When recycling is not politically correct (updated)

Clarice Feldman and Rosslyn Smith
It sees that not all forms of recycling are to be embraced.  In a move that will greatly increase the cost of ammunition and may cause several US manufacturers to lay off workers, the Defense Department is ending a long standing practice of selling expended brass cartridges to domestic ammunition manufacturers.   Instead the readily recyclable casings are to be melted down and recast for sale as scrap metal. To add insult to injury it should be noted that a scrap metal the brass will sell for substantially less than the expended casings themselves now bring!

Update - Joseph Smith writes:

After Democrat senators Tester and Baucus of Montana 
wrote a letter to the DOD asking them to reverse this policy change, the policy was reversed.  It appears the original change in policy was the result of bureaucratic bungling within the defense department, without consideration of the shooting industry.  While many were very concerned that the original policy change was a back door move on gun rights, that does not appear to have been the case.
It sees that not all forms of recycling are to be embraced.  In a move that will greatly increase the cost of ammunition and may cause several US manufacturers to lay off workers, the Defense Department is ending a long standing practice of selling expended brass cartridges to domestic ammunition manufacturers.   Instead the readily recyclable casings are to be melted down and recast for sale as scrap metal. To add insult to injury it should be noted that a scrap metal the brass will sell for substantially less than the expended casings themselves now bring!

Update - Joseph Smith writes:

After Democrat senators Tester and Baucus of Montana 
wrote a letter to the DOD asking them to reverse this policy change, the policy was reversed.  It appears the original change in policy was the result of bureaucratic bungling within the defense department, without consideration of the shooting industry.  While many were very concerned that the original policy change was a back door move on gun rights, that does not appear to have been the case.