March 31, 2007
A WHIFF OF GUNPOWDER: Roll Call has an article on gun lobbying. It’s subscription only, but here’s a key bit:
Any lingering doubt about the gun lobbyâ€™s continued juice under Democratic rule was laid to rest Thursday. House Republicans, maneuvering to derail a bill to grant Congressional voting rights to the District of Columbia, inserted a provision in their alternative measure that would dramatically scale back the cityâ€™s gun restrictions.
But nervous that conservative members of their Caucus who favor gun rights could switch sides and hand the Republicans a victory, House Democratic leaders pulled the bill from consideration â€” and Republicans gloated. â€œFearing 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,â€ House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement.
Though the NRA has pushed in the past to roll back the districtâ€™s gun restrictions, Cox said his group had no hand in the effort on the voting rights bill. Nevertheless, he said its fate testifies to the potency of the issue. â€œWhat youâ€™ve seen is the political reality that the Second Amendment is a major political force, not only on Election Day, but throughout the legislative process,â€ he said.
It certainly seems that way. I wonder how Jim Webb would have voted? Would he vote differently today than last week?
UPDATE: Michael Geisler, who doesn’t understand the conditional, writes: “Have you figured out yet that Senators can’t vote on House measures you dumbass, you?”
Would have. Not did. Got it?
ANOTHER UPDATE: XRLQ emails: “Has Michael Geisler figured out yet that Senators *can* vote on bills that originate in the House, and in fact must do so before said bills can reach the Presidentâ€™s desk for signature, he dumbass, he?”
Apparently not. Par for the course from my critics, alas.