Key Senate Aide: Gun Control bill is ‘Just dead on arrival. Period. It doesn’t have the votes’

Photo Credit: Image by Brett Hondow from Pixabay

On March 11, the “Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021,” otherwise known as H.R. 8, a bill which would require a background check for every U.S. firearm sale, passed the House.

Afterward, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer told reporters, “Last time, [H.R. 8] went into Mitch McConnell’s legislative graveyard. The legislative graveyard is over. H.R. 8 will be on the floor of the Senate and we will see where everybody stands,” according to a report in Yahoo. He added, “No more thoughts and prayers – a vote is what we need.”

Schumer’s plan to take up this legislation in the Senate, however, was thwarted last week after three key senators spoke out against it. The three include: Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Jon Tester of Montana and Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine.

The Washington Free Beacon’s Stephen Gutowski spoke to several key senate aides who agreed that the restrictions in the bill were “dead on arrival” in the Senate.

Particularly objectionable was the “requirement that licensed gun dealers perform background checks nearly every time someone sells or even lends a gun to another person is a non-starter.”

An aide to Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania told Gutowski, “H.R. 8 is just dead on arrival. Period. It doesn’t have the votes. Not only does it not have the votes quietly, it doesn’t have the votes loudly because Manchin and Toomey are out there opposing it.”

He said that “Senator Toomey is not interested in playing political games or being an example in a background check exercise. He’s interested in achieving an actual outcome.”

According to these sources, there has been speculation that Democrats may “revive a bipartisan 2013 bill that would only apply background checks to private sales.” Toomey had been a co-sponsor of this bill and “played a leading role in selling the policy to voters and fellow senators” including “four Republicans.”

The bill did not receive the 60 votes required for passage. The Toomey aide added that “He’s interested in a consensus product, he’s not interested in political theater. He’s not interested in helping lead a project that’s just ultimately doomed to fail.”

Toomey, considered a swing vote, was one of seven Republican senators who voted to convict former President Donald Trump in his February impeachment trial.

Other staffers Gutowski spoke to were not convinced that the Senate could reach an agreement on the 2013 bill. If the filibuster remains in place, any gun control legislation would require 60 votes for passage.

On Thursday, Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, said that he and the Majority Leader will “spend the next several weeks working with both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate to try to craft the strongest background checks bill that can pass.”

In a Sunday interview with NBC News’ Chuck Todd, Murphy said, “”I am not interested in getting 50 votes in the Senate. I am interested in getting 60 votes.”

Schumer’s position is far less accommodating than Murphy’s. On Thursday, he told reporters, “We will try to work with our Republican colleagues on a bipartisan basis when and where we can. But if they choose to obstruct, rather than work with us to deliver for American families, we must make progress nonetheless. Failure is not an option.”

One GOP staffer told Gutowski that the passage of any gun control legislation really depends on Schumer’s willingness to compromise. “Does Schumer want to actually come to the table and talk about stricter enforcement on straw purchases? Does he want to talk about some of the gun restraining order proposals that had strong due process checks in them? Or does he just want to keep trying to run up against the filibuster and score political points?”

For the Uber-partisan Schumer, I’m afraid it’s only the latter.

The resistance of Sens. Manchin, Tester and Collins was a big win for Republicans. Although seven House Republicans voted for H.R. 8, it’s difficult to imagine there would be sufficient Republican support in the Senate to get to 60 votes.

The checks and balances have saved us for now. And while this is good news, especially in the short run, this isn’t the end. Democrats will never give up the fight to take away our gun rights.

God help us if the Democrats somehow manage to end the filibuster.

5 replies »

  1. I guess my background checks to own, purchase and carry lethal weapons has no bearing on Chuck? Oh, except to remove my Constitutional rights to further a globalist agenda…
    How in the hell do imported people buy guns legally in the first place? Me thinks the “background” checks so flawed by our bloated bureaucracy, that stupid people perhaps flooded with PC intent simply allow idiots to legally buy weapons.
    Bolster the f*”king checks already in place. Weed out potential terrorists. Oh, but that would be profiling. Yes, we law abides are profiled down to our underwear!
    Leave lifelong real Americans alone as we already prove worthy of self and national defense. Our entire lives back to birth, with fingerprints are digested into their data banks.
    But just let one international mole sleep for a few years here and voila’ instant power to kill en masse.
    More people are shot in Chicago in one week than all mass murders by easily profiled nut jobs. The FBI used to do a good job profiling and eliminating these mass murdering creeps. God help Chicago from their reign of terror.
    Whew! Off soapbox.
    God Bless America, because no one else will.

  2. EV,
    Guber Graham promises to shut down the Senate if things get too weird. That involves having all 50 Republican senators no where to be found. I like the potential of one or two fencepost democrats holding out.
    Can You imagine the force of evil that would rain down to change the 50/50 Senate from non-quorum should all opposition senators decide to vacate the hall?
    The pucker factor, let alone the bribes (ala Manchin’s wife’s new govt largest) not withstanding?

    • I hope they do that. I searched the internet for hours trying to find the answer to this question: If Democrats are not able to eliminate the filibuster, is there a way Biden and/or Harris could do it by executive order? I know that there have been “carve-outs” for specific legislation, but wouldn’t even a carve-out require a simple majority vote?

      I was not able to find the answer.

  3. Sure, Biteme can try to legislate anything he wants from the Oval Office. The SCOTUS has to step in (and has in the past: 2010, McDonald v Chicago upholding 2nd Amendment).
    More worryingly right now is media, tech, education, science and govts banning free speech, pressuring businesses to block conservatives.
    Your blog is very timely and aptly named.

Leave a Reply