Revival of Manchin-Schumer-Toomey May Come Up in U.S. Senate

The NSSF issued the below alert earlier today:

Call Your Senators Now. Tell Them to Vote NO
on These Amendments 

NSSF has learned that anti-gun U.S. Senators are expected to bring up a vote at ANY MINUTE this afternoon on the previously defeated Manchin-Toomey "universal background check" amendment as well as an amendment expanding the prohibited persons list to anyone unknowingly placed on a secret, error-prone government list, the so called "terrorist watch list."

Call your senators at 202-224-3121 as soon as you can and urge them to vote NO on both amendments.

Update: Politico reports that the "terrorist watch list" amendment has been defeated.

Washington Post: Manchin, Toomey Interested in Reviving Gun Control Push

The Washington Post reports that West Virginia U.S. Senator Joe Manchin and Pennsylvania U.S. Senator Pat Toomey in separate interviews during a reception before a ceremony hosted by Sandy Hook families where Toomey was honored, expressed interest in reviving their effort to criminalize private firearm sales.

“We want to make sure we have the votes. Pat’s going to have to, and I’ll work with him, to get some of our colleagues on the Republican side,” Manchin said, adding that he hasn’t talked directly to Toomey about a revival.

Until last night, Toomey has been quiet on the subject since the bill went down in flames in April of 2013 but he offered no apologies for turning his back on law abiding gun owners when he accepted his award:

Accepting his award on Tuesday night, a visibly emotional Toomey said that despite some of the political fallout from his conservative base, he’d “do it again in a heartbeat.” He said he does have two regrets, however. One, that the 2013 bill didn’t pass. And, “that it took me so long before I raised my voice on this very important issue,” he said.

Talk of reviving the so-called "universal background check" bill began after last week's church shooting in Charleston.  President Obama during a much talked about podcast with Marc Maron however seemed to hold out little hope that will occur, and even suggested it is the one area he will not be able to address with his so-called "executive actions" and rule making.  From the Business Insider coverage of the podcast interview:

"Unfortunately, the grip of the NRA on Congress is extremely strong,” he said. “I don’t foresee any legislative action being taken in this Congress, and I don’t foresee any real action being taken until the American public feels a sufficient sense of urgency and they say to themselves, ‘This is not normal. This is something that we can change and we’re going to change it.’”

Obama showed his frustration with Congress, but said that in many policy areas, he has been able to effect change through rulemakings and other executive actions -- even when Republicans in Congress have refused to work with him. Gun control, he said, has been the exception.

Obama even suggested in that podcast interview that mass shootings have been a financial boom for firearm manufactures:

While the president did not attack gun manufacturers directly, he did point out the irony that they tend to do very well financially in the wake of mass shootings.

“Right after Newtown, gun sales shot up, ammunition shot up, and each time these events occur; ironically, gun manufacturers make out like bandits, partly because of this fear that’s churned up that the federal government and the black helicopters are coming to get your guns.”

Maybe the President should point the finger at himself when he talks about churning up fear since he was the one who proposed banning the one of nation's best selling firearm.

Is Mark Warner Wishing the Old Filibuster Rules Were Still in Effect?

Last Thursday, Jim Geraghty was doing his weekly appearance on NRANews' Cam and Company. During the discussion on the demise of President Obama's nomination for Surgeon General, Geraghty raised the question of whether endangered Democrats wished that Harry Reid had never imposed the "Nuclear Option" for Obama appointees.

It made me wonder if Mark Warner is one of those who might be second guessing that vote to do away with the 60 vote threshold for moving certain items through the Senate.  Warner has spent a lot of time since 2000 remaking himself from the anti-gun left of center liberal chairman of the Democratic Party of Virginia to the "radical centrist" Democrat that supports the Second Amendment, balanced budgets, and bipartisanship. As Governor, he never vetoed a pro-gun bill and in 2004 signed 17 really good pieces of pro-gun legislation.  That earned him an NRA "A" rating in 2008 (but no endorsement as his opponent was also a former governor with an "A" rating that also happened to be an NRA Board member).  Warner probably was just looking for the "A" rating anyway.

Even though Warner has tried to portray himself as bipartisan, he has voted with President Obama and Harry Reid 97% of the time over the last five years.  Most recently, thanks to losing the cover of the filibuster, Warner voted to confirm Debo Adegbile, President Obama's pick to head the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Justice Department and an advocate for cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal.  This wasn't a case of a defendant needing an attorney to defend him at his original trial.  Adegbile took up the cause of this dirt bag decades after his original conviction for the execution style killing of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner.  Reid miscalculated and was abandoned by the Democrats who are considered endangered this year.  Warner apparently feels confident enough about reelection that even having to vote for the advocate of a cop killer did not cause him to break with Reid and the President.  We likely won't know how he would have voted on the gun ban advocate Surgeon General nominee as Reid did a better job of counting votes than he did with the Adegbile nomination and has pulled it from consideration.

We do know that last year Warner voted for the Manchin/Schumer/Toomey amendment that would have criminalized private transfers of firearms, created a national gun registry and had other negative impacts on gun owners, and he voted to confirm both Sonia Sotomayor and Elana Kagan to the Supreme Court. Sotomayor voted against our rights in the McDonald case. Kagan has not had the opportunity to vote on a Second Amendment case since joining the court but is not considered friendly to our rights based on her time in the Obama administration.

As Governor, Warner had to work with a Republican House and Senate.  He was able to carefully cultivate the bipartisan appearance under such circumstances.  Since joining the Senate, he has voted in a more partisan manner.  It remains to be seen if his yet to be determined GOP opponent will be able to capitalize on this more partisan record and give Warner a run for his money.

Manchin's Messaging on Background Checks

With the U.S. Congress in recess, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin has been using a likely focus group tested soundbite to explain his support for Chuck Schumer's attempt to require background checks on private firearm transfers.  In both Roll Call and National Journal, there are stories about how he responds with a rhetorical question that the uninformed can simply shake their head in agreement.  In Roll Call:

And he reiterated a line on guns he used repeatedly at the state fair and likely has been well-honed in his time at home since the spring: “Don’t you want to know if a person is a criminal or a crazy person or a terrorist?” Many in the group nod.

And in National Journal:

Manchin said to the crowd. "Do you think it's unreasonable if you went to a gun show or online that there'd be a background check? That's all we're talking about."

Manchin should know that was not all Manchin/Schumer/Toomey would do.  He even repeated the false statement to the crowd in that meeting covered by National Journal that the amendment would have expanded gun rights.  According to Dave Kopel, the amendment was a "bonanza of gun control."  

Unlike Pat Toomey, who has moved on, Manchin continues to push the gun control proposal.  Will he pay a price in his home state?  Comments like this:

"Hey, I'm Joe, you know me."

...leads one to the conclusion that he thinks in the end, he can talk his way out of his votes when it's time for reelection. Time will tell.  He is not up for reelection until 2018.  That's a long time for voters to remember.