damien
Member
I like this guy and I think he does some good analysis. I hope he is right.
Why a Renewal of the 1994 Assault Weapon “Ban” is NOT Happening Unless Republicans Vote For It
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/11/the_heller_gun_12.html
...
People can forget about a new “assault weapon” ban - that one is not getting any traction – Labor is opposed and Rahm Emanuel is not putting his boss or a Democratic majority at risk. Look at the makeup of the new Congress. Some of this buying may be Obama paranoia but a lot of this is also upscale people going downscale.
Given all the paranoia about “assault weapons”, for the record, all the 1994 law did was to prohibit or restrict the making or importation into the US of various firearms and high capacity magazines. It did not affect any “pre ban” guns. The 1994 law as to imports codified a prior import restriction effectuated by President Bush 41. That law expired in 2004 though John McCain voted for an extension as part of final bill that failed and the import ban remains in effect which means that restricted weapons can only be made under a licensing agreement within the US.
The 1994 crime bill which included “the ban” passed because Republicans voted for it. Many of those Republicans are gone and because of the movement of seats because of the 2000 census and resulting redistricting, many of the Democratic seats where the members voted for it are gone as well.
In fact, the shifts in redistricting in the wake of the 2002 census have created situations where no 1994 revival could even pass the House. A number of the seats of Democrats who voted for the 1994 law have disappeared and those Republicans who voted for the 1994 law are gone as well replaced by GOP hardliners. The Karl Rove plan which I wrote about actually weakened Republicans in the Northeast and Midwest by creating large numbers of marginal seats in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
Because of demography and philosophical trends, Rove in effect created a number of what I would call AHSAcrats or Unioncrats in 2006. These are Democrats who are union oriented, tax wary, trade wary, mildly pro gun, “tough on defense”, difficult to define on abortion [whose views on this may be shaped by religious teachings which are not on all the same page vis-a-vis this issue] Democrats in a number of states. In addition, you have large numbers of African American congresspersons from the rural south who want to move up. The best way to connect with White voters you need – witness Rod Wright – is to be for gun rights. Pelosi’s majority depends on all these Congresspersons.
In the Senate, the only reason the 1994 legislation avoided a filibuster is that Republicans put up 6 votes for the bill to cut off debate. Those Republicans are gone – the Senate within the GOP is devoid of moderates. The easiest way to note this is to make a comparison on votes is between the Senate as likely to exist in 2009 and the Senate in 2004. In 2004, an extension passed 52 to 47.
It was generally assumed that Democrats would pick up seats in 2008 and they did but they did not pickup seats in the numbers people thought that they would. The Democratic pickups maybe Alaska [Mark Begich will vote with NRA], as well as pickups in Colorado [Mark Udall is an AHSAcrat], New Hampshire [Jeanne Shaheen is an AHSAcrat], New Mexico [Tom Udall is an AHSAcrat], North Carolina [Kay Hagen is very pro gun AHSAcrat], Oregon, and Virginia [Mark Warner is more pro gun than John Warner]. Norm Coleman has been I believe reelected and Saxby Chambliss will be reelected. Democrats did not get to 60 votes to shut off debate on anything unless the Republicans want that to happen. [Of course, in the case of taxes unless something is done then all current tax reductions expire on January 1, 2011.] I should add that every single Democrat elected in 2008 will be up in 2014 and if Obama is reelected the second mid term of a President is not good.
As to guns, in the 2004 elections, the following 5 Yes extension votes were replaced by 5 or 6 No votes on an extension (Vitter for Breaux, Thune for Daschle, Burr for Edwards, Sanders for Jeffords, Martinez for Graham, and maybe Warner for Warner). The following No extension votes may have been replaced by Yes votes (Mark Udall of CO for Allard, Salazar (possibly – though doubtful) for Campbell, Tom Udall of New Mexico for Domenici, McCaskill (possibly – she is an AHSAcrat) for Talent.
Gordon Smith who lost on Tuesday voted for the 2004 extension [yet he was NRA endorsed] as did Judd Gregg. Gregg is up in 2010 and he should be worried about his base so he becomes a NO. Kay Hagan has indicated that she would not vote for an extension or renewal. I would not be surprised if Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins go from Yes to No. As can be seen, the net effect of this is that it is not at all clear that there are even 50 votes for a revival of an extension.
Besides the closeness of the vote, the first thing people have to remember is that Majority Leader Harry Reid is up in 2010 for reelection in Nevada, as is Byron Dorgan in North Dakota, Ron Wyden in Oregon and Russ Feingold in Wisconsin. The second thing people have to remember is that in 2004 Republicans gained US Senate Seats and those seats are up in 2010 in red states - with the possible exception of Mel Martinez in Florida – none of those Reeps have to worry about a general but they have to worry about their base. As such, nothing is happening.
