|
THE
FIRST thing you have to understand about proposed gun legislation
in Washington is that it isn't necessarily proposed to get passed.
Not when it can be used as voter bait during a presidential election.
Anti-gun
Democrats have been known to sabotage anti-gun bills so that they
can blame Republicans as a means of wooing soccer moms. That happened
in 2000 after the Senate passed, then alleged purists in the House
killed, a bill that would have required background checks for
purchase at gun shows. Dems bolted -- ostensibly in protest of
a provision to mandate 24-hour background checks in lieu of 72-hour
checks -- but the time period that the Dems seemed the most sensitive
to was November 2000.
Republicans,
on the other hand, have been known to give lip service to modest
gun-control measures, while secretly rooting against them.
In
the 2000 campaign, President Bush said he would support an extension
of the 1994 assault-weapon ban signed by President Clinton, which
will expire on Sept. 13, 2004, unless Bush signs a law extending
it. White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said Bush stills supports
an extension.
Of
course, it doesn't hurt that Bush, who won the NRA's endorsement
in 2000 despite his support for the gun-ban extension, won't have
to make good on his pledge if Capitol Hill fails to muster the
votes to pass a bill. And from the look of things, the big question
isn't whether the 1994 assault-weapons ban will die, but which
party will kill it first.
Last
week, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay suggested the GOP leadership
wouldn't bring the extension to a vote. The next day, Speaker
Dennis Hastert said he hadn't decided what to do.
Sen.
Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is arguing that if Bush truly meant
what he said about the ban during the 2000 presidential race,
he would pressure GOP leaders to pass a measure. White House spokesman
Ari Fleischer countered, the ban is not at the top of Bush's to-do
list.
Credit
Feinstein with proposing a doable bill -- an extension with modest
additions, such as a ban on imports of magazines with 10 bullets
or more. Spokesman Howard Gantman explained, "She feels that
we should focus right now on legislation that we could get through
the Congress and be signed by the president."
Reps.
John Conyers, D-Mich., and Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., on the other
hand, have introduced legislation that would widely expand the
kinds of guns that would be banned. Smart move -- pushing a tougher
anti-gun bill in a GOP House -- that is, if you want to kill it
and wave its carcass in front of voters days before the presidential
election.
Joe
Sudbay of the anti-gun Violence Policy Center argued in favor
of the Conyers/McCarthy measure, saying that it would be "the
most effective assault-weapons ban possible." Sorry, but
how effective is a bill that never makes it off Capitol Hill?
No
wonder the NRA's Andrew Arulanandam said, "The real theater
of action will be Congress."
|