#sen. chris Murphy

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked efforts by Senate Democrats to pass an assault weapons ban and universal background checks legislation after the United States over the weekend broke the record for the most mass shootings in a single year.

Republican Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) objected to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) request for unanimous consent to pass the assault weapons ban, despite the pleas of Democratic senators who took to the Senate floor to cite the harrowing statistics of gun violence in America.

“The scourge of gun violence in America is a national crisis. The American people are sick and tired of enduring one mass shooting after another. They’re sick and tired of vigil and moments of silence for family, friends, classmates, coworkers,” Schumer argued on the Senate floor.

The assault weapons ban, originally sponsored by the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), would ban semiautomatic rifles with pistol grips, forward grips and folding or telescoping stocks, as well as rifles outfitted with grenade launchers, barrel shrouds or threaded barrels to allow for noise and flash suppressors to be attached.

But Barrasso argued that the Democratic-drafted bill would infringe on the Second Amendment and deprive law-abiding gun owners of an important liberty.

“Americans have a constitutional right to own a firearm. Every day, people across Wyoming responsibly use their Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms,” he said. “Democrats are demanding that the American people give up their liberty.”

He said that Democrats are trying to ban many types of semiautomatic firearms “because of the way they look.”

He asserted that popular rifles such as AR-15s “work the same way as popular shotguns and other rifles used for hunting and personal protection.”

“The Second Amendment is freedom’s essential safeguard. Without it, there can be no liberty and there can be no security. So Mr. President, I object.”

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy (Conn.) later stood up on the floor to ask for unanimous consent to pass legislation to require universal background checks for firearms purchases.

“We don’t have more mental illness in this country, we don’t spend less money on law enforcement, we don’t have angrier people, we have more guns, and we are much more permissive in this country about allowing felons, dangerous people, to get their hands on guns,” he said.

A Gallup poll conducted in June 2022 found that 92% of Americans favor requiring background checks for all firearm sales.

“This just feels like a test of democracy. It really does. Like, how does democracy survive if 90% of Americans, 90% of Republicans, 90% of Democrats want something, and we can’t deliver it?” Murphy asked before he asked for unanimous consent to pass the background checks bill.

Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee took to the floor immediately to object.

“I want to note at the outset we’re not asked to vote in this chamber on polling questions. We vote on legislation,” he said.

He said the legislation to expand background checks “has some real problems with it.”

“This is not solely about transactions involving guns at gun stores. This is about the father who wishes to pass down a hunting rifle to his son or the friend who wants to lend a shotgun to his neighbor who is in need of protection at the time,” Lee said before objecting to Murphy’s request.

#us politics #news #the hill #us senate #senate republicans #assault weapons ban #gun violence #gun rights #mass shootings #gun regulation #gun reform #2023 #Sen. John Barrasso #sen. Chuck Schumer #Sen. Dianne Feinstein #Sen. Chris Murphy #2nd amendment #Sen. Mike Lee

[dontmean2bepoliticalbut]

#us politics #2023 #twitter #tweet #republicans #conservatives #gop #gov. ron desantis #gop platform #gop policy #orwellian #book bans #critical race theory #florida department of education #reedy creek improvement district #disney #sen. chris murphy

[gwydionmisha]

#Office of Gun Violence Prevention #Gun Violence #Biden Administration #Chris Murphy #Kamala Harris #News

[meandmybigmouth]

“HISTORICALLY WEAK” AND BULLSHIT! CHILDREN WILL STILL DIE AND IT’S UNVBELEIVABLE AMERICA IS WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT?

#gun control #congress #gun violence #gun safety

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Monica Alba and Julie Tsirkin at NBC News:

The Biden administration is expected to propose a rule Thursday that would accelerate the pace at which certain migrants could be processed and denied asylum after having crossing the southern border, according to two sources familiar with the decision. The regulation, which had been in the works for months and will be published by the Department of Homeland Security, seeks to cut down on illegal border crossings. It would specifically target people who are deemed ineligible for asylum because of criminal records or who are assessed to be national security risks, one of the sources said.  The asylum process sometimes can take years, and the proposed rule will aim to shorten that time substantially for those deemed ineligible. It is not considered the major executive action NBC News has been previewing for months, which could still materialize in the near term. The White House declined to comment.

As the Biden administration weighs more sweeping executive action on the border that could affect the asylum process, up Pennsylvania Avenue, Senate Democrats had an initial closed-door conversation Wednesday about what legislative steps they could take. “I think the starting point for the discussion is the bipartisan deal that was negotiated, so we’ll start there. Do we subtract a little bit, do we add a little bit? We don’t know yet,” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told NBC News after the meeting. “Everybody realizes we are going to have a meaningful discussion about it in the coming weeks.” NBC News reported Monday that Democrats in the Senate could force “messaging” votes on immigration and border-related provisions that Republicans would most likely block. Republicans blocked the bipartisan package negotiated by Sens. James Lankford, R-Okla., Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., in February at the behest of former President Donald Trump. 

But asked about the administration’s actions during his leadership news conference Wednesday, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the Biden administration and congressional Democrats “agree” that “the best thing to deal with the problem on the border is pass legislation.” “We have strong bipartisan drafted legislation,” Schumer said. “If Republicans are serious about fixing the border, join us — we can only pass it with Republican votes, Democratic votes and Republican votes, and that’s what we should do.”

The Biden Administration is expected to propose a new rule to speed up the processing of asylum seekers of those barred from seeking asylum.

#Joe Biden #DHS #Biden Administration #Immigration #Asylum Seekers #Asylum

[tomorrowusa]

Democrats pick up House seat in special election in NY-03!

I ❤️ NY-03!

Democrats have not won a major election in suburban Nassau County since Biden took the area in 2020. NY-03 is mostly in Nassau County and was famously won by Republican fabulist George Santos in 2022. It was Santos's ouster from the House which led to this special election.

So Democrat Tom Suozzi easily defeated his GOP opponent Mazi Pilip on Tuesday by a margin similar to Biden's win in 2020.

Republicans sought to use immigration against Democrats in this election – and failed.

William Kristol and Andrew Egger observed at The Bulwark:

Republicans pummeled Suozzi on immigration with waves of hyperbolic border-invasion ads. But in his three terms in Congress Suozzi had been, for a Democrat, something of a border hawk. And he had plenty of money to portray himself as that. Indeed, he did so aggressively. When Republicans in Congress torpedoed the border bill, Suozzi attacked them for doing so and lamented that it would not now be able to expel “eighty percent” of asylum seekers and to stop migrants from flooding New York.

Yep, Republicans have been demanding border reform. When a viable bipartisan plan became a possibility in the US Senate, they shot it down on orders from adjudicated sex offender Donald Trump.

So now we have a Republican border crisis which Trump hopes will catapult his demented self back into the White House. But indications from NY-03 are that it probably won't work out for them.

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut was one of the senators who worked on the Senate bipartisan immigration reform which Trump sabotaged. Murphy sees the MAGA GOP flip-flop on the border as something which can be used against Republicans nationally.

Sen. Chris Murphy urges Democrats to follow Tom Suozzi and go on the offensive on the border

“Suozzi messaged aggressively on the issue, running ads that highlighted his support for a secure border and legal pathways to citizenship,” Murphy wrote. “He flipped the script on his Republican opponent, successfully painting her as unserious about border security because of her opposition to the bipartisan border bill, and turned what could have been a devastating political liability into an advantage.” Murphy acknowledged his frustration that after months of negotiating the bipartisan border security bill, Republicans in the Senate ultimately knifed it in a matter of days. But he said the GOP’s rejection of the bill provides Democrats with a way to counter GOP talking points on the border.

Back in NY-03, some Republican apologists tried to blame the 7.8% defeat of their candidate on the weather. The official NWS weather station at La Guardia Airport in Queens, next to NY-03, reported a grand total of 3.3 inches [8.38 cm] of snow on Tuesday. And the snow was over by 3 PM. In New York, polls are open until 9 PM. There was plenty of time for Republicans to sweep away the minor amount of snow from their sidewalks and get to their polling places. Don't let the GOP give you a snow job about their loss of a swing district.

Anyway, with the victory of Tom Suozzi, Republicans are one step closer to losing their majority under Speaker "MAGA Mike" Johnson.

