Hastert, DeLay Disagree on Assault Weapons Vote


PDA






Jeff White
May 16, 2003, 01:04 PM
Time to put the pressure on. Once again the Republican Party is proving it is unable to stand up for anything once the mainstream press puts turns up the heat.

Obvioulsy soccer moms won the election in 2000 :banghead:



Hastert says House may renew weapons ban
WASHINGTON POST
updated: 05/15/2003 11:12 PM


Statement contradicts DeLay's
DeLay had suggested
Republicans would allow
the ban to expire




WASHINGTON - House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said Thursday that House Republican leaders had yet to decide whether to allow a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons to expire next year.

The statement represents a rare split with his top deputy, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. On Tuesday, DeLay angered gun-control advocates by saying the GOP-led House would let the ban expire next year.

Now, Hastert is raising the possibility of a vote to extend it. Hastert said that before he made a final call, he wanted to talk with President George W. Bush, who supports an extension of the ban.

Several Republican aides said Hastert and other GOP leaders were concerned that DeLay was making unilateral decisions without consulting them. Hastert stopped short of promising a vote, and two GOP leadership aides said they doubted that one would take place.

At issue is a 1994 law that makes it illegal to import, "manufacture, transfer or possess" 19 types of semiautomatic weapons. The law does not apply to the sale or possession of the weapons if they were legally held before the ban took effect.

Unless extended by the House and Senate, the law expires on Sept. 13 next year. Bush has supported an extension, so the National Rifle Association and other gun rights activists are counting on the Republican-controlled House.

On Tuesday, DeLay said that most House members opposed the ban, and his spokesman said Republicans would refuse to bring up legislation to extend it.

Gun control is popular in many suburban districts, especially among women. Some Republicans who represent such districts complained privately that DeLay's remarks could hurt the party's image.

"No one is better instinctively than Tom DeLay at counting votes," said House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo. "Certainly for now he is exactly right" that a majority of members oppose renewing the ban.

Some GOP officials said the House would extend the ban only if Bush pressured Republicans to support it. But several Republicans said Bush had no plans to lobby Congress hard.

If you enjoyed reading about "Hastert, DeLay Disagree on Assault Weapons Vote" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
AJ Dual
May 16, 2003, 01:25 PM
Hastert is ruffling his feathers on this one, saying, "Hey guys, remember me? The speaker?"

Just afraid DeLay is going to steal his thunder.

Just a blip, no worries.

Master Blaster
May 16, 2003, 01:31 PM
Call your congress critters an remind them who voted them in.

Dont count on innaction to carry the day.

And the house version aint just a renewal, It bans many new guns including all semiauto shotguns, and the PC mini-14, and well as .22 lr target pistols with and evil magazine outside the grip.

CALL NOW

UnknownSailor
May 16, 2003, 01:41 PM
This "gentleman" needs to be politely but firmly reminded exactly who put the Republicans in charge of the house, and especially what issue got so many of Democrat colleagues voted out of office.

gun-fucious
May 16, 2003, 06:13 PM
Hastert, DeLay Disagree on Assault Weapons Vote
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, May 16, 2003; Page A05

In a rare split with his top deputy, Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said yesterday that House Republican leaders have not made a final decision on whether to allow the 1994 ban on semiautomatic assault weapons to expire next year.

Two days after House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) infuriated gun control advocates by saying the GOP-led House would let the assault weapons ban expire next year, Hastert raised the possibility of a future vote to extend it. Hastert said he wants to talk with President Bush, who supports extending the ban, before making a final call. "I am not ready to make that decision," Hastert said.

Hastert and other GOP leaders were concerned that DeLay was making unilateral decisions without consulting them, said several Republican aides, and attracting attention to the politically sensitive topic of banning certain semiautomatic firearms 16 months before the law expires. Still, Hastert stopped short of promising a vote, and two GOP leadership aides said they doubted one will take place.

