John Rudolf2013-05-19T19:50:14-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/author/index.php?author=john-rudolfCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for John RudolfGood old fashioned elbow grease.Paul Ryan Backs Expanding Gun Background Checkstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25759462013-01-29T15:40:01-05:002013-03-31T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
But in an interview with the editorial board of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, released on Monday, Ryan broke ranks with the pro-gun group and came out in favor of closing the so-called "gun show loophole."
All guns sales by licensed firearms dealers require mandatory federal background checks, but the loophole exempts gun sales by private individuals. Exactly how many guns are sold without mandatory checks is unknown, but a 1997 study estimated that it could be between 35 and 40 percent. (NRA-backed laws forbid the collection of data that would answer the question definitively)
The NRA's chief lobbyist said on Tuesday that the group is opposed to expanding background checks to cover all gun buyers.
Yet in his interview with the Journal-Sentinel, Ryan called the idea "reasonable" and "obvious."
"I think we need to find out how to close these loopholes and do it in such a way that we don't infringe upon people's Second Amendment rights," Ryan said.
Ryan dismissed, however, federal legislation banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.
"I don't see the effectiveness of that," he said.]]>Wayne LaPierre, NRA Chief, Signals No Compromise On Guns Ahead Of Senate Hearingtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25751562013-01-29T13:38:16-05:002013-03-31T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
Don't expect any surprises. LaPierre will hold to the NRA's bedrock position of no compromise on gun control legislation, according to prepared remarks distributed by the NRA on Tuesday afternoon.
"As I said earlier, we need to be honest about what works and what does not work. Proposals that would only serve to burden the law-abiding have failed in the past and will fail in the future," LaPierre says in the remarks.
"And when it comes to the issue of background checks, let's be honest - background checks will never be "universal" - because criminals will never submit to them."
What LaPierre has to say -- and how he comports himself -- under potentially fierce questioning from Senate Democrats are another matter entirely. If his previous performances in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting are any guide, his tone will probably fall somewhere between strident and unhinged, depending on your perspective.
Also testifying tomorrow will be Mark Kelly, husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Gifford, who miraculously survived being shot point-blank in the head during a shooting rampage two years ago.]]>New Mexico Weighs New Gun Lawstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25747542013-01-29T12:00:07-05:002013-03-31T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
The legislation is up for debate before the state's judiciary committee today, the AP reports.]]>Americans Support Gun Control, Polls Saytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25738122013-01-29T10:01:42-05:002013-03-31T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/major new polls confirm that a majority of Americans support significant new gun regulations -- even if their lawmakers do not.
The most recent poll is out this morning from the Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health. Salon has the write-up:
According to the survey, released today, a majority of Americans support a wide array of policies being discussed in Congress: 89 percent support closing the so-called gun show loophole by requiring background checks for all firearms sale; 69 percent support banning the sale of semiautomatic assault weapons; while 68 percent support banning the sale of large-capacity ammunition magazines.
Meanwhile, more than 80 percent favor prohibiting "high-risk individuals" from having guns, including those convicted of a serious crime as a juvenile or those convicted of violating a domestic-violence restraining order.
A Gallup poll from last week found much the same thing.
This isn't exactly breaking news to those in the trenches of the gun control debate. In his interview in this week's The New Republic, President Obama acknowledged that while the public may broadly back new gun regulations, rampant gerrymandering has created a proliferation of "safe" Republican districts, where the moderate majority has little or no sway.
Here are Obama's direct quotes:
"The House Republican majority is made up mostly of members who are in sharply gerrymandered districts that are very safely Republican and may not feel compelled to pay attention to broad-based public opinion, because what they're really concerned about is the opinions of their specific Republican constituencies.
There are going to be a whole bunch of initiatives where I can get more than fifty percent support of the country, but I can't get enough votes out of the House of Representatives to actually get something passed."
]]>After Bitter Gun Control Hearing, Connecticut Lawmakers Take Up Mental Healthtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25735492013-01-29T09:49:26-05:002013-03-31T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/hearing on gun control yesterday -- the first since 20 children and six educators were gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School -- the Connecticut legislature today takes up the issue of mental health and violence.