#ny-03 #us house of representatives #special election #democratic victory #tom suozzi #mazi pilip #queens #nassau county #new york #snow #immigration reform #republican border crisis #chris murphy #“maga mike” johnson #donald trump #vote blue no matter who #election 2024

[republicansaredomesticterrorists]

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Dianne Feinstein, the woman who represented California in the US Senate and was the longest-serving female senator in history, “blazed trails for women in politics and found a life’s calling in public service”, Hillary Clinton said.

The former New York Senator and Secretary of State, who in 2016 was the first woman to win the presidential nomination of a major US party, paid tribute to her fellow Democrat shortly after the announcement of her death. At the time of her death, Feinstein was 90 and still in office.

Clinton added: “I’ll miss her greatly as a friend and colleague.”

From the White House, Joe Biden saluted “a pioneering American.”

The President added: “Serving in the Senate together for more than 15 years, I had a front-row seat to what Dianne was able to accomplish. It’s why I recruited her to serve on the Judiciary Committee when I was chairman – I knew what she was made of.”

“… Often the only woman in the room, Dianne was a role model for so many Americans … she had an immense impact on younger female leaders for whom she generously opened doors. Dianne was tough, sharp, always prepared, and never pulled a punch, but she was also a kind and loyal friend.”

Gavin Newsom, the Democratic Governor of California, will select Feinstein’s replacement. Calling Feinstein “a political giant”, he said she “was many things – a powerful, trailblazing US Senator; an early voice for gun control; a leader in times of tragedy and chaos.”

“But to me, she was a dear friend, a lifelong mentor, and a role model not only for me, but to my wife and daughters for what a powerful, effective leader looks like.”

Feinstein’s “tenacity”, Newsom said, “was matched by her grace. She broke down barriers and glass ceilings, but never lost her belief in the spirit of political cooperation. And she was a fighter - for the city [San Francisco, where she was the first woman to be mayor], the state and the country she loved.”

There was some discord among the praise. David Axelrod, formerly a senior adviser to Barack Obama, pointed to recent controversy over whether, given her evidently failing health and absences which affected Democratic Senate business, Feinstein should have retired.

“How sad that the final, painful years will eclipse in the memories of some a long and distinguished career,” Axelrod said⁩. “RIP, Senator Feinstein.”

Many users cited a recent piece in New York magazine by the writer Rebecca Traister, about Feinstein’s declining years, which asked: “She fought for gun control, civil rights and abortion access for half a century. Where did it all go wrong?”

John Flannery, a former federal prosecutor turned commentator, was among those who had a rejoinder: “I hope some of those who hounded her in her dying days will remember her contributions.”

Many tributes highlighted Feinstein’s contributions to attempts to combat the problem of gun violence.

Though Feinstein “made her mark on everything from national security to the environment to protecting civil liberties”, Biden said, “there’s no better example of her skillful legislating and sheer force of will than when she turned passion into purpose, and led the fight to ban assault weapons.”

Chris Murphy, a Democratic Senator from Connecticut and a leading voice for gun control reform, said Feinstein would “go down as a heroic, historic American leader … an early and fearless champion of the gun safety movement as author of the monumental Assault Weapons Ban of 1994.”

“For a long time, between 1994 and the tragedy in Newtown in 2012 [in which 20 young children and six adults were killed], Dianne was often a lonely but unwavering voice on the issue of gun violence.”

“The modern anti-gun violence movement – now more powerful than the gun lobby – simply would not exist without Dianne’s moral leadership.”

From the US House, Maxwell Frost of Florida, one of the youngest congressional progressives, called Feinstein “a champion for gun violence prevention that broke barriers at all levels of government.”

“We wouldn’t have had an assault weapons ban if it wasn’t for Senator Feinstein and due to her tireless work, we will win it back. May her memory be a blessing.”

From outside Congress, Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, a pro-gun control group, pointed out that Feinstein was “one of the first among her colleagues to support gun safety – including Democrats”.

Inside Congress, as a government shutdown loomed, Feinstein’s desk in the Senate was draped in black cloth, a vase of white roses placed to mark her death.

From the other side of the political aisle, the Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins called Feinstein “a strong and effective leader, and a good friend.”

Newsom has pledged to pick a Black woman to replace Feinstein until the midterm elections next year.

On Friday, Barbara Lee, a Black Democratic congresswoman running for the seat, said: “This is a sad day for California and the nation. Senator Feinstein was a champion for our state, and served as the voice of a political revolution for women.”

Among commentators, the MSNBC anchor Mehdi Hasan highlighted what will to many prove a complicated political legacy.

“The high point and low point of … Feinstein’s long and storied career as a US senator both relate to the ‘War On Terror’,” Hasan said. “Low point: voting for the Iraq invasion. High point: going against the CIA to expose their torture programme.”

In his statement, Newsom said: “Every race [Feinstein] won, she made history, but her story wasn’t just about being the first woman in a particular political office, it was what she did for California, and for America, with that power once she earned it. That’s what she should be remembered for.”

“There is simply nobody who possessed the poise, gravitas, and fierceness of Dianne Feinstein.”

Jennifer Mercieca, a historian of political rhetoric at Texas A&M University, put the case for Feinstein perhaps most simply of all.

“Dianne Feinstein was on the right side of history,” she said.

#us politics #news #the guardian #rip #sen. dianne feinstein #Democrats #us senate #Hillary Clinton #president joe biden #gov. Gavin Newsom #David Axelrod #California #Rebecca Traister #John Flannery #1994 assault weapons ban #gun control #gun rights #gun reform #sen. chris Murphy #rep. Maxwell Frost #Shannon Watts #Moms Demand Action #sen. Susan Collins #rep. Barbara Lee #Mehdi Hasan #msnbc #twitter #tweet #x #Jennifer Mercieca

[acnews]

#usa news #us politics #usa today #usa politics #usa #senate #us senate #us congress #immigrants #immigration #usa migrants crisis #migrants

[socialjusticeinamerica]

[plethoraworldatlas]

The Biden administration signaled on December 12 that it is willing to make disastrous—and permanent—changes to asylum and immigration policy to obtain temporary military aid for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.

Top White House officials reportedly met with some of the key Senate negotiators, Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), as well as Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Unfortunately, media reports indicate the White House is willing to resurrect some Trump-era anti-immigrant policies to cut a deal on Ukraine funding. These include the nationwide expansion of a fast-track deportation process known as “expedited removal,” the expansion of mandatory detention, and the immediate expulsion of migrants at the border under a Title 42-like authority.

...

The implementation of Title 42-like authority at the border would be counterproductive at addressing migration and, instead, will result in many individuals being sent back to persecution in their home countries or forced to wait in Mexico indefinitely. Human rights organizations have tracked thousands of incidents of violence against migrants, including murder, rape, and torture, during the Biden administration’s implementation of Title 42.

Reimposing Title 42 would also fail to seriously address border crossings. Analysis from the American Immigration Council shows that these expulsions do not deter migrants from attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border. During the Title 42 policy, roughly one in three people apprehended after crossing the border were on their second or higher failed attempt to cross. This is confirmed by a recent analysis of DHS data from the Cato Institute, which revealed that ending Title 42 significantly reduced repeat crossings and halved so-called “gotaways.” As a result, allowing any DHS secretary to simply shut the border to asylum seekers would lead to tremendous harm to both asylum seekers and to basic principles of border management.

Dramatically expanding mandatory immigrant detention

The White House has also reportedly agreed in principle to language that would strip authority from DHS to release migrants who cross the border and are taken into custody. While many of those individuals are currently eligible for release, language currently in H.R. 2,  a Republican-supported bill that passed along party lines in the House earlier this year, would bar DHS from releasing any migrant—regardless of whether they are families or children.

The expansion of detention raises serious human rights concerns and would represent a complete break from the promises President Biden made as a candidate and while in office. Within the confines of the already expansive immigrant detention landscape, there are numerous complaints of negligent medical care, unsafe conditions, unfair and discriminatory treatment of detained migrants, and excessive use of force. Barring the release of migrants seeking protection to deter migration would only increase these abuses.

In addition, the United States simply does not have, and has never had, sufficient detention capacity to detain all migrants crossing the border, so releases would have to continue anyway. But by barring DHS from releasing migrants, Congress would also likely force the administration to restart family detention centers, leading to children suffer in detention centers for months or longer

Heightening the Standard for an Initial Asylum Screening

Negotiators are contemplating heightening the standard used for initial asylum screenings at the border. Currently, migrants must show that there is a “significant possibility” that they are eligible for asylum or similar protections, including under the Convention Against Torture. The standard was established in 1996 as a safeguard to prevent the U.S. government from breaking its international humanitarian agreements by erroneously deporting someone back to danger. If the migrant fails to show a significant possibility, they can be swiftly deported through the expedited removal process.

As we’ve seen under the Biden administration, making the standard more difficult will have not have a significant impact on newly arriving migrants. Since May, the Biden administration has been implementing a heightened standard in this initial screening process under its Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule. Despite this, border apprehensions have risen significantly since this rule went into effect, which suggests that it has not been a deterrent.

Migrants often don’t know the nuances of immigration policy and arrive at our border simply hoping to find safety. This means that raising the standard will only result in the deportation of migrants who may have viable asylum claims but can’t immediately prove their case to an asylum officer at the border.

Third Country Transit Asylum Ban

Though the specifics are not yet known, an asylum ban for people who travel through a third country before arriving to the United States can have devasting consequences for U.S. foreign policy and for immigrants arriving in this country on visas. For example, under a bill passed along party-lines in June, an untold number of individuals could lose access to asylum for simply having an international layover on a flight to the United States. This means that even an Afghan national evacuated from Kabul via a U.S. military base in Germany could not apply for asylum for failing to apply in Germany first. A Ukrainian national whose flight stopped in London before arriving to the United States would be similarly barred.

Such a proposal ignores that many people may pass through a country where applying for asylum is impracticable or which is not safe for them, and they would be barred from asylum as a result. In addition, this proposal will not have any impact on reducing migration. Under the Biden administration’s asylum restriction, roughly 90% of migrants who cross the border between ports of entry are already banned from seeking asylum. Imposing a statutory transit ban would most heavily impact individuals who enter legally through ports of entry or who fly into the country on visas.

Expansion of Fast-Track Deportations Nationwide

On December 8, news broke that the White House would be willing to support a nationwide expansion of “expedited removal,” a fast-tracked deportation process.

Currently, expedited removal is applied to noncitizens who present themselves at a port of entry without proper entry documents, or who enter without permission within the last 14 days and are apprehended within 100 miles of the border. This process severely limits due process by allowing low-level immigration officials (not judges) to immediately order deportations without the right to an attorney.

A nationwide expansion, like previously occurred under the Trump administration, could mean that immigrant parents, children, and spouses of U.S. citizens living in the United States for years could be swept up for swift removal with little legal recourse. Due to the expedited nature of this process, migrants with pending applications for relief could be removed and Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities could be unfairly targeted. This would also require significantly more resources for immigration enforcement, as interior enforcement of expected removal would involve significant operational complexities.

Crucially, expanding expedited removal to the interior would not reduce border crossings, as the policy is already in effect at the border. It would, however, provide a powerful tool for a future administration that aimed to carry out mass deportations of recently arrived migrants.

What’s Next?

It’s still unclear whether any of these concessions can make it through both chambers of Congress. The House GOP has indicated that they want significantly broader changes to asylum and border policy, and hardline GOP senators have reportedly said that even these policies are “not nearly enough.” With the clock ticking on holiday recess, the chance that Congress can hammer out a deal and make it law by the end of December is increasingly slim.

However, in the past few days, the Senate negotiations have moved us closer to potentially seeing these Trump-era like policies becoming law. We need real policy solutions that don’t throw the immigrant community under the bus

#us politics #joe biden #biden administration #israel #palestine #ukraine #taiwan #immigrants #immigration #american immigrants #refugees #Asylum ban #Doing even one of these would basically 100% kill Biden's chances to win #Black and Latino voters turned out for him in 2020 because he said he'd undo Trump's worst deeds #If he reinstates Trump Immigration policies for any reason especially to send more money to Israel which is already insanely unpopular #He basically permanently kills not only his chances but every Democrat who campaigns on undoing the damage Republicans do #If they'll reinstate the worst Republican policies to get already unpopular other bills passed then they can be trusted to undo them at all #AND REPUBLICANS ARE STILL PLANNING TO OVERTHROW DEMOCRACY AND THE GOVERNMENT!!! #Democrats literally just have to not shit the bed to win and their pants are down underwear off and they're squeezing

[tomorrowusa]

The truth is plain for America to see. Republicans don't REALLY care about the border. They would actually prefer to have 50,000 migrants show up every day to help stoke culture wars.

The Democrats' lead negotiator on a $118 billion bipartisan national security bill says GOP efforts to tank the bill are not based on its merits, but an effort to support former President Donald Trump's reelection bid. "Right now most Republicans are prepared to listen to Donald Trump, who says he wants chaos to continue at the border because that will help him politically," Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told Morning Edition's Michel Martin. At least two dozen GOP senators are casting doubt on the chances of the $118 billion bill, which would result in the most significant change to U.S. immigration law in some four decades.

Republicans don't bargain in good faith. They waste your time for months and then do an abrupt U-turn when ordered to by their Lord and Savior Donald Trump.

"We did exactly what Republicans told us to do," Murphy said. "We got a bipartisan border reform bill, a historic one. And now those same Republicans are saying that they are going to oppose the bill that they asked for because Donald Trump wants chaos at the border."

^^^ emphasis added

Instead of going ahead with border fixes, House Republicans tried to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. With the House GOP in shambles all through the 118th Congress, things went about as you'd expect.

House GOP Suffers Spectacular Double Fail on Mayorkas, Israel Package

Republicans are unfit to govern. They kowtow to Trump who needs chaos at the border to keep voters from being reminded of his Nazi rantings, numerous legal problems, and reputation as an adjudicated sex offender.

The MAGA Republican version of immigration reform involves putting up incredibly low-grade barriers that fall apart when it rains or gets windy. These pictures of Trump's "wall" were taken during his term.

The Trump wall was what Russians would call a показуха which could be translated as window dressing or possibly staged event. Though the barrier equivalent of a Potemkin village also would be an appropriate description for this failed project.

#chris murphy #immigration reform #national security #republicans #donald trump #gop concern about the border is a sham #republican chaos at the border #trump's failed border wall #alejandro mayorkas #house gop failure to impeach mayorkas #us house of representatives #house republicans #“maga mike” johnson #republicans are unfit to govern #election 2024 #vote blue no matter who

[cleoselene]

https://wapo.st/3UdnrZy

"I think the Republican conference is going to make a decision in the next 24 hours as to whether they actually want to get something done or whether they want to leave the border a mess for political reasons," said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn), the lead Democratic negotiator. "If Republicans blow this up, Vladimir Putin will win the war and Europe will be at risk."

(gift link as always, free to you)

I cannot fathom that these spineless Republican fucks in Congress are going to let Ukrainians who have fought so valiantly for two years go down like this. Ukrainian soldiers are rationing bullets now because Republicans are all subservient to Donald fucking Trump and refuse to behave like adults. They claim to care deeply about border security, but when offered everything they want on it, decline to take it because they would rather use it as a political cudgel to win elections.

I'm so sorry, Ukraine. I'm so sorry that these people are my fellow countrymen.

Putin's puppet Donald is doing everything he wants for him. There is so much at stake this year.

Republicans have no real values or political goals. They just obstruct. That's why it seems like they're so much better at getting what they want. It's easy to prevent things from getting done. A lot harder to get things done.

#ukraine

[progressivepower]

Sen. Chris Murphy Says Republican Party Is ‘Addicted To Chaos’. The Connecticut Democrat said that the GOP's handling o... http://dlvr.it/SpqXhL

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday reintroduced universal gun background checks legislation that is overwhelmingly popular with the American public — but not with a majority of U.S. Senators.

Federal law requires criminal background checks for firearm sales only at licensed dealers. Private sales between individuals, including at gun shows or online, aren’t subject to background checks.

Polls over the years have consistently shown that around 90% of Americans support requiring a criminal background check for all firearm sales. But it’s extremely likely that no Republican Senators will support Murphy’s bill.

“This is one of those wild issues in which 90% of the American public have made up their mind and we still can’t move the proposal through the Senate,” Murphy told HuffPost. “This is the holy grail of gun policy: It’s wildly popular, and it makes a big difference.”

Federal law prohibits certain people from buying guns, including those who have been convicted of violent crimes or who are subject to restraining orders. But without a background check, there’s nothing to stop them from buying a gun. According to one estimate from 2017, nearly a quarter of new gun owners bought their weapons without a background check.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), a member of the Senate Republican leadership team, told HuffPost that he would “obviously” oppose a universal background checks bill and so would any Senators who favor protecting Second Amendment rights. Not all Democrats will support Murphy’s bill, either; Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.) and Jon Tester (Mont.) refused to co-sponsor last year’s version, and Manchin told HuffPost this week that his position hasn’t changed.

With Republicans in control of the House for at least the next two years, universal background checks will remain a non-starter.

But Congress has not been totally paralyzed on gun violence, which in recent years eclipsed car wrecks as the leading cause of death of children in the U.S. Last year, Murphy partnered with Republicans on a law that, among other things, expanded background checks for gun buyers between 18 and 21 years old. The FBI told HuffPost this week that the expanded checks had denied dozens of gun sales so far.

The 2022 law also modified the legal definition of who counts as “engaged in the business” of selling guns and therefore must register with the federal government as a firearms dealer. The new text stresses that someone’s a dealer if “the intent underlying the sale or disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining pecuniary gain,” meaning profit.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), one of Murphy’s main Republican partners on last year’s bill, said that language change “basically did” what Murphy’s now trying to do with his universal background checks bill.

“If they’re in the business of selling firearms, they’re gonna be charged with a crime,” if they don’t do background checks, Cornyn said.

Federal law already required anyone in the business of selling guns for profit to apply for a license. It’s not clear what practical effect the new wording will have. The Congressional Research Service said the change “could make some, but not all, intrastate, private firearm transfers” subject to background checks.

The gun control group Giffords, which celebrated the new law, called the revision to the gun dealer language just a minor change: “The loophole that allows unlicensed sellers to sell guns without conducting background checks would remain open,” Giffords said on its website.

#us politics #news #huffington post #2023 #us senate #118th congress #sen. chris murphy #universal background checks #gun violence #gun rights #gun control #2nd amendment #Sen. John Barrasso #sen. joe manchin #sen. kyrsten sinema #sen. jon tester #sen. john cornyn #Congressional Research Service #Giffords

[beardedmrbean]

A coalition of 30 mayors representing communities along the New Jersey coast are calling on federal lawmakers and officials to implement a moratorium on offshore wind development in response to a spate of whale deaths.

The mayors, who collectively represent 359,168 residents and communities with beaches that welcome millions of visitors, requested that federal and state agencies conduct a comprehensive analysis of the impact offshore wind construction and surveying equipment may have on marine wildlife. They argued such development should only continue if it is conclusively proven to not harm wildlife.

"The 30 undersigned mayors of New Jersey coastal communities stand united in their concern about the unprecedented number of whales that have washed ashore recently and call for an immediate moratorium on all offshore wind activities until an investigation is held by federal and state agencies that confidently determines these activities are not a contributing factor in the recent whale deaths," they wrote in a letter Tuesday.

"While we are not opposed to clean energy, we are concerned about the impacts these projects may already be having on our environment," they continued. "We again urge you to take action now to prevent future deaths from needlessly occurring on our shorelines."

UPTICK IN DEAD WHALES ALONG EAST COAST SPARKS INTENSE DEBATE AMONG ENVIRONMENTALISTS OVER OFFSHORE WIND

The letter was addressed to New Jersey Democratic Rep. Frank Pallone and Republican Reps. Chris Smith and Jeff Van Drew, all of whom represent coastal districts. It was also sent to Democratic Sens. Cory Booker and Bob Menendez. Copies of the letter were additionally sent to President Biden and Gov. Phil Murphy.

NJ CONGRESSMAN DEMANDS INVESTIGATION INTO WHETHER OFFSHORE WIND PROJECTS ARE KILLING WHALES

While Van Drew and Smith have echoed calls for a moratorium and investigation into the cause of recent whale deaths, Pallone, Booker and Menendez have largely been silent on the issue.

The letter comes amid an uptick in whale deaths in New Jersey and other states along the