Why a Renewal of the 1994 Assault Weapon “Ban” is NOT Happening Unless Republicans Vote For It
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/11/the_heller_gun_12.html
...
People can forget about a new “assault weapon” ban - that one is not getting any traction – Labor is opposed and Rahm Emanuel is not putting his boss or a Democratic majority at risk. Look at the makeup of the new Congress. Some of this buying may be Obama paranoia but a lot of this is also upscale people going downscale.
Given all the paranoia about “assault weapons”, for the record, all the 1994 law did was to prohibit or restrict the making or importation into the US of various firearms and high capacity magazines. It did not affect any “pre ban” guns. The 1994 law as to imports codified a prior import restriction effectuated by President Bush 41. That law expired in 2004 though John McCain voted for an extension as part of final bill that failed and the import ban remains in effect which means that restricted weapons can only be made under a licensing agreement within the US.
The 1994 crime bill which included “the ban” passed because Republicans voted for it. Many of those Republicans are gone and because of the movement of seats because of the 2000 census and resulting redistricting, many of the Democratic seats where the members voted for it are gone as well.
In fact, the shifts in redistricting in the wake of the 2002 census have created situations where no 1994 revival could even pass the House. A number of the seats of Democrats who voted for the 1994 law have disappeared and those Republicans who voted for the 1994 law are gone as well replaced by GOP hardliners. The Karl Rove plan which I wrote about actually weakened Republicans in the Northeast and Midwest by creating large numbers of marginal seats in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
Because of demography and philosophical trends, Rove in effect created a number of what I would call AHSAcrats or Unioncrats in 2006. These are Democrats who are union oriented, tax wary, trade wary, mildly pro gun, “tough on defense”, difficult to define on abortion [whose views on this may be shaped by religious teachings which are not on all the same page vis-a-vis this issue] Democrats in a number of states. In addition, you have large numbers of African American congresspersons from the rural south who want to move up. The best way to connect with White voters you need – witness Rod Wright – is to be for gun rights. Pelosi’s majority depends on all these Congresspersons.
In the Senate, the only reason the 1994 legislation avoided a filibuster is that Republicans put up 6 votes for the bill to cut off debate. Those Republicans are gone – the Senate within the GOP is devoid of moderates. The easiest way to note this is to make a comparison on votes is between the Senate as likely to exist in 2009 and the Senate in 2004. In 2004, an extension passed 52 to 47.
It was generally assumed that Democrats would pick up seats in 2008 and they did but they did not pickup seats in the numbers people thought that they would. The Democratic pickups maybe Alaska [Mark Begich will vote with NRA], as well as pickups in Colorado [Mark Udall is an AHSAcrat], New Hampshire [Jeanne Shaheen is an AHSAcrat], New Mexico [Tom Udall is an AHSAcrat], North Carolina [Kay Hagen is very pro gun AHSAcrat], Oregon, and Virginia [Mark Warner is more pro gun than John Warner]. Norm Coleman has been I believe reelected and Saxby Chambliss will be reelected. Democrats did not get to 60 votes to shut off debate on anything unless the Republicans want that to happen. [Of course, in the case of taxes unless something is done then all current tax reductions expire on January 1, 2011.] I should add that every single Democrat elected in 2008 will be up in 2014 and if Obama is reelected the second mid term of a President is not good.
As to guns, in the 2004 elections, the following 5 Yes extension votes were replaced by 5 or 6 No votes on an extension (Vitter for Breaux, Thune for Daschle, Burr for Edwards, Sanders for Jeffords, Martinez for Graham, and maybe Warner for Warner). The following No extension votes may have been replaced by Yes votes (Mark Udall of CO for Allard, Salazar (possibly – though doubtful) for Campbell, Tom Udall of New Mexico for Domenici, McCaskill (possibly – she is an AHSAcrat) for Talent.
Gordon Smith who lost on Tuesday voted for the 2004 extension [yet he was NRA endorsed] as did Judd Gregg. Gregg is up in 2010 and he should be worried about his base so he becomes a NO. Kay Hagan has indicated that she would not vote for an extension or renewal. I would not be surprised if Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins go from Yes to No. As can be seen, the net effect of this is that it is not at all clear that there are even 50 votes for a revival of an extension.
Besides the closeness of the vote, the first thing people have to remember is that Majority Leader Harry Reid is up in 2010 for reelection in Nevada, as is Byron Dorgan in North Dakota, Ron Wyden in Oregon and Russ Feingold in Wisconsin. The second thing people have to remember is that in 2004 Republicans gained US Senate Seats and those seats are up in 2010 in red states - with the possible exception of Mel Martinez in Florida – none of those Reeps have to worry about a general but they have to worry about their base. As such, nothing is happening.