The Hartford Courant has the story:
Today's hearing will feature more than 100 people who have signed up to testify about deficiencies in mental health services. Experts will tell the mental health subcommittee of the Bipartisan Task Force on Gun Violence and Children that reaching - and properly treating - troubled teenagers and children won't be easy.
"Identifying the need early and getting treatment early avoids intervention and more costly treatment later,'' said Maggie Adair, executive director of the Connecticut Early Childhood Alliance, in testimony submitted in advance to the Bipartisan Task Force on Gun Violence and Children's Safety.
]]>Gun-Rights Supporters Heckle Newtown Shooting Victim's Father At Hearingtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25700582013-01-28T19:20:28-05:002013-03-30T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
But several pro-gun enthusiasts in the audience could not restrain themselves from shouting over his remarks as he called for a ban on military-style assault weapons like the Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle that killed his son, according to Ken Dixon of the Hartford Courant.
A tearful Heslin asked lawmakers why assault weapons like the Bushmaster were being sold in the state, Dixon reports.
"The Second Amendment!" the gun enthusiasts shouted from behind.]]>Sandy Bill Passes Senate, Measure Heads To White House For Obama Signaturetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/thenewswire//2.25693122013-01-28T18:37:45-05:002013-03-30T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
The long-delayed bill, coming three months after Sandy battered the Northeast, now goes to President Barack Obama, who is expected to quickly sign it into law.
The final tally, 62-36, was light on Republican support, with more than three-quarters of GOP senators voting against the full package. The amendment to require spending cuts offset the disaster relief funding, which was proposed by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), was voted down along similar lines. GOP senators backed the Lee amendment by a wide majority, although several leading Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), joined Democrats to defeat it.
Northeast lawmakers blasted the amendment, noting that dozens of other disaster relief bills had passed in recent years without mandating cuts elsewhere in the federal budget.
"There's no reason why we should treat this disaster, this emergency, this horror, any differently than we have past disasters," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, accused conservative backers of the amendment of hypocrisy, noting that Republicans had voted for hundreds of billions of dollars in spending on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars without regard for its impact on the deficit.
"We had plenty of money to rebuild Iraq," Mikulski said. "Now we're nickel-and-diming whether to rebuild New York."
Supporters of the amendment disagreed, saying that massive federal deficits urgently required a new approach to disaster relief.
"We've got a trillion-dollar budget deficit," said Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). "We're just adding another $60 billion right on top of that."
Sandy ranks among the most destructive storms in U.S. history. New York and New Jersey, which took the worst hits, suffered more than $70 billion in damage, according to state estimates. The $51 billion package contains billions for a federal program providing cash grants to disaster victims and roughly $33 billion for long-term reconstruction of battered coastal areas.
The Senate passed a $60 billion aid package for Sandy victims back in mid-December, but House Republicans failed to bring that bill up for a vote before the end of the last session of Congress. That failure drew the wrath of Northeast Republicans like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who said House GOP leaders had allowed the aid bill to fall victim to "toxic" internal politics.
In January, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) brought a new $51 billion relief package to the floor, where it passed with combination of Democratic and Republican votes. But more than two-thirds of the House Republican caucus voted against the full Sandy package.
A previous bill providing $9 billion to replenish the federal government's flood insurance fund passed the House and Senate and was signed into law by Obama in early January. ]]>Feinstein Assault Weapons Ban Lacks Votes In Senatetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25681392013-01-28T13:57:44-05:002013-03-30T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/Feinstein's bill banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips will struggle to pass the Senate with a simple majority if brought to the floor for a vote, Bloomberg reported today. At least six Senate Democrats are either wobbly on the ban or are flat-out opposed. No Republican Senator has spoken in support of the ban.
If the rest of the Democrat's 55-vote majority hold together to support the ban, that's still one vote short of passage. But a simple majority is rarely enough to pass anything in Washington these days. The near-certain use of the filibuster on Feinstein's assault weapons bill raises the threshold of passage to 60 votes.]]>U.S. Gun Laws Are A Global Outliertag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25672782013-01-28T11:34:52-05:002013-03-30T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/31,000 people in the U.S. in 2010.
