"I'm not at all sure that even a callous, irresponsible drug dealer with a six-year-old kid in the house wouldn't leave a child trigger lock on a gun." That's your president speaking, to CNN's Greta van Susteren on Thursday. That comment prompted Michael Cannon, an aide to the Senate
Republican Policy Committee, to try to imagine how this would work: "Dear, if you're not expecting the DEA tonight, could you please keep the trigger lock on the .45? You know, the kids?" "Sorry, honey. Could you get it for me? It's in the cupboard by the blowtorch."
This must be what the Democrats mean by "common-sense gun control." What it really is, of course, is boob bait for soccer moms. That legislation is not the goal of the push for gun control is clear from a letter sent by Dick Gephardt, David Bonior, and other Democrats to Orrin Hatch last week.
Gephardt et al. demanded that the House-Senate conference committee's report must include "gun safety" measures at least as strong as those that passed the Senate. Since the Senate provisions were rejected by large
margins in the House, they are effectively demanding a bill that cannot pass the House. "They've thrown down a gauntlet that can't be picked up," says the NRA's Chuck Cunningham.
It's not clear that the issue will be as valuable to Gephardt as he thinks. So far, the agitation for gun controls has served mainly to swell the NRA's coffers. "We greatly appreciate it," says Cunningham. "Our constituency is pretty doggone energized. And pretty soon it's going to be focused on November 7th." Republicans, moreover, have a message on guns — that we need to enforce existing laws, not write new ones — that works with the general public. John Zogby's "American Values" poll, released yesterday, found that 68.3 percent of Americans would prefer a candidate who stood for tougher enforcement to one who sought new gun controls; only 29 percent expressed the opposite preference.
Last June, Patrick Kennedy, the head of the Democrats' congressional campaign, told the Boston Globe that he couldn't identify a single Republican who could be defeated on the gun-control issue. Nevertheless, a
few House Republicans are still worried. They want to vote on a bill that deals only with trigger locks, and they would prefer to see it enacted so as to "take the issue off the table." (As though President Clinton wouldn't ask for more at the signing ceremony.) As it stands, squishy Republicans can already tell their constituents that they have voted for
background checks and tougher enforcement, only to see Democrats cynically vote the bill down. Even Senator Orrin Hatch, under pressure from conservatives in Utah, is holding steady. There's no need for the House to wobble now.
Magnanimity is the best revenge: Boy, is Jerry Falwell looking statesmanlike these days. Not only does he accept McCain's apology for calling him "evil" (even though McCain hasn't apologized for saying he brought shame to the GOP); on MSNBC the other night, he suggested that McCain "would make a great vice presidential running mate" (courtesy
Hotline). . . . The other day we asked when, given the irritation with gas prices, a congressman would propose cutting the gas tax. Answer: this week. Richard Pombo, a Republican from California, has introduced a bill to repeal Clinton's 4.3 cent gas-tax hike — the one Al Gore broke a Senate
tie to pass. . . . On the night of Super Tuesday, Gore said, "We don't need to go back to where we were eight years ago. They tried their approach before — it produced a triple-dip recession and quadrupled the national debt." Anyone have any clue what, if anything, Gore means by
"triple-dip recession"?
