I'm trying to come to grips with this idea. Breaux will not face the electorate again. In other ways seems to be to the right of his other Democrat cronies. Why? Why does he stick the knife in the gun owners? I can reconcile in my own mind that he falls for the "hunters and sportsman" horsepoop regarding his "interpretation" of the 2A. But still, WHY????? He will not be subject to party dicipline. He will not be offered patronage by some Democrat President. He's not going to be the highly paid head of some VPC/Brady Bunch think tank. Of what possible satisfaction is it to him to vote against what he MUST know are the wishes of his constituency? Landrieu, same state, same party, was obviously concerned with the wrath of the voters, and accordingly, she voted our way up and down the line, against the party. Breaux, who in most other matters is to the right of Landrieu, broke it off in us, even in the final 90-8 vote. Can anyone shed some light on this?