In Japan, a country with a population of 130 million, there were just seven gun-related homicides in all of 2011.
First, anyone who wants to get a gun must demonstrate a valid reason why they should be allowed to do so. Under longstanding Japanese policy, there is no good reason why any civilian should have a handgun, so - aside from a few dozen accomplished competitive shooters - they are completely banned.
Virtually all handgun-related crime is attributable to gangsters, who obtain them on the black market. But such crime is extremely rare and when it does occur, police crack down hard on whatever gang is involved, so even gangsters see it as a last-ditch option.
Rifle ownership is allowed for the general public, but tightly controlled.
The AP goes on to explain the strict gun laws in Switzerland and Brazil, which also have extremely low rates of gun-related violence.]]>Stephen King Pushes For Gun Controltag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25669652013-01-28T10:23:41-05:002013-03-30T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
King is himself a gun owner -- he has several handguns and rifles at his suburban Maine home -- but says he supports a ban on military-style semiautomatics and high-capacity ammunition clips and a major expansion of background checks for gun buyers.
King also has harsh words for pro-gun lobbyists like Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, who has vowed to fight any new gun control regulations tooth and nail. He writes:
"One only wishes Wayne LaPierre and his NRA board of directors could be drafted to some of these scenes, where they would be required to put on booties and rubber gloves and help clean up the blood, the brains, and the chunks of intestine still containing the poor wads of half-digested food that were some innocent bystander's last meal."
The essay is for sale, priced at 99 cents, as a "Kindle Single" on the Amazon website.]]>Gun Control Bills Flood Statehouses In Wake Of Sandy Hook Shootingtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2013-01-19T09:09:05-05:002013-01-19T09:27:11-05:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
While pro-gun lawmakers have filed dozens of measures to loosen gun regulations since the shooting, including bills allowing schoolteachers to carry concealed weapons in the classroom, these proposals are significantly outnumbered by bills pushing stronger gun laws, according to data that the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, an advocacy group that tracks federal and state gun laws, shared with The Huffington Post.
Indeed, the states are much more active around gun legislation than lawmakers in Congress, highlighting the role states can and will play in the gun control debate even if the divisive issue continues to stymie the federal government.
Perhaps most significantly, legislators are floating bills to strengthen gun regulations in swing states like Virginia and Colorado, where pro-gun advocates have long been perceived to have the upper hand.
"We're seeing it in places you might expect, and places you might not expect, and we're seeing it because Sandy Hook broke America's heart," John Feinblatt, chairman of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and a top advisor to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, said of the recent burst of state legislation.
A flurry of state action to bolster gun regulations will keep the issue in the public eye and increase pressure on Congress to act on the proposals put forward earlier this week by President Barack Obama as part of a sweeping plan to counteract gun violence, gun control advocates said.
"When states pass things easily in a bipartisan manner and D.C. doesn't do anything, it increases the narrative that Washington is broken, and it puts pressure on recalcitrant members to do something," said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence.
Out of more than 190 gun-related bills filed in statehouses between Jan. 1 and Jan. 15, 114 bills strengthen gun regulations, while 67 weaken them, according to the Law Center analysis. (The remainder are considered neutral.)
Between 2009 and 2012 -- a period which saw several high-profile mass shootings, including the shooting rampage in Tucson, Ariz. that killed six and seriously wounded former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords -- proposed state gun laws were much more evenly divided between those that strengthened and those that weakened regulations, said Laura Cutilletta, a senior staff attorney with the group.
"Usually by this time there are far fewer bills, and the bills are pretty evenly divided," Cutilletta said. "What I'm seeing this year is totally different -- it's overwhelmingly toward the side of regulation."
The first state to take action on gun regulation was New York, where Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) pushed through a major legislative package with the support of Senate Republican leaders earlier this week. The legislation, which bans assault weapons and high-capacity magazines and requires instant background checks for ammunition sales, makes New York's gun laws the toughest in the country.
But gun control advocates said that legislative movement on gun regulations in bellwether states like Virginia and Colorado will be the most compelling indication of the political shift created by the Sandy Hook shooting.