At issue is a 1994 law that made it illegal to import, "manufacture, transfer or possess" 19 types of semiautomatic weapons. The law does not apply to the sale or possession of the weapons if they were legally held before the ban took effect.

Unless extended by the House and Senate, the law will expire on Sept. 13, 2004. Bush has supported an extension since the 2000 presidential campaign, so the National Rifle Association and other gun rights activists are counting on the Republican-controlled House to end the prohibition. On Tuesday, DeLay told reporters that most House members oppose the ban, and his spokesman, Stuart Roy, said Republicans would not bring up legislation to extend it. The NRA cheered the statement, but Senate Democrats denounced it.

"I, for one, don't believe that we should allow banned guns like the AK-47, the TEC-9 or the Street Sweeper to be manufactured once again," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said on Wednesday. "And the American people know that these assault weapons are the weapons that drive-by shooters and grievance killers use in their rampages. They know that assault weapons are designed for one purpose -- to kill human beings."

Some moderate Republicans who represent suburban districts, where gun control is popular, especially among women, complained privately that DeLay's remarks could hurt the party's image in some areas.

"No one is better instinctively than Tom DeLay at counting votes," said House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.). "Certainly for now he is exactly right" that a majority of members oppose renewing the ban. "Between now and when the ban expires . . . a lot of things can happen, including the president deciding to focus some time on this, so who knows where the votes will be over the course of the next 15 months?"

Some GOP officials said the House will extend the ban only if Bush pressures Republicans to support it. Several Republicans said Bush has no plans to lobby Congress hard to renew the ban, however.

In 1994, when Democrats controlled the House and held many more seats than they do today, the ban passed by only two votes. Since then, many Democrats who represent rural or southern districts have come to see gun control laws as politically deadly. Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), who voted for the ban in 1994, said this week he now opposes the ban because his district includes many more gun owners than it did then.

Justin
May 16, 2003, 06:23 PM
Hastert is ruffling his feathers on this one, saying, "Hey guys, remember me? The speaker?"

Just afraid DeLay is going to steal his thunder.

Just a blip, no worries.

Yeah, everyone. Go back to sleep. :scrutiny:

Pendragon
May 16, 2003, 07:12 PM
Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.)
Tom DeLay (R-Tex.)

Baba Louie
May 16, 2003, 08:01 PM
Pendragon's right. Hastert hails from Illinois, Repub or not, sounds like he's thinking like a Daley.

Darn.

Adios

Waitone
May 16, 2003, 08:14 PM
The rat is smelling stinkier and stinkier.

Bush is the key. Watch what he does, not what he says.

Bruce H
May 16, 2003, 08:14 PM
Dennis Hastert is the prime example of " all seniority, no ability". He is just another in a long line of congresscritters who would be hard pressed to handle fast food jobs. Why do we elect the lowest of the worthless to be spokesmen? Are we really that unconcerned about our future?

Jeff White
May 16, 2003, 09:32 PM
Dennis Hastert is just demonstrating the color of the mainstream Republican Party



YELLOW

The mainstream Republican Party will not stand on any principle if it means they might receive a scolding by the liberal media. This is not a case of Hastert telling DeLay who's boss. This is all about the Republicans being afraid to take heat on the editorial pages. Hastert fears the soccer moms more then he fears us. We need to change that. We need to tell him in no uncertain terms that the enemy we know (the Democrats) might be preferable to a friend we are unable to trust.

If Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Dick Durbin and Frank Lautenberg can stand up for their positions regardless of how they play on Fox News or in the Washington Times, we should be able to expect that our leadership stands up for our positions regardless of how they play on CNN or in the New York Times. It was the fear of CNN and The New York Times and Washington Post that kept the Republicans from convicting Bill Clinton in the impeachment trial.

I hate to say it, but right now we get more respect from the Democrats (who fear us) then we do the Republicans (who fear the liberal media calling them puppets of the NRA more then they fear us.)

Hastert must go. My letter instructing him to resign as speaker is in the mail. We can't have leaders who won't lead!!

It's quite obvious that Bush will not lead on this issue. Now it appears that the Speaker of the House won't lead either.

LISTEN UP REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP; I WANT YOU TO BEND OVER, NOW REACH BEHIND, GRAB YOURSELF BY THE EARS AND PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF WHATEVER ORIFICE IT IS STUCK IN!! WE GAVE YOU CONTROL OF THE ENTIRE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH...DON'T SQUANDER IT!!! LEAD OR GET OUT OF THE WAY AND LET SOMEONE WHO HAS THE GUTS TO LEAD STEP IN AND DO IT!!! THERE WILL BE A PRICE TO PAY IF YOU DON'T!! YOU WILL SHOW ME ONCE AND FOR ALL THAT YOU ARE NOT DIFFERENT ENOUGH FROM THE DEMOCRATS TO WARRANT MY CONTINUED SUPPORT

Jeff

Standing Wolf
May 16, 2003, 09:49 PM
Too bad we don't have a Republican majority in both houses of Congress. </sarcasm>

PakWaan
May 16, 2003, 10:06 PM
My latest email to my congressmen and Pres Bush:

The Clinton assault weapons ban, a blatant violation of the second amendment and a bill that accomplished absolutely nothing, is expiring soon. Please don't allow this trampling of the Constitution to be re-authorized. I don't own an assault weapon and don't have any interest in one - but that's beside the point. I'm a veteran - that means you and I both took the same oath "To protect and defend the constitution of the United States...." - here's a great chance to do just that. Take it.

geekWithA.45
May 17, 2003, 12:16 AM
Just a blip, no worries.

That thinking has brought us the NJ Smart Gun Law.

The local 2a Sisters, and other groups were gearing up a grassroots campaign, but their contacts with the NRA said "stand down, don't make a stink, it'll be OK."


WRONG


It wasn't OK, and that is the last time I will stand down on 2nd Amendment Issues

Tamara
May 17, 2003, 12:24 AM
I'm waiting for the "Beaten Wife Brigade" to show up...


"But this is just how the Republican party proves it really loves me!" :rolleyes:


Don't worry; the NRA will hammer out an Eleventh Hour compromise that will let us keep our semiauto shotguns that hold no more than three rounds and our non-pistol-grip semiauto rifles, then declare "victory for RKBA" and ask for more money.

Glock Glockler
May 17, 2003, 09:24 AM
"Don't worry; the NRA will..."

Tam,

Why are you looking to them to provide you with what you want?

Tamara
May 17, 2003, 10:57 AM
You might want to check your sarcasm detector; I think it's busted. ;)

Marko Kloos
May 17, 2003, 11:07 AM
Too bad we don't have a Republican majority in both houses of Congress. </sarcasm>

Precisely. We have a Republican House, a Republican Senate, and a Republican White House, and nothing is happening.

I've asked the question before, and it hasn't been answered: What mythical constellation do the stars have to take for Republicans to unequivocally support the right to keep and bear arms? How come, with a Republican majority in both House and Senate, and a Republican President, we don't get any pro-gun legislation? How come all we hear from the right side of the aisle are debates on whether it'd be politically wise to shaft gun owners a little less in 2004?

Republicans know that their conservative constituents will vote Republican regardless, 'cause "where else are they going to go?"

Waitone
May 18, 2003, 08:42 AM
I've asked the question before, and it hasn't been answered: What mythical constellation do the stars have to take for Republicans to unequivocally support the right to keep and bear arms? How come, with a Republican majority in both House and Senate, and a Republican President, we don't get any pro-gun legislation?Gun forum, gun coment, good comment. But I'll extend the comment far beyond guns. At this point I can not detect a single consistent belief republicans will defend. I can detect no overriding philosophical principal driving its political agenda. I can detect no belief for which the republicans will go to the mat.

Democrat's beliefs I think are well known and quite predictable. Problem is it is a malignant belief system endangering life, liberty, and property. I don't know what republicans belief and I can't guess based on what they do. Both are extremely dangerous to personal freedom.

emc
May 18, 2003, 09:16 AM
Bottom line, it is a matter of having the courage of your convictions. Regardless of what we think of them, the Demos, especially the more radical wing of the party can claim to have that conviction. I have yet to see that the Republican party does, ESPECIALLY at the leadership level. They are in serious need of spine transplants. :banghead:

FWIW,

emc

Marko Kloos
May 18, 2003, 09:41 AM
At this point I can not detect a single consistent belief republicans will defend.

Isn't it funny that Libertarians are the only ones who base their position on uncompromising philosophy...and they're the ones who get ridiculed by both Liberals and Conservatives as "dreamers" and "unrealistic and un-electable"?

When it comes to constitutional rights, anything other than a firm and principled stand will cause your rights to erode gradually. Too bad so many people vote for what's marketable and popular, rather than for what's right.

Glock Glockler
May 18, 2003, 10:17 AM
Sorry, Tam

A while back I remember you posting something in reference to renewing your NRA membership. I thought you might have been invested a little to heavily in them, glad to know I was wrong:)

I don't know if you've been in the habit of bringing newbies and fense sitters shooting, but I've made a commitment to bring 1 non-gin person per week to the range, and it's amazing the response that they give, especially when you make it as fun as possible for them.

Adopt-a-shooter, or 10, is a much better route than asking the NRA to obsolete themselves.

Don Gwinn
May 18, 2003, 10:22 AM
Need to find out how the Illinois AWB played in Hastert's district. I know most of the collar counties were against it, and he's from Kane County, which is a bit farther out and fairly rural. It would be interesting to have him talk to the state Rep and Senator from his district. I bet they, like everyone else, got an earful about the ban Daley tried to enact in Illinois. It was a lot stricter than the existing ban, but not much worse than the so-called "California plan."

hammer4nc
May 18, 2003, 10:54 AM
Political gamesmanship: Look at the alternative...lets say Bush issued an edict to NOT renew the AWB (or sign more draconian gun grabber bills), the issue would fade for the 2004 election. Dems (with some exceptions) would be inclined to cut their losses, as the repubs have the votes to dictate the outcome. Also, the gun community would be comfortably complacent (=not inclined to activate or vote).

Recent history has shown that gun control has killed more dem politicians than any other; keeping the outcome in doubt helps keep the issue in the spotlight. A sword on which gun grabbing dems will be more inclined to impale themselves once again? Schumer and Boxer are up for election in 2004!

And, this way the gun community gets super activated (look at all the pleas for letter writing in this forum lately). Like it or not, we are still a minority faction.

So, one might conclude that this strategy is perfect for the situation. Or, it might be too smart by half (to quote Limbaugh). Thank goodness the issue will come to a head just BEFORE the 2004 election.

Stay tuned.

geekWithA.45
May 18, 2003, 11:02 AM
Like it or not, we are still a minority faction.



Well, we wouldn't be if complacent gunowners removed their ??? helmets!

What are the figures? 40%? 50% own guns?

Of gunowners, maybe 4 or 5% have joined the NRA?

***?

DUCKHUNTERS:

Hear me now: If they come to take my eeeeeevil black guns, I won't be there to help you when they come for you Bennelli.

GET THE PICTURE?

And where will I be? Well, it almost doesn't matter, because it's all the same in the end.

I might be:

*Dead. They might have decided to barge the door @ 4 am, and come in shooting.
*In Jail: I might deny ownership, and they toss me in jail because of some new law a la Australia that traces ownership from records.
*In Hiding: Yeah, now THERE'S a lifestyle we want to live.
*Or, I might look @ my wife and family, and decide to peacably hand them over.

Either way, you're next, and I won't be able to help you.

If you enjoyed reading about "Hastert, DeLay Disagree on Assault Weapons Vote" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!