Substitute while the actions of the article are loading
The Senate vote Tuesday to promote a close bipartisan agreement to tighten federal gun laws was, on the one hand, a political miracle, with 14 Republicans joining Democrats to oppose the National Arms Association and vocal conservative critics – in in elections, no less.
Viewed differently, however, the strong Republican opposition to a bill that proposes only relatively gradual changes to existing gun laws after an escalating series of mass shootings demonstrates the resilience of strong gun rights views and puts the spotlight on the dwindling corps within the Republican Party. The Senate, which is ready to make even modest deals with the Democrats.
Tuesday’s 64-44 test vote, which put the Two-Party Safer Communities Act on the road for adoption later this week, offered a roadmap on how governance can still happen on sensitive issues in a divided era – very carefully , with the right players and in the right circumstances.
No player was more important than Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Who brought in a trusted deputy to Sen’s leadership. John Cornin (R-Tex.) After the May 24 massacre at a primary school in Uwalde, Texas, made it clear that the time had come – unlike in the past – for Republicans to make a deal on gun violence.
“This time is different,” McConnell said Wednesday in a speech that officially supports the deal Cornin agreed upon. “This time, the Democrats have come our way and agreed to offer some sensible solutions without revoking the rights of law-abiding citizens. The result is a product that I am proud to support. ”
However, McConnell found himself in the minority at a split Republican conference, a position he usually tries to avoid.
Only 13 other Republicans backed the deal in Tuesday’s test vote, including three who are due to retire next year and six others who, like McConnell, are not running for re-election until 2026. Another Republican who supports the deal does not vote in Tuesday, Senator Patrick J. Tumi (R-Pa.) Also withdrew.
Among the 34 Republicans who did not vote Tuesday were several members of McConnell’s leadership team – including Senator John Thun (SD), GOP leader II, and Senator John Baraso (Wyatt), number 3 – and a number of senators who openly flirting with presidential candidates.
Some of those Republicans were among the most outspoken on Wednesday, publicly opposing the deal, warning of a looming conservative reaction that could wash supporters of the deal out of power. One of them, Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Summed up his voters’ reaction to the bill as “rage.”
“People are absolutely furious that this bill does nothing to deal with the wave of national crime. “It is not doing anything meaningful to deal with escalating attacks on police and civilians,” he said. “I mean, in Missouri, we have a record number of homicides, car thefts, violent crimes, and that’s everywhere. And this bill does nothing about it. “
After Cornin made a final speech to his colleagues at a Republican Senate luncheon on Wednesday – focusing on mental health and law enforcement funding in the bill, as well as tougher gun control regulations that have been omitted – Baraso and Senator Ted Cruz ( R -Tex.) Proposed a vote on a different bill that completely abolishes arms measures instead of focusing solely on mental health and school security regulations.
A wider group of Conservatives in the Senate also expressed public concern, including Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), Who told reporters that his office phones were “lit” by callers who were “disappointed that we had 14 Republicans who voted for… that we had a Republican base that put that on top. “
Asked about McConnell’s role, he said: “There are a lot of frustrated people … everywhere.”
In the House of Representatives, meanwhile, senior leaders quickly distanced themselves from Senate bargaining deals – with House Leader Minority Kevin McCarthy (R-California) and minority whip Steve Scaleys (R-La.), Who told their members only hours after a vote in the Senate on Tuesday that they would oppose.
A note sent Wednesday by the Scalise office to Republican lawmakers said the bill was “an effort to slowly remove the rights of law enforcers from the Second Amendment” and that it “contains insufficient guardrails to ensure that the money actually goes to keep weapons in the hands of criminals or prevent mass violence. “
“I’m 100 percent against it – 100 percent,” said Jim Jordan, Ohio, a prominent Conservative leader in the House. “It’s the wrong thing to do, and I hope it doesn’t happen.”
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, McConnell said it was “not at all unusual” for his party members to have opposing views. “We see this often,” he said.
In fact, McConnell has blessed several bipartisan deals with Democrats since the Republican Party entered the Senate minority last year, including a $ 1.2 trillion infrastructure deal, a major industrial policy bill aimed at boosting US competitiveness with China, a postal reform measure and other. In any case, McConnell and his allies said, the desire to show cooperation and progress on issues of public interest outweighs the political risks of giving victory to Democrats.
However, gun violence was a particularly powerful test, and the tragedy with Uwalde came at a particularly sensitive time, amid the midterm primary, where several Republican senators have faced or are about to face primary elections against more conservative contenders.
However, McConnell’s allies said there was political logic in the decision to make a modest deal with the Democrats and to demonstrate to the public that the Republican Party is not an unshakable obstacle to action to tackle the drumbeat of mass shootings.
“I think the country wants us to find common ground on unstable people using guns, to try to get better information in the system to stop some of these shootings,” said Senator Lindsay O. Graham (RS.C. .). “When you work with 80 percent support for these ideas, it’s a national consensus. And, you know, 20 percent – I respect their views, but when the public says, “Can’t you do something?” The answer is yes. “
Senator Tom Tillis (RN.C.), who is negotiating the bill with Cornin, called the bill a “balanced policy” and said it effectively curtailed future arms control efforts – just as Republican support for the infrastructure bill likely prevented a much larger party democratic bill.
“If you look at what we haven’t done – no mandatory waiting periods, no ban on any weapons that can be legally purchased today… I think it’s reasonable and I think the majority of the American people agree with that,” he said. said.
Still, the political reality of Tuesday’s vote was clear, with the deal backed mainly by Republican senators, who are most isolated from the aftermath of the election. Even the two Republican senators who will be re-elected this year, who voted to reach an agreement Tuesday, reflect this fundamental dynamic: Senator Lisa Markowski (R-Alaska) is counting on independent and democratic voters to survive their re-election efforts. a more conservative Republican candidate, and Senator Todd S. Young (R-Ind.) withdrew without resistance from the May 3 primary.
Young said Wednesday that a vote in favor of the final bill was not guaranteed, saying he was still “learning the actual language”. But he praised the funding for mental health and school security in the bill and called the weapons regulations “quite reasonable.” If a conservative reaction to the bill is expected, he said, it is not reflected in the feedback from his constituents.
“The calls are about 10 to 1 in my office – 10 in favor of reasonable bans” to allow dangerous people access to firearms, he said. “For me, it’s just listening to my constituents and being responsive, and sometimes the government actually has to do that – to be responsive.
However, constitutional pressure went in the opposite direction for Senator Cynthia M. Loomis (R-Wyo.), Who expressed some openness to narrow arms regulations this month. On Wednesday, she said, Wyoming voters who contacted her office turned “en masse” against the pending deal.
“Now everyone is worried about the violation of the rights of the Second Amendment,” she said.
Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Who voted against moving the deal on Tuesday, summed up the message he received from voters: “Stand up. … Do not give up, do not give way to the Second Amendment.
However, he declined to criticize McConnell or other Republicans for accepting the deal and predicted that any political repercussions within the Republican base would be fleeting: “I feel we have a good team right now, that we are together and that we will go there and we will agree not to agree after that. And I think at the end of the day … people at home are so obsessed with inflation, the price of gasoline, that’s not a problem in the top 10 for them.
Meanwhile, for many Republicans who support the deal, any election consequences are irrelevant. “I’m not sure that’s a good policy,” said Sen. Mitt Romney (Utah). “It will save lives – that’s why it’s good.”
Mariana Sotomayor contributed to this report.
Add Comment