On Friday, the Virginia Senate's Republican-led judicial committee rejected bills banning assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines, but approved a measure to substantially strengthen background checks for gun buyers in the state. The bill, which passed the committee 8-6 with the support of the Republican Senate majority leader, requires all firearms sold at gun shows to be subject to a federal background check.
Sen. Henry Marsh, the bill's Democratic author, said he had unsuccessfully pushed the gun show proposal for nearly 20 years and it had never before made it out of committee. On Friday, however, two Republicans and one pro-gun Democrat voted in favor of the measure, giving the bill its first real chance of passage, he said.
"There's a significant chance it'll make it, but don't bet any money on it," Marsh said. "The bill has a road to travel. But you've got to be persistent in this business."
Republicans control the Virginia House, Senate and governorship.
Closing the so-called "gun show loophole" has long been a priority of gun control advocates on the state and federal level, and is one of the key legislative recommendations made by Obama in his gun violence plan earlier this week. An estimated 40 percent of all gun sales nationwide are exempt from background checks because they are made by private sellers, not federally licensed firearms dealers.
A similar measure to tighten background checks was proposed last week in Colorado by Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat who has previously shown little interest in promoting tougher gun legislation. Even after the Aurora shooting, where 12 people were killed and many more wounded after a disturbed man opened fire with an assault rifle in a crowded movie theater, Hickenlooper expressed skepticism that tougher gun laws would make a difference in reducing violence.
“Surely, Second Amendment advocates and gun control supporters can find common ground in support of this proposition: Let’s examine our laws and make the changes needed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people,” he said.
In Virginia, the background check bill was returned to the judicial committee for reconsideration on Friday, after several senators complained about its phrasing. But Marsh said the measure’s two Republican supporters made him hopeful it would quickly return to the full Senate for a vote. A spokesman for the Virginia Republican Caucus declined to comment on the bill.
Gun control advocates said it was much too early to declare success, but said they were surprised that even a single bill toughening gun regulations had made it through a Republican-led committee.
"I thought everything was going to get killed," Horwitz said. "Last year we played defense the whole time."]]>Obama Gun Control Proposals Face Rocky Road In Congresstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2013-01-16T18:23:34-05:002013-01-17T10:37:33-05:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/unveiled a series of far-reaching proposals to help stem future episodes in mass gun violence.
Now comes the tough part.
Selling his policies to Congress will be harder than coming up with them in the first place. Senior administration officials acknowledge as much. The president, in his Wednesday morning press statement, pledged to put "the weight this office holds" toward making the proposals a reality. That includes drumming up public support in districts that are home to more gun-friendly lawmakers.
But the legislative process can often be immune to such measures, especially in the Republican-run House of Representatives. And so, the administration and gun control advocates are devising ways to apply enough pressure to that body that its leadership eventually cracks.
"This isn't like the fiscal cliff where something has to get done," said Jim Kessler, senior vice president for policy at centrist think tank Third Way. "The House can make the choice of not bringing up anything. Essentially there needs to be pressure to bear to get them to act. And on top of that, you will likely have to bring up something that probably won't get the majority of House Republicans. So it will be tough."
The goal, at least initially, is to see the Democratic-run Senate act first, passing as comprehensive a proposal as possible. A senior administration official told reporters on Wednesday that the president's recommendations -- which include universal background checks, funding for cops, resources for mental health screenings and school security, a cap on high-capacity magazines and an assault weapons ban -- were merely suggestions for such a legislative package, and the White House would work with Congress on specific language.
Any gun-related bill in the Senate will have to pass the Senate Judiciary Committee. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who chairs the committee, announced Wednesday that he'll hold his first gun violence hearing on Jan. 30. Until then, he said, he won't speculate on what proposals can or can't pass Congress.
"Everybody's talking about ‘We'll do this, we'll do that.’ Nobody's held hearings," Leahy said during remarks at Georgetown University Law Center. "I'm going to hold the first hearings; that should be an example that I'm committed to getting something done."
The big question facing the Senate is whether or not it can pass an assault weapons ban. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) suggested last week that such a ban could not pass and is therefore not worth pursuing. But in a statement after the president’s remarks, Reid, who has sought the National Rifle Association's support in the past, appeared to leave the door open.
