty to conspiracy as part of the Abramoff lobbying scandal, served as the Commonwealth’s Secretary of Labor and Immigration from 1998 to 2002—during the time that Young blocked immigration and labor reform.