Gun Deal Is Less Than Democrats Wanted, but More
Than They Expected
Though the compromise does not go as far as many would
have preferred, it is still seen as a serious step that could save lives.
Carl Hulse
By Carl
Hulse
Published
June 12, 2022
Updated
June 13, 2022, 12:06 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON
— The bipartisan gun safety deal announced Sunday is far from what Democrats
would have preferred in the aftermath of the racist gun massacre in Buffalo and
the mass shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, but it is
considerably more than they hoped for initially.
The
proposal, which still has a long way to go before becoming law, focuses less on
the “gun” part of gun control and more on other factors, such as a buyer’s
mental health or violent tendencies, in a concession to Republican hesitation
and the hard political reality that tough limits on sales, let alone outright
bans on firearms, are far out of reach.
Though it
would not raise the age to buy assault rifles from 18 to 21, the plan would
enhance background checks on those under 21 before they could take possession
of a gun — perhaps the most significant element of the emerging measure.
Republicans say enough sentiment exists for a direct age increase, but perhaps
not enough to forestall a filibuster.
Democrats
would much rather ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, impose
universal background checks and take other stringent steps to limit access to
guns. But they will accept the agreement as a step in the right direction.
“We cannot
let the congressional perfect be the enemy of the good,” said Senator Richard
J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, who said he would have
preferred to bar military assault weapons. “Though this agreement falls short
in this and other respects, it can and will make our nation safer.”
In
interviews over the past two weeks, multiple Senate Democrats made it clear
they were ready to embrace almost anything the bipartisan talks could produce,
rather than engage in another fruitless standoff on the Senate floor and ending
up with nothing.
That
outcome might have allowed them to make a potent political point, pummeling
Republicans for standing in the way of popular gun control initiatives, but it
would not have answered the public outcry for action. Stymied on multiple
legislative fronts, Democrats are also eager to claim a win for a change.
“While more
is needed, this package will take steps to save lives,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi
said Sunday in a statement, indicating she will back it even though the House
last week passed much more sweeping measures.
As the
talks got underway two weeks ago, it appeared more likely that the effort would
collapse, as so many had before it, once the initial outrage of the most recent
mass shootings had died down. And the designation of Senator John Cornyn of
Texas as the lead Republican negotiator limited the possibilities from the
start, since Mr. Cornyn quickly declared that he would not be backing an
assault weapons ban or other steps to make weapons harder to obtain.
But as the
talks continued, Senator Christopher S. Murphy of Connecticut, the lead
Democratic negotiator, said steady progress was being made, and that the talks
had a different feel from the failed efforts of the past. On Sunday, he said on
Twitter that he thought Americans would be “surprised” at the scope of the
legislative framework, which included more substantial measures than the ones
initially on the table.
The more
extensive background check for buyers aged 18 to 21 is a narrower version of a
change Democrats have been promoting for years, which would allow more time to
vet potential gun buyers who are flagged by an initial instant check. And for
the first time, juvenile and mental health records will be allowed as part of
that review.
The deal includes
federal incentives for states to enact so-called red flag laws to seize guns
temporarily from those deemed a threat to themselves and others. And in a
long-sought change that has been opposed by Republicans in the past, it would
also make it harder for those accused of domestic violence to obtain guns,
adding dating partners to a prohibition that currently applies only to spouses.
Any one of
those provisions is likely to draw significant opposition from Republicans who
believe in giving no ground whatsoever on gun safety measures, which are seen
as intolerable infringements on Second Amendment rights. But the Republicans
engaged in the talks believe they have made worthwhile concessions without
treading on the gun rights so many Republican voters see as sacrosanct.
Even this
proposal could be achieved only because the potential political backlash for
the Republicans directly involved is limited. Four of the 10 Republicans who
are backing the proposal — Senators Roy Blunt of Missouri, Rob Portman of Ohio,
Richard M. Burr of North Carolina and Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania — are
retiring, and may never face voters again. None of the other six Republicans
who signed on to the compromise is on the ballot in November.
But the
fact that Republicans engaged to the level that they did showed that they were
hearing from voters at home about the epidemic of mass shootings after the
horrific episode in Uvalde, Texas, to a greater extent than they have in the
past.
“They are
all asking that Congress act,” said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine
and one of the lawmakers behind the compromise, after her Memorial Day travels
around her state. “They are not sure what should be done, but there are things
that Congress can do that will make a difference. There is more of a sense of
urgency that something has to be made into law.”
Some
Democrats said they were worried that they were handing Republicans a
face-saving win that would allow G.O.P. lawmakers to claim they were acting on
guns despite an unwillingness to take more significant steps, including gun
control measures that polls have shown are backed by large majorities of
Americans. But they said they were willing to set those reservations aside in
the interest of getting an agreement with both substantive and political wins
for each side.
The
agreement still has to be turned into legislation, and failure to agree on the
terminology and the exact reach of some of the provisions could prove difficult
and still imperil the deal. Gun rights groups and legislative opponents are
also certain to raise the alarm and attempt to build opposition to it.
“I will
vote against the Biden-Schumer gun confiscation legislation, which includes red
flag gun confiscation that violates the Second Amendment rights of my constituents,”
Representative Mary Miller, Republican of Illinois, declared in on Twitter on
Sunday, soon after the framework was disclosed.
Representative
Lauren Boebert, the right-wing Republican from Colorado who has made gun rights
her calling card, circulated the names of the 10 G.O.P. senators backing the
deal on Twitter, calling it a “list of Senate RINOS,” using the acronym for
“Republican in name only.”
Though gun
safety proponents on Sunday said they hoped the proposal was the beginning of a
new era of compromise, this is considered likely to be the best opportunity on
gun safety for some time.
Given
rising public alarm over the mass shootings and crime in general, both parties
were ready to act and give some ground. Enough Republicans were also in a
position to take the political leap required, and negotiators in both parties
had the backing of their leadership to try to make something happen. But with
Republicans poised to win the House and threatening to take the Senate in
November, the outlook for more expansive changes sought by Democrats in the
months ahead is not bright.
Still, both
sides saw what they could agree on as worthwhile, and as evidence that
Congress, in light of unspeakable gun violence, could for once offer more than
thoughts and prayers.
“When we
put our partisan differences aside and focus on what’s best for the American
people, the Senate is capable of making a substantial, positive impact in our
society,” said Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware. “This is a step
forward for the Senate, and if this proposal becomes law, will be a much bigger
step forward for gun violence prevention and our nation.”
Carl Hulse
is chief Washington correspondent and a veteran of more than three decades of
reporting in the capital. @hillhulse
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário