Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Background Check Compromise Doesn't Have Votes To Break Filibuster

Posted By on Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Mark Kelly and Gabrielle Giffords sent out a bulletin this morning urging people to contact their senators to urge them to support the Toomey-Manchin compromise on background checks. The couple acknowledged that there is not enough support to break a filibuster on a vote scheduled for later today :

We won't waste any time getting to the point.

The U.S. Senate is set to vote on expanding background checks and other legislation to reduce gun violence today at 4pm Eastern.

The truth is that as of right now, it's very close, but we don't have the votes. That's why it's so critical you make your voice heard in the next few hours.

Slate rounds up the latest on the gun bill here.

New York magazine's Jonathan Chait has six reasons why the background-check compromise is on the rocks. Reasons 1-3:

1. Getting a majority of America isn’t the same thing as getting a majority in Congress, because Congress doesn’t perfectly represent America. The House represents a collection of districts, the overwhelming majority of which are not competitive and produced a nearly impervious Republican majority despite Democrats receiving more votes in aggregate. The Senate gives vastly disproportionate representation to small states, which are mostly rural (that’s why they're small) and thus much more pro-gun.

2. Even if you win a majority in the Senate, it isn’t enough. You need 60 votes to break a filibuster. When you combine 1 with 2, you hand a small rural minority overwhelming power.

3. Almost everybody may support background checks, but not every American knows the actual content of every bill that gets a vote. Look at health-care reform. Americans overwhelmingly favor nearly every provision of Obamacare, but oppose the law because they had a general sense of not liking it.

Likewise, opponents have turned the debate into a general discussion of “gun control,” which is way less popular than a specific law about background checks. Lisa Murkowski explains her No vote thusly: “In Alaska you're pretty much pro-gun. That about sums it up.”

Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments (2)

Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

Previously in the Range

More by Jim Nintzel

Staff Pick

Butterfly Magic

Butterfly Magic is a fully immersive experience that surrounds you with rare butterflies, tropical plants and orchids… More

@ Tucson Botanical Gardens Oct. 1-May 31, 9:30 a.m.-3 p.m. 2150 N. Alvernon Way.

» More Picks

Submit an Event Listing

Popular Content

  1. You're a Wizard, Harry: A Harry Potter Ball at Your Favorite Barnes & Noble (The Range: The Tucson Weekly's Daily Dispatch)
  2. T.H.R.E.A.T. Watch: Journalist Christiane Amanpour Is Worried (The Range: The Tucson Weekly's Daily Dispatch)
  3. Quick Bites: Help Keep Monsanto Out of Pima County (The Range: The Tucson Weekly's Daily Dispatch)
  4. Betsy DeVos Set To Join the Trump Cabinet's Billionaire Boys [and Girls] Club (The Range: The Tucson Weekly's Daily Dispatch)
  5. The Weekly List: 25 Things To Do In The Next 10 Days (The Range: The Tucson Weekly's Daily Dispatch)

© 2016 Tucson Weekly | 7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 | (520) 797-4384 | Powered by Foundation