Senate Democrats Block Attempt To Expand Gun Rights

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM

SAHIL KAPUR MAY 8, 2013, 2:28 PM
The Senate voted 56-43 on Wednesday to block an amendment expanding gun rights as Democrats used the filibuster to prevent a simple majority vote.

The measure, offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) as an amendment to water resource legislation, would have allowed people to carry firearms in water development projects like lakes and camp sites which are currently gun-free zones.

The vote was set at a filibuster-proof 60 vote threshold — a rare case where the party in power uses the tool to deny a Senate majority from passing legislation by a majority vote.

“I would hope that this gun amendment would not get the 60 votes required, because I believe it is dangerous,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the sponsor of the water resource legislation, prior to the vote. “Why would we want to have on a water infrastructure bill an amendment that allows people to come in with guns and go right to the heart of those critical water infrastructure projects, those dams, those reservoirs, those locks?”

Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/05/senate-vote-coburn-gun-amendment.php?ref=fpb

[geek tragedy]

1. Shockingly, the four backstabbers who voted with Team RNC/NRA on background

checks also voted to allow people to allow armed yahoos to occupy Hoover Dam.

[DrDan]

2. not only do we not get additional controls - we have to fight to keep from

expanded gun rights legislation from being passed.

We have NO voice with this congress . . .

how sad the turn this has taken in the past 4 months

[leftyohiolib]

3. well maybe it's a good thing there was no filibuster reform

[msongs]

4. headline is a lie - the "right" to own guns is not absolute, it is "well regulated" nt

[graham4anything]

5. As I have said before Thank God for Harry Reid. I love Harry Reid.

[bobclark86]

6. So, it's OK to squash the majority...

...if you don't like it? Wasn't pretty much every Democrat screaming about this just a week or two ago and moaning about how horrible it was, including Mrs. Boxer?

I love the hypocrisy of this.

[IveWornAHundredPants]

7. It's okay to squash the majority

when the proposed legislation is particularly stupid.

[firenewt]

8. Big difference there - the majority of the people want background checks. In this case just the

majority in Senate wanted this - not the people.

[savalez]

12. yep, they don't represent the people at all.

There are two Senators per state! No matter how small the state is! It would be nice if is was based on population.

[ileus]

9. change gun rights to human rights...

guns don't have rights....

[bucolic_frolic]

10. Hallelujah, Americans, there's hope and sunshine on this fine spring day

The DEMOCRATS - THE DEMOCRATS!! - used the filibuster.

Mercy sakes alive, who'd have thought they'd remember it?

Here's to them! SALUTE! It may only be a training wheels vote of sorts,
but at least they've run around the block with it.

Now let's figure out how to use it more often and more expeditiously so
that next time even the GOP is surprised!!

[rhett o rick]

16. What a terrible situation when the Democrats have to filibuster when they have the majority.

Corruption everywhere.

[savalez]

11. Shouldn't the title read

"Senate Republicans Fail to expand gun rights"?

How come the group using the 60 vote rule to their advantage is getting outed this time?

(as if I didn't know)

[rhett o rick]

13. I am totally confused*. It appears that Reid filibustered the amendment and a cloture vote

failed 56 to 43. If that's the case the article should have said, that the Republicans (and turncoat Dems) failed to override a Democratic lead filibuster by a vote of 56 to 43. The amendment did not get voted on.

If I have it wrong please straighten me out.

*Not that that's unusual.

[geek tragedy]

14. As I've said before, with guns the problem isn't the filibuster the problem

is that the Senate is owned, ahem lock, stock, and barrel, by the NRA.

[rhett o rick]

15. I agree with you. nm