An Open Letter to those US Senators who voted against Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013 (S.649)

April 26, 2013

Dear Senator:

Lamar Alexander (TN); Kelly Ayotte (NH); John Barrasso (WY); Roy Blunt (MO); John Boozman (AR); Richard M. Burr (NC); Saxby Chambliss (GA); Daniel Coats (IN); Tom Coburn (OK); Thad Cochran (MS); Bob Corker (TN); John Cornyn (TX); Michael Crapo (ID); Ted Cruz (TX); Michael B. Enzi (WY); Deb Fischer (NE); Jeff Flake (AZ); Lindsey Graham (SC); Chuck Grassley (IA); Orrin G. Hatch (UT); Dean Heller (NV); John Hoeven (ND); James M. Inhofe (OK); Johnny Isakson (GA); Mike Johanns (NE); Ron Johnson (WI); Mike Lee (UT); Mitch McConnell (KY); Jerry Moran (KS); Lisa Murkowski (AK); Rand Paul (KY); Rob Portman (OH); Jim Risch (ID); Pat Roberts (KS); Marco Rubio (FL); Tim Scott (SC); Jeff Sessions (AL); Richard Shelby (AL); John Thune (SD); David Vitter (LA); Roger Wicker (MS); Max Baucus (MT); Mark Begich (AK); Heidi Heitkamp (ND); Mark Pryor (AR).

Subject: SAFE COMMUNITIES, SAFE SCHOOLS ACT OF 2013 (S.649)

Please reconsider your opposition to gun control. Surely reasonable people can agree on gun control measures that will reduce the appalling prevalence of gun violence in America. Are we so divided that as honorable persons we cannot devise measures that will reduce the eye-blink destruction of innocent lives in mass shootings, reduce the tragedy of young lives lost in senseless violence, and address the unfathomable grief of parents and loved ones?

I’m sure you’re familiar with all the myriad arguments against gun control and it is not my purpose to examine that sad litany of paranoia, faulty logic, and myth, nor the reasons, admittedly emotional as well as rational, supporting gun control. I simply wish to say that refusing to take up the matter in a reasonable debate on the floor of the Senate, refusing to bring the matter to a vote, is not just ignoring the will of the vast majority of the American people, it is an assault on the bedrock principle of democracy and representative government, “the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for redress of grievances.”

Noah Pozner, 2006 - 2012

Senator, we the people grieve. We grieve for Noah Pozner, shot to death three weeks after his sixth birthday, and his nineteen classmates, who died with him, and the six people who tried to protect these children, and the thousands of Americans shot to death just since Newtown. We grieve for them senator, and we petition you for a redress of our grievances. Senator, please reconsider your opposition to gun control.

Sincerely,

RVBadalamente

Richard V Badalamente, LtCol, USAF (Ret.)

3302 W 42nd Pl

Kennewick WA 99337-2794

The United States of America

A plain blog about politics: Manchin-Toomey and the Filibuster

From "A plain blog about politics," by Jonathan Bernstein.

A plain blog about politics: Manchin-Toomey and the Filibuster

The background checks portion of the bill will be defeated today. It was being added as an amendment to the bill, and under a consent agreement all amendments needed 60 votes; it's not going to get there.

The correct thing to say about this is that the amendment was defeated by filibuster. It's a little tricky, but that's the essence of it. The UC agreement under which the amendment (and all amendments to this bill) is considered requires 60 votes; that's agreed to in order to avoid a cloture vote, which is necessary because of the standing GOP plan to filibuster everything. It is wrong to say that "Senate procedure requires 60 votes." Senate procedure only requires 60 votes in case of filibuster. Which, under current conditions, means in virtually all cases. Manchin-Toomey is defeated by filibuster.

A Republican Legacy

By the end of 2008, the Republicans in the White House and in the RNC were already thinking ahead to the midterm elections of 2010 and the next presidential election of 2012 as George W. Bush’s last, miserable year was winding down. Here’s what they were thinking.

First, the major recession brought on by Bush’s wartime tax cuts, his unfunded Medicare Part D program, and the debacle created by an under-regulated financial sector would saddle the new Democratic Administration with a severely damaged economy.

Second, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would drag on, since Bush and his neocon cohorts never planned an exit strategy, even though they were planning to invade Iraq before 9/11 even happened.

And third, they bet that America’s instant-gratification, memory-challenged populace would forget where the responsibility lay for the country’s problems. Americans would grow weary of the wars, angry at how long it was taking to right the foundering ship of state, and fearful about their job prospects in the dismal economy. Then, looking around the capital grounds, people would blame the new administration and Democratic majority for all their woes. Republicans subscribed to the thinking of Henry Mencken, “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”

In order to take advantage of their legacy, the Republican leadership decided to “just say no,” and use the threat of filibuster to oppose every piece of legislation proposed by the democrats to improve the economy and pull the country from the brink of another Great Depression. To bolster the chances of this craven strategy working, they played on the fears of the public by labeling the Administration’s attempts to prop up financial institutions, “socialism.” Republicans threw this term around so much it was almost funny. Everything from creating laws against texting while driving to improving the conditions in egg farms to prevent salmonella poisoning was socialism.

Of course the Republican minority’s most shameful episode and one that continues to this day was their reaction to president Obama’s program to improve healthcare and stem the tide of exponentially increasing healthcare costs. Here again, their strategy was supremely simple and supremely dishonest:

• propose nothing substantive of their own
• lie about what was in or intended by the bill moving through congress
• scare some of the most vulnerable members of society, claiming their fate would be decided by “death panels”
• vote “no, no, no” as one, over and over again.

In his book, “What Happened, Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception,” Scott McClellan, former White House Press secretary, said that under Karl Rove’s influence, governing the country became a continuous political campaign characterized by whatever deception was necessary. Richard A. Clarke, Bush’s Coordinator for Counterterrorism, in his book, “Against All Enemies,” lamenting the then president's meager understanding of al'Qaeda, stated that Bush wasn’t much on reading. Well, let’s hope most Americans read more than their former president, because if they do, they’ll understand how little today’s Republicans really care about America.