R's use poison pill in DC House of Rep's debate

[sar]

GOP Forces House Democrats To Pull DC Voting Bill

March 22, 2007

GOP Forces House Democrats To Pull DC Voting Bill


House Democrats pulled a bill to grant voting rights to Washington, D.C., after Republicans offered a motion that would repeal the gun ban for the District.

The move is a clear signal that Democrats have lost control of House floor after minority Republicans presented the Democratic majority with a politically unpalatable motion that their conservative members would be forced to support for fear of angering the gun rights community.

Fifty-two Democrats voted with Republicans on a similar measure to repeal the gun ban in 2004. That would be more than enough support for Republcians to add a repeal to the voting rights bill - something a majority of Democrats would vehemently oppose.

Republicans have taken great pride in offering motions to recommit during their time in the minority, an often over-looked legislative procedure that has allowed them to amend various bills on the House floor.

Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher of California, who presided in the chair when the House began consideration of the motion, called the postponement at the request of her leadership, saying the speaker has complete discretion to postpone consideration of any legislation at any time.

Democrats scrambled to remedy the situation on the floor but were eventually forced to pull the bill to begin debate on a controversial wartime funding measure that is expected on the floor Friday. Republicans could offer a similar procedural motion to slow consideration of that measure whenever it comes to the floor.

The House was expected to approve the bill to grant Washington, DC, with a vote in the House by a wide margin, with several Republicans expected to vote in favor of the overarching legislation.

 

[gogetumnow]

We need to find out who these 52 Democrats are and if any are in your state or district write them a thank you note via snail mail.

 

[baz]

Is there some political strategem here I'm missing, because this sounds like it could moot an appeal of Parker. How would that be a good thing?

 

[wooderson]

Lovely. No repeal of the ban AND we're still leaving DC subject to "taxation without representation" (even the half-arsed representation this plan would have created).

 

[jeff-10]

I am willing to bet DC consumes a lot more taxes than it puts out. So are people still worried about a AWB renewal when 52 Democrats vote to repeal the DC gun ban?

 

[Mortech]

Exactly Jeff-10 , I've been telling people this for along time . Alot of the new Democrats are actually more conservative than most of the Republicans that got kicked out . Worrying about a new AWB has been a red herring for a while and this new tactic but the minority Repubs shows how little actual power the Democrats have to pass any new restrictive legislation .

 

[billwiese]

While the efforts of legislators to remove DC gun ban may be noble on first blush, it could be an effort to moot Parker, which will have a much bigger effect (eventually).

At this point these efforts by supposedly pro-gun congressmen should be stopped.

However, as one other poster pointed out, this does show Democrat weakness and a general pro-gun tilt across both aisles.

This makes HR1022's death pretty certain - but paranoia & vigilance are of course still the watchword, since you don't wanna fight a rearguard action like we are in CA.

Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

 

[vis-à-vis]

Well I have renewed confidence.

With regards to DC voting rights, are they voting to give DC Congressmen to represent its residents on the house floor?

 

[wooderson]

I am willing to bet DC consumes a lot more taxes than it puts out.

As did American colonists.

 

[ozarkhillbilly]

With regards to DC voting rights, are they voting to give DC Congressmen to represent its residents on the house floor?

Yes that’s what they are trying to do, without any regard to the fact that congress does not have the authority to give the District of Columbia either a congressman or senators. Both are reserved for states and DC is not a state. The only legal way it can be done is by constitutional amendment.

 

[vis-à-vis]

If the house passes such a measure to confer voting rights to a DC rep, then who is to slap their hand and stop them?

 

[lacoochee]

DC is not a state it is a federal district, people choose to live in that federal district. They are not hemmed in by fences, they do not need a passport to leave.

The District of Columbia was setup so as not to give any one state the advantage of having the nation's capital on it's soil. Giving D.C. a representative in Congress nullifies the purpose of that federal district, what's next two senators?

If they really want to re-enfranchise the people who voluntarily live there, they need to return all of the residential districts of D.C. back over to Maryland as it was their land originally. The Mall and Federals building would stay as what is left of D.C..

Alexandria was once part of D.C. and has been returned to Virginia.

 

[lacoochee]

Vis-a-vis it would then be reviewed by the Supreme Court.

