Will Senate vote on gun control? Untangling the politics of filibusters

The Senate will hold a vote on gun control legislation Thursday – but it's only to break a filibuster and allow debate to proceed. Will the bill actually become law? That's a different question.

|
Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP
Sens. Chuck Schumer (D) of New York (l.) and Joe Manchin (D) of West Virginia speak to reporters as they walk from the office of Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada on Capitol Hill in Washington Tuesday after a meeting on gun control.

President Obama appears increasingly likely to get the very least of his demands on new national gun-control legislation: an open debate in the Senate on a package of firearms bills followed by a vote. What remains uncertain is what might pass in that vote and become law.

Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada told reporters on Tuesday that he was scheduling a vote for Thursday to break a Republican filibuster. Several Republican senators, including Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah, have vowed to block the bills. If 60 senators vote Thursday to end that filibuster, then the Senate can proceed with actually debating and amending the proposed bills.

That looks likely. Currently, nine Republicans have agreed to vote to stop a filibuster Thursday. With only a pair of potential Democratic defections expected, Senator Reid seems to have the 60 votes he needs to proceed.

From there, however, the prospects for the package to pass the Senate – much less the House – get more nuanced.

Measures to ban assault weapons or high-capacity magazines are almost certain to fail, while measures to stiffen penalties for straw purchases and gun trafficking and to increase school safety are likely to pass the Senate.

The outstanding question is whether the Senate can rally around universal background checks. Currently, the votes don't appear to be there, but Sen. Joe Manchin (D) of West Virginia and Sen. Pat Toomey (R) of Pennsylvania are negotiating a potential compromise amendment that could get bipartisan support.

In the meantime, the threat by Senator Paul and colleagues to block the progress of the bill is driving Senator Manchin batty. 

Manchin has an A rating from the National Rifle Association and once famously shot a copy of a cap-and-trade bill in a campaign commercial, but he says the filibuster is pointless. Republicans had two long-standing issues about what would happen if the bill proceeded to debate: First, that amendments from both sides should be allowed in abundance, and second, that no bill would actually pass the Senate without a 60-vote supermajority. Both have been agreed to.

“I’ve agreed with Republicans that there should be an open amendment process. That’s been guaranteed. And for anyone to talk that they’re going to filibuster, when you’ve [been] given everything that you’ve asked for doesn’t make any sense to me,” he says. “We’re all big guys and big ladies, we can take the votes.”

But Paul, Senator Lee, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R) of Texas say the package infringes on Second Amendment rights. By insisting on their right to filibuster, Senate rules dictated that Reid delay the procedural vote 72 hours – to Thursday.

“Our effort to require a 60 vote threshold is an attempt to facilitate greater debate about the specific piece of legislation that will come to the Senate floor,” Lee said in a statement. “By objecting to the motion to proceed, we guarantee that the Senate and the American people have at least three additional days to assess and evaluate exactly how this particular bill will affect the rights of law-abiding citizens and whether it will have any significant impact on crime.”

Should the Senate break the filibuster as expected Thursday, attention will then turn to the effort to mandate universal background checks. Even if the assault-weapon and high-capacity magazine measures fail, the background checks would be a significant achievement, some say. 

It “might not be everything,” says Sen. Tim Kaine (D) of Virginia, who governed the commonwealth during the 2006 shooting at Virginia Tech. “But that would be very helpful.”

Even if the Senate could manage a compromise, though, the bill would then have to go to the House, where its prospects remain unclear.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Will Senate vote on gun control? Untangling the politics of filibusters
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2013/0409/Will-Senate-vote-on-gun-control-Untangling-the-politics-of-filibusters
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe