Year: 2009

The news media has picked up the story that Pelosi had to pull her bill.  We might, from the articles, get an idea of what might happen in The House.  First, from the New York Times:

Chris Cox, the executive director of the N.R.A.’s legislative unit, wouldn’t confirm today that his organization threatened to monitor the vote in the House, or “score” it, as one of the gauges it uses to grade lawmakers’ adherence to the group’s agenda. “What I will say is that we would hold our right to take a position on a procedural motion that has a possibility of positively or adversely affecting the 2nd amendment,” Mr. Cox said. He termed “restoring Second Amendment rights” to district residents a “core issue’’ for his organization.

Next from the Washington Times:

House Democratic leaders have said the National Rifle Association is a major influence on some pro-gun Democrats on the Rules Committee, who may have agreed to attach the gun amendments to the bill.

“Leadership thought there was understanding with the NRA to keep the bill clean,” Mr. Connolly said. “Obviously there was a misunderstanding.”

From the Washington Post:

In an afternoon conference call with city officials, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said he did not have enough votes to bring the bill to the floor without the possibility of amendments, according to sources with knowledge of the discussion.

“We weren’t confident the votes would be there,” said a senior House aide who spoke on condition of anonymity because she was not authorized to discuss the matter.

Hoyer put the bill on hold Tuesday after learning that the National Rifle Association was urging its members to use a procedural maneuver to press for amendments that would repeal many of the city’s gun laws.

Based on Chris Cox’s statements in the three articles, the NRA is playing its cards close to its chest, and so is the House leadership.  Pelosi and Hoyer pretty clearly don’t want to send Obama a bill with gun rights language in it — a bill Obama will likely have to sign.  There will be a lot of back room dealing over this bill, as both sides try to influence lawmakers.

This would be a good time to contact your Representatives and make sure they know how you expect them to vote on restoring the Second Amendment to the District of Columbia.  It’s a big help to NRA’s lobbyists if they are meeting with a representative who’s also gotten dozens of phone calls and e-mails about the issue, rather than heard nothing from constituents.

In perhaps an unintentional tribute to the title of this blog, I have to wonder about this bit from SayUncle:

If, say five year ago, you told me that there would be an actual discussion on the floor of passing concealed carry laws in Illinois, I would not have believed you.

And also this from Clayton Cramer:

See this video from CNN. They actually interview an expert pointing out that guns being used in Mexico aren’t assault weapons.

Lou Dobbs has been offering quite a lot of positive coverage about gun issues, and if you had told me five years ago CNN would be asking skeptical questions about a proposal for an assault weapons ban, and questioning whether it was constitutional, I also would not have believed you.

UPDATE: More from Lou Dobbs on the New Jersey One-Gun-a-Month bill here.

Those weak and defeated Lairds of Fairfax, who refuse to fight the good fight, and who are afraid of their own shadows, sure seem to have the leadership on Capitol Hill worried.

Democrats may be running the House, but the National Rifle Association (NRA) can still stop a bill in its tracks.

House Democratic leaders on Tuesday pulled legislation from the floor that seemingly had nothing to do with guns because the NRA disliked it.

The bill in question would give the District of Columbia a voting member of Congress. The gun-rights lobby prefers a Senate version, which includes language amending the District’s gun policies, and some suggest the NRA could make life difficult for conservative Democrats if that language is not included in the House version.

Pelosi was all set up to pass a clean bill, and NRA threatened to make accepting the Senate version in the house a “key vote” meaning that politicians will be graded on the vote.  That was enough to get her to pull the bill.

“The D.C. vote bill needs to pass,” said Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Calif.), a Blue Dog gun-rights supporter who sits on the House Rules Committee. “I would have concerns about any group who would tell us how to run our House.”

The NRA’s clout was evident last week when the amendment — removing D.C.’s ban on semiautomatic weapons, its registration requirement and trigger-lock rule — was adopted by the Senate, 62-36.

What Mr. Cardoza and his “blue dog” buddies need to understand is that it does no good if you just tell us you’re pro-Second Amendment, and answer your questionnaire well during election season.  At some point will come the time to vote.  Now is the time.  Look at blue dogs like Jason Altmire, who are actively out there fighting the leadership on this issue:

“They want to be like the rest of America. One of the things Americans do is pay attention to Supreme Court rulings,” said Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), a member of the House Second Amendment Task Force.

That’s what earns you those A grades.  The time to start dividing friend from foe is now.  Are you blue dog Dems friends of us?  Or friends of Pelosi and Hoyer?  Time to choose.