 

[gunsmith]

Finally the R's got some gumption and inserted a progun pill into a popular
D bill...They should do this more often.....(the D's show their true feelings about guns)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032200683.html?sub=AR

House Vote on D.C. Seat Thwarted
GOP Tries to Link Bill to Gun Limits

By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 23, 2007; Page A01

Republicans yesterday derailed a vote on a bill giving the District its first full seat in the House of Representatives by trying to tie the legislation to a drastic weakening of the city's gun-control laws.

The surprise development came as the Democratic-dominated House appeared on the verge of passing the measure. Many D.C. vote activists had gathered at the Capitol for what they hoped would be a historic day -- the first time in nearly 30 years the chamber would vote to give the District a full-fledged House representative.



Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton and Rep. Thomas M. Davis III are sponsors of the bill, which would add two House seats.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton and Rep. Thomas M. Davis III are sponsors of the bill, which would add two House seats. (By Andrea Bruce -- The Washington Post)
Related Articles

* House Vote on D.C. Seat Thwarted




But as more than three hours of debate drew to a close, Rep. Lamar S. Smith (R-Tex.) proposed sending the bill back to committee with additional language gutting the city's gun restrictions.
Democrats retreated, fearing that conservative, pro-gun members of their party could be tempted to side with Republicans. The majority party postponed further action to give voting-rights backers time to regroup.

The bill's supporters said they hope to return the D.C. vote legislation to the House floor in a matter of days -- but with rules that would prohibit such maneuvers.

"It's a motion to shoot the bill dead," Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), the District's non-voting congressional delegate, declared angrily on the House floor after Smith introduced his measure. "These people are trying to kill voting rights for the people of the District of Columbia."

The Republican maneuver reflected the party leadership's staunch opposition to the bill. During yesterday's floor debate, Republicans called the bill unconstitutional and accused Democrats of creating a precedent that could lead to two full senators from the District.

The voting-rights measure, sponsored by Norton and Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), is a compromise that would add two seats to the House, one for the heavily Democratic city and another for the state next in line to expand its delegation -- currently Republican-leaning Utah.

The opposition went into high gear during the past week. The White House said that if the bill reached President Bush, advisers would recommend a veto. Republican leaders also worked the House in recent days.

Norton and Davis said that Smith's motion caused turmoil because it tested Democrats from conservative areas where gun rights are popular. If they voted against the measure, "it makes a great TV ad" that critics could run in their home districts, Davis said.

If such Democrats helped pass the motion, though, it would send the voting rights bill back to committee, which could tie it up or even kill it.

Republicans protested the decision to delay any action.

 

[Standing Wolf]

"It's a motion to shoot the bill dead," Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), the District's non-voting congressional delegate, declared angrily on the House floor after Smith introduced his measure. "These people are trying to kill voting rights for the people of the District of Columbia."

Yep. You can always count on representatives of the Democratic (sic) party to do two things: anything to prevent commoners from exercising the right to keep and bear arms, and lie about it.

 

[gunsmith]

more and more

from the same article

"Fearing that many in their party would support Second Amendment rights for District residents, the Democratic leadership shamefully exploited a rule to kill debate and postpone the vote indefinitely," Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement.

Voting-rights supporters blasted the Republican move as a partisan stunt and sought to minimize its impact.

"Today, House Republicans have shown contempt for the half-a-million taxpaying citizens of Washington, D.C., who do not have representation in Congress -- contradicting the basic founding principles of our nation," Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), the House majority leader, said in a statement.

Democrats "are committed to addressing this issue as soon as possible," he said.

The voting bill easily cleared two House committees last week, and House Democrats have pledged to use their 32-seat majority to approve it on the full floor. It then would head to the Senate, where its prospects are uncertain.

Smith's efforts were the latest in a history of Republican maneuvers to repeal the District's gun restrictions, widely viewed as among the strictest in the country. Congress has considered such measures several times since 1999 but has yet to overturn the D.C. law. They have been opposed by the city's political leaders.

The language trumpeting the rights of gun owners comes at a time when the D.C. law is threatened on another front: A federal appellate court recently ruled that the law illegally bars residents from having handguns in homes. D.C. officials say they will appeal.

Smith's language would bar any attempt by the D.C. mayor or council to outlaw guns permitted under federal law. It would repeal the city's ban on semiautomatic rifles and remove criminal penalties for possessing unregistered guns.

 

[hagar]

Giving the "citizens" of DC a vote would be akin to making Haiti a state.

Just say no to stinking 3rd world hellholes..

