Is gun control still important to Democratic voters? We’re about to find out
In the midst of Rep. Barbara Cubin’s (R-Wyo.) outrageous remark last week suggesting that all black people are drug addicts, it was almost too easy to overlook the legislation being debated in the House at the time.
The bill under consideration when Cubin made her now infamous comparison dealt with a Republican effort to protect gun manufacturers from lawsuits filed by victims of gun violence. Democrats offered an amendment to the legislation that would have banned gun sales to drug addicts when Cubin asked, “So does that mean that if you go into a black community, you can’t sell any guns to any black person?”
Cubin’s remarks were so offensive, the issue of the gun legislation was all but forgotten.
The effort to shield gun manufacturers from lawsuits effectively removes an important arrow from gun control advocates’ quiver. Over the last couple of years, more than two dozen lawsuits have been filed seeking damages from the gun industry. The idea is that gun manufacturers bear some responsibility for making an unsafe product and allowing these products to fall into criminals’ hands.
“Shielding gun makers, dealers and distributors from liability and dismissing all pending lawsuits is the most egregious form of corporate welfare I’ve yet to see,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.). “This is special treatment for special interests.”
Emanuel’s arguments did little to persuade his allies on the other side of the aisle. The GOP majority in Congress has made it a priority to curtail these lawsuits and protect the industry, which generously contributes to the Republican Party and its candidates. After the Cubin controversy grabbed headlines, few noticed that the House passed the legislation easily — 285 to 140. The bill now moves to the Senate where over half the body is cosponsoring a companion bill, though some Democrats are threatening a filibuster.
Just out of curiosity, has anybody asked Howard Dean what he thinks of this bill?
To be sure, Dean has done a great job positioning himself as the darling of the Democratic Party’s liberal base. He’s opposed the war, demanded health care for all, and proudly told audiences that he represents “the Democratic Party wing of the Democratic Party.”
That’s largely true, but there’s a nagging feeling I have about how the left will respond to Dean’s position on gun control. After all, the Democratic Party wing of the Democratic Party generally supports tougher gun laws and hates the National Rifle Association.
If you asked the typical Democratic primary voter for his or her opinion on the legislation to shield gun manufacturers from victim’s lawsuits, I suspect most would oppose it. In fact, though the bill easily passed the House, most Democratic members of Congress — whom Dean is reaching out to for endorsements — opposed the bill. Indeed, the only two House members to endorse Dean, Reps. Neil Abercrombie (Hawaii) and Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), both voted with the party majority against the legislation.
As liberal as Dean is on social issues, he nevertheless boasts of an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association and freely admits he’d resist new federal gun control laws if elected president.
I know that some party leaders would prefer to simply take the gun issue off the table entirely. As Dean himself accurately notes, the issue hurts Democrats in many areas, particularly in the South, where Al Gore didn’t win a single state in 2000.
But rank-and-file Democrats and many leaders in Congress still believe that the NRA is a menace with a dangerous agenda. Marian Wright Edelman, founder of the Children’s Defense Fund, mentioned last week, “When a child is being killed by guns every three minutes, it’s not enough to say, ‘Let the states handle it.'” The remark was a not-so-subtle reminder to Dean that his position, which is “let the states handle it,” may simply be unacceptable.
Or, as the LA Times’ Ron Brownstein put it, the gun issue is a “time bomb ticking beneath Dean’s embrace by the left.”