“I am committed to ensuring that the Senate will consider legislation that addresses gun violence and other aspects of violence in our society early this year,” Reid said. “All options should be on the table moving forward."
On cue, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Wednesday that she will be moving forward with legislation to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. Leahy, likewise, said it was worth pursuing the ban and pushed back on a Washington Post article that characterized him as too cautious on the issue.
"I would point out that I have a track record of getting legislation passed. There are some who say nothing will pass. I disagree with that," Leahy said. "What I'm interested in is what we can get."
For all the challenges ahead for Obama, there were some signs of encouragement. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said last week that he could be open to restricting high-capacity gun magazines, and Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) signaled that he, too, could support such restrictions, in addition to stronger background checks.
On Wednesday, shortly after Obama laid out his proposals, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) told NBC that he will “probably support a lot” of Obama’s executive actions relating to gun violence, and that he sees “some merit” to the idea of restricting high-capacity magazines. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) didn't exactly endorse Obama's vision, but issued a statement saying any effort to stem the kind of violence that occurred in Newtown, Conn. is “a noble cause” that Congress should be a part of, as long as lawmakers abide by the Constitution.
Even some interest groups that would seem bent on opposing Obama's proposals showed some signs of willingness to enter conversations.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation, which lobbies for the gun industry, issued a statement saying it was keeping an "open mind" and lending support to strengthened background checks. "We believe it is critical to first focus on the unauthorized access to firearms by irresponsible persons and those not legally qualified to possess them," it reads.
In contrast, the NRA, which donates millions of dollars in campaign contributions to members of Congress and has tremendous sway on Capitol Hill, responded to Obama’s speech by vowing to oppose any efforts to tighten the nation's gun control laws.
"Attacking firearms and ignoring children is not a solution to the crisis we face as a nation," reads the NRA statement. "Only honest, law-abiding gun owners will be affected and our children will remain vulnerable to the inevitability of more tragedy."
For now, all eyes are on what the Senate can do. Even if it were to pass something comprehensive to put pressure on the House to act, passing a bill in that chamber will prove exceedingly difficult. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) initially tried to steer clear of the issue; his spokesman Michael Steel on Wednesday said only that House committees will review Obama’s proposals and, “if the Senate passes a bill, we will also take a look at that.”
Regardless, any legislation that makes it to the House would need to clear the House Judiciary Committee, whose chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) is a staunch gun rights supporter with an ‘A’ rating from the NRA. In the immediate aftermath of the Newtown shooting, Goodlatte vowed to oppose any bills that tighten gun control. On Wednesday, he said he welcomed Obama's recommendations but warned of proposals that “trample on the rights of law-abiding citizens.”
“Good intentions do not necessarily make good laws,” Goodlatte said.
One option being floated by some gun control advocates is to break up Obama's proposal into individual pieces and have Congress move each one separately. But the initial reaction to that idea among some Democrats on the Hill was generally skeptical.
"I think if you did that, then you would never pass the, quote, hard stuff," said Rep. Diana Degette (D-Colo.). "I think that some of the Republican leadership in Congress and the NRA would like nothing more than for Congress to pass some laws on mental health issues and some other issues, law enforcement training, and then they would say, 'Okay, problem solved.' So I think it really needs to be a package. It has to be a package."]]>Obama Gun Control Proposals Unveiled, Marking Biggest Legislative Effort In A Generationtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2013-01-16T11:54:37-05:002013-01-17T10:59:55-05:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
"This is our first task as a society: keeping our children safe. This is how we will be judged," Obama said. “We can’t put this off any longer."
The proposal, which comes at the end of a month-long review process spearheaded by Vice President Joe Biden, is broken down into four key subsections: law enforcement, the availability of dangerous firearms and ammunition, school safety and mental health.
In an effort to touch on all four of those elements, the president recommended requiring criminal background checks for all gun sales; reinstating the assault weapons ban; restoring a 10-round limit on ammunition magazines; eliminating armor-piercing bullets; providing mental health services in schools; allocating funds to hire more police officers; and instituting a federal gun trafficking statute, among other policies. The cost of the package, senior officials estimated, would be roughly $500 million, some of which could come from already budgeted funds.
Because these recommendations require congressional approval, the administration is supplementing its proposal with 23 executive actions that will be taken immediately. Those actions include requiring federal agencies to hand over relevant data for a background check system; providing law enforcement officials, first responders and school officials with better training for active shooting situations; directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence; and many more.
"I intend to use whatever weight this office holds to make them a reality," said the president, speaking about his full set of recommendations. "If there's even one life that can be saved, then we've got an obligation to try."
The approach is so sweeping that what would have otherwise been a headline-grabbing announcement received second billing. The president on Wednesday will nominate Byron Todd Jones, the acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, to take over the post permanently.
In total, the proposal goes beyond what most gun control advocates were hoping for at the start of Biden's review process, during which he held 22 different meetings with 229 different organizations and 31 elected officials.
"This is a monumental moment. It's a long time coming and we're thrilled the president's putting the full weight of his office behind this," said Josh Horowitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. "We're ready to push this thing through."
But putting together ideas is the easy part. Selling them on the Hill will take a bit of legislative craft.
Seasoned political observers have questioned whether it makes more sense to break the package into separate bills or push for one comprehensive proposal. A senior administration official said that the president's proposal shouldn't be considered finalized legislative language, but rather a series of recommendations for Congress to consider. The president would be working with lawmakers to move the process forward, the official added, and would be trying to build up public opinion as well.
"I will put everything I've got into this and so will Joe [Biden]. But I tell you, the only way we can change is if the American people demand it," said Obama. "We are going to need voices in those areas and congressional districts where the tradition of gun ownership is strong."
"It can't just be the usual suspects," he continued. "This will not happen unless the American people demand it."
The gun-rights lobby has already signaled that it will try to block the administration's effort. A spokesman for the National Rifle Association did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the president's proposal. But the organization has already harshly criticized the Obama administration for overreach.
"It is unfortunate that this administration continues to insist on pushing failed solutions to our nation's most pressing problems," the NRA said after meeting with Biden last week. "We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be blamed for the acts of criminals and madmen."
The group continued its offensive this week, launching an advertising campaign attacking Obama as an "elitist hypocrite" for opposing the NRA's widely-criticized proposal, made after the Newtown, Conn. shooting, to place armed guards in all of the nation's schools.
But that attack appeared a bit premature. As part of its policy recommendations, the White House called on Congress to act on an old administration proposal to spend $4 billion to keep 15,000 cops on the streets. In addition, the president is proposing a new initiative that would incentivize police departments to hire more school resource officers and encourage schools to hire more mental health professionals. The president's plan also calls on Congress to allocate resources to help schools, other educational institutions and houses of worship develop emergency management plans.
The White House proposals, even officials there admit, are not a cure-all for mass shootings. Among the suggested recommendations on the gun-policy front, only the ban on high-capacity magazines could have had a tangible impact on the shooting in Newtown, and it's unclear what, exactly, the effect would have been.
Moreover, the administration is pointedly not going after those weapons and ammunition magazines that are currently and lawfully owned. The proposal would instead affect the future production and sale of military-style weapons or high-capacity magazines.
"We are not going to go after existing stock of weapons or magazines," said a senior administration official. "We are going to limit it to the manufacturing of assault weapons and clips going forward."
The White House nevertheless insists that its package of proposals has teeth. It would provide law enforcement with the mechanisms needed to go after the illegal transfer of weapons and help prevent those weapons from falling into the wrong hands. It would also stem the use of military-style weapons -- the White House says its proposal would improve on the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, which was riddled with loopholes -- and give schools and communities resources to address violence when it occurs.
The question, in some respects, is not what's missing from the set of ideas, but what took the administration so long to get to this point.
