Senate Democrats Threatening Anti-Gun Filibuster


PDA






Waitone
May 13, 2003, 06:10 PM
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/13/165428.shtml

Senate Democrats Threatening Anti-Gun Filibuster

NewsMax.com.

Tuesday, May 13, 2003

Senate Democrats continuing a weeks long filibuster against two of President Bush's judicial nominees are now threatening another filibuster in an effort to talk a new gun law to death.
According to the Washington Times, the bill, backed by both the White House and the National Rifle Association, would prevent lawsuits against gun makers for criminal or unlawful use of their weapons.

Anti-Second amendment Sen. Jack Reed, (D-R.I.) told the Times that he and his Democrat colleagues would "do everything we can to stop this shameful piece of legislation from becoming law'"

The bill passed the House last month by a lop-sided margin of 285 votes to 140, with a third of House Democrats voting for the legislation. The White House has said that the legislation "would help prevent abuse of the legal system and help curb the growing problem of frivolous lawsuits in the United States."

Noting that there has been a flurry of such lawsuits whose sole aim has been to bankrupt the gun industry, supporters of the bill explained that at least 33 municipalities, counties and states have sued gunmakers since 1998, with many claiming that manufacturers allowed weapons to reach criminals because of irresponsible marketing, the Times reported., - The bill now before the Senate which was offered by Sen. Larry Craig, (R-Idaho), has 52 sponsors, enough to pass the legislation in a floor vote. According to Reed, the real battle will be over the bill's backers getting the 60 votes needed to end a filibuster and bring the bill to the floor for a final vote where it appears assured of passage.

In addition to a threatened filibuster, Reed said opponents might try to clutter it up with amendemnts to close gun show loopholes on purchasing waiting periods, add safety lock language and toughen criminal background checks.

Liberal Sen. Barbara Mikulski, (D-Md.), told the Times that under the legislation, the families of the victims of last year's Washington-area sniper attacks would be barred by Congress from suing the Tacoma, Wash., gun shop that sold the gun to the alleged snipers. The shop has no record of that sale or the sales of more than 200 other guns, and the families believe it was negligent.

However, Chris Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist told the Times that the bill is aimed at protecting legal manufacturers from being held responsible for the illegal actions of criminals. "It doesn't protect those who break state or federal laws," he said. "It doesn't close the door to anyone" filing claims against wrongdoers.

Passing the gun manufacturers' liability bill was the NRA's top legislative priority this year, Cox explained. The liability bill is one of a few gun-related issues to arise in a Congress where gun-control advocates, faced with a Republican president and a GOP-controlled House and Senate, are on the defensive.

On another gun issue, the Times notes that President Bush has given his "qualified support for extending the 10-year ban on assault weapons enacted in a 1994 law,' but House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, has warned Democrats they would not have the votes in the House for any attempt to expand the weapons listed under the ban.


<my 2 cents on>
I smell a really big, stinky rat in Mr. DeLay's comments.

Spinelessrepublicans have yet to seriously challenge democrats use of the filibuster. They are so successful democrats continue the original targets, expanded the list of targets to include new nominees, and now branching out to other issues.

Sooner or later spinelessrepublicans will have to grow a pair and counter the filibuster. It would be easy to do but involves a lot of scorched earth and political corpses, but it can be done.

<my 2 cents off>

If you enjoyed reading about "Senate Democrats Threatening Anti-Gun Filibuster" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
cuchulainn
May 13, 2003, 06:16 PM
The bill now before the Senate which was offered by Sen. Larry Craig, (R-Idaho), has 52 sponsors, enough to pass the legislation in a floor vote. According to Reed, the real battle will be over the bill's backers getting the 60 votes needed to end a filibuster and bring the bill to the floor for a final vote where it appears assured of passage.

So who are the the 8 most likely to cross over?

Can pressure be brought to bear on them?

Standing Wolf
May 13, 2003, 06:20 PM
Senate Democrats continuing a weeks long filibuster against two of President Bush's judicial nominees...

Baloney! They haven't filibustered 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They've been loafing along with the connivance of the Republicans.

El Tejon
May 13, 2003, 07:10 PM
Start talking now, you fools. Give the NRA a big, fat target to shoot. See you in November '04!

Do it FOR THE CHILDREN.:D

CZ-75
May 13, 2003, 07:26 PM
Enlighten me on the rules, but Filibustering is essentially taking the floor for the duration of the session? When the legislators go home at night, the speaker with the floor may continue his filibuster the next day, or just some other member of the same party? The way to break a filibuster is to continue the session until the speaker is forced to relinquish the floor. As an aside, I believe Strom Thurmond kept it up for over 24 hours once and is the record holder - I wouldn't expect this to be too difficult to break.

Additionally, as long as there is a filibuster, no legislation can be passed? Wouldn't it be wise for the Repubs. to "stack" the issues so that they can break the fillibuster only once, then call for a vote on all nominations and legislation thus stalled? Or doesn't it work that way.

I need some remedial Civics 101.

Waitone
May 13, 2003, 07:33 PM
I just belched and developed a really ugly scenario.

Item 1--Bush XLIII says he will sign a new AWB IF IT REACHES HIS DESK.

Item 2--Rep. Tom DeLay is quoted as saying "Democrats they would not have the votes in the House for any attempt to expand the weapons listed under the ban."

Item 3--Democrats announce they will filibuster the gun manufacturers liability control bill.

I smell a deal in the making whereby democrats will not filibuster the liability control bill in exchange for the republicans allowing the extension of the AWB.

So all you AWB foes out there, how would you feel about being a poker chip in GWB's 5-card stud tourney?

HBK
May 13, 2003, 08:02 PM
They should go back to the days when a filibuster was a real filibuster. I'm fed up with this. I guess more letter writing is in order.

pittspilot
May 13, 2003, 10:57 PM
Go here for a look at the filibuster (http://lsolum.blogspot.com/2003_05_01_lsolum_archive.html#200259305)

I wonder how many more things the Democrats can filibuster. As the article says, there are ways to bust a filibuster, but they set some ugly precedent.

We are about to see a crackup in the senate, and it is going to be huge.

Shaggy
May 13, 2003, 11:55 PM
I smell a really big, stinky rat in Mr. DeLay's comments.

Spinelessrepublicans have yet to seriously challenge democrats use of the filibuster. They are so successful democrats continue the original targets, expanded the list of targets to include new nominees, and now branching out to other issues.

Sooner or later spinelessrepublicans will have to grow a pair and counter the filibuster. It would be easy to do but involves a lot of scorched earth and political corpses, but it can be done.


I smell a bunch of republican bashing.

From the Washington post, which is a liberal left wing paper more likely to misquote Delay than Newsmax.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) said most House members are willing to let the ban expire next year. "The votes in the House are not there" to continue the ban, DeLay told reporters.

I've heard that quote above from more than one source. I've heard that jumbled up sentance from newmax.....well, that's the first I've seen of that.

Besides, what happens in the Senate is irrelevent. This battle will be won or lost in the House.

CZ-75
May 14, 2003, 12:38 AM
They should go back to the days when a filibuster was a real filibuster. I'm fed up with this. I guess more letter writing is in order.

From the little bit I've just read, the VP or other presiding officer, can opt to make the Senator filibustering actually take the floor and speak, rather than use procedural rules to do so.

If you enjoyed reading about "Senate Democrats Threatening Anti-Gun Filibuster" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!