 

[Mark Whiteman]

D.C. is a great example of what would happen nationwide should actual total federal control of the country ever take place. Great marble monuments surrounded by shabbiness and ugliness.

 

[PershingRiflesC-7]

Easy to fix

The legislation needs to entirely dissolve the District and give it back to Maryland, save for the White House, Supreme Court, and Capitol. This would give the Demos what they want, taxation with representation, only it would be more taxation (MD state) with already existing representation because the increase in MD population would not be enough for another Congressional seat.

As to the gun rights part, little would change, given the MD approach to gun rights, so the Demos would probably be able to accept that.

My principle behind this approach is similar to child discipline where you give them what they most desire to the point of excess and they soon stop desiring it.

 

[Ratzinger_p38]

I say let Maryland re-annex its land (Like VA did) and tell the DC'ers to shut the hell up. I dont feel sorry for them. DC is like a third world country.

 

[BigG]

Giving Representation to DC (imagine uhoh smiley here)

What have you got against Haiti?

 

[MechAg94]

I just thought it was nice to see that some of the new pro-gun Democrats were actually planning to live up to their promises. Good to see that even if they are Democrats.

 

[Erebus]

As to the gun rights part, little would change, given the MD approach to gun rights, so the Demos would probably be able to accept that.

The Dems want the guaranteed seats they would get from Reps and Senators from DC. They don't care about the residents rights.

I just thought it was nice to see that some of the new pro-gun Democrats were actually planning to live up to their promises. Good to see that even if they are Democrats.

Agreed, it's good to see that it's something the Dems actually have to at least consider.

 

[Threeband]

The legislation needs to entirely dissolve the District and give it back to Maryland

Oh my G-d! No!

Things are bad enough here as it is! There is no way we want that parcel back again.

We donated 69-some square miles of prime swamp land, and look what they did to it. They completely ruined it.

The only alternative I've heard that has some appeal is to give them Montgomery and Prince George's counties. That would significantly improve a lot of things here.

 

[alan]

Not having noticed the discussion started by SAR, I had posted the following, along with a couple of my own comments..

Got the following from CCRKBA today
NEWS RELEASE
HOUSE Democrats REVEAL TRUE COLORS; SACRIFICE VOTING RIGHTS OVER GUN ISSUE
BELLEVUE, WA – Congressional Democrats claim at every turn they “support the Second Amendment,” but the truth came out Thursday when they pulled a coveted District of Columbia voting rights bill because of an amendment that would have ended the long-standing handgun ban.

“This shows the true colors of the Democrat leadership,” Alan M. Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms stated. “It should have been easy for the Democrat caucus to agree to the Republican-sponsored amendment, because of the recent federal appeals court ruling that declared the handgun ban unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

“Instead,” Gottlieb said, “Democrats proved once again that all their avowed support for the Second Amendment is nothing but empty rhetoric. House Democrats had a chance to stand up and be counted, but instead they ran for cover, afraid to have a recorded vote prove that, as a party and as individuals, they remain as anti-gun as ever.”

Republicans attached an amendment to the District voting rights measure that would have essentially restored the Bill of Rights to Washington, D.C. residents. The bill would give District residents full representation in the House of Representatives. It’s a bill Democrats want because the District is heavily Democrat.

“With this delay over the addition of a gun rights amendment,” Gottlieb observed, “House Democrats have demonstrated a new low in moral hypocrisy that, frankly, just didn’t seem possible. It has taken Democrats only three months to erase the years of promises and pontificating they’ve done, trying to convince American voters, and particularly the nation’s 90 million gun owners, that they are not the party of gun control.

“Yet here they are, sacrificing full House representation for a huge constituency, rather than face a vote on a simple gun rights amendment,” he concluded. “Democrats can call this anything they want, they can join the New York Times in blaming Republicans for this debacle, but the truth is simpler and more insidious. If Democrats do not support gun rights for citizens of the District, they don’t support gun rights for citizens anywhere else.

------------------

Re Full House Representation for residents of Washington, D.C., D.C. is NOT a state. It is composed of territory taken from the states of Maryland and Virginia. Let residents of The District vote in either of the above mentioned STATES. As to the rest of Gottlieb's observations on Democrats, individual members positions are one thing, the positions of LEADERSHIP are another, they seem to lean heavily toward antigun positions. By the way, there are anti gun Republicans too. Remember Henry Hyde to name just one?
alan is offline