"It is not as though we had this whole policy paper sitting on the shelf somewhere," said a senior administration official. "[We worked] 24/7 for the past month. And we met with a lot of groups and we learned a lot of ideas that came as a result of this process. We tried to be as comprehensive as possible. We are hoping that as the process goes on and as the debate goes on, we might come up with some other ideas." ]]>Daily News: NRA "Spits On The Graves" of Sandy Hook Victims With iPhone Shooting Apptag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.24827722013-01-15T18:27:21-05:002013-03-17T05:12:01-04:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
In its inside headline, the Daily News declared that the NRA "spits on the graves of Newtown massacre victims" with the game. Ouch. No response yet from the NRA.
]]>Sandy Relief Passes House Despite Conservative Oppositiontag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//2013-01-15T16:44:35-05:002013-01-16T19:17:14-05:00John Rudolfhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rudolf/
An amendment to the relief package introduced by Tea Party-allied conservatives requiring across-the-board cuts to defense and domestic programs to pay for $17 billion of storm aid was supported by a majority of Republicans, but was defeated 258-162 with a combination of GOP and Democratic votes.
The full $51 billion relief bill passed the House 241-180, with 179 Republicans opposed.
The relief measure provides billions of dollars to repair flood-damaged transit systems in New York and New Jersey, and $5.4 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Disaster Relief Fund, which provides cash grants directly to storm victims. Tens of billions of dollars are also allocated for long-term flood control and recovery projects.
"There's clearly a federal responsibility to act," said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.). "We have a national interest in getting this region on its feet as quickly as possible."
The Democrat-controlled Senate passed a $60 billion comprehensive storm relief package in December, but Republican leaders in the House did not take up the Senate bill, choosing instead to move on storm relief in a series of incremental measures.
A bill providing $9.7 billion to replenish the federal government's flood insurance fund passed the House and Senate, and was signed into law by President Barack Obama earlier this month, just days before the insurance fund was set to run out of money. That bill was strongly supported by House Speaker John Boehner, but opposed by 67 Republicans, including Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the party's 2012 vice presidential nominee.
A measure authorizing an additional $33 billion in storm relief and recovery funding, in the form of an amendment to the initial $17 billion aid measure, passed the House late Tuesday afternoon.
While the storm relief bill was approved on Tuesday with the support of GOP and Democratic leaders, it again split the Republican caucus, as fiscal conservatives took to the House floor to decry the relief bill as loaded with extraneous funding.
"A tragedy like Hurricane Sandy shouldn't be used for a grab-bag of spending," said Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.).
Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), a member of the House Tea Party Caucus, introduced the failed amendment requiring all spending on the initial $17 billion in relief funds to be offset by a 1.6 percent across-the-board cut to federal discretionary expenditures in 2013. The amendment was backed by other Tea Party-allied conservatives and cleared for a floor vote by the House Rules Committee on Monday night.
"We don't have enough money to take care of our own people. That's wrong," Mulvaney said. "Our government is facing a fiscal crisis."
The amendment was decried by Northeast lawmakers as a "poison pill" and "political ransom" that would imperil the measure's chance for passage by the Senate.
"Finding offsets is no easy task and it makes no sense to put that on the back of emergency aid," said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.). "I urge my colleagues to reject this madness."
Mulvaney rejected the notion that the amendment was designed to sabotage the Sandy aid bill, however.
"This amendment is not about delay," he said. "I want these folks who need this money to get it."
Other Republicans spoke out against Mulvaney's amendment, saying the proposed cuts would hurt defense and veterans' programs. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said the proposal would result in "devastating slash-and-burn cuts."
"This amendment is an across-the-board cut that holds no program safe from harm," Rogers said.
No previous disaster relief bill has required offsetting spending cuts, and Cole called it "hypocritical" for lawmakers whose districts have benefited from federal aid after previous disasters to require sweeping spending cuts in order to authorize the storm aid.
"We have never done that in the past in a disaster, and we certainly shouldn't do so now," Cole said.
More than two-thirds of Republicans backed the amendment, but it was defeated with a combination of GOP and Democratic votes.
This article has been updated to reflect the final House vote on the relief measure.
CLARIFICATION: 5:50 p.m. -- An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that a $17 billion Sandy relief measure had passed the House on Tuesday afternoon. That vote in favor of the relief measure was a preliminary vote, not a final vote, which occurred later in the evening.]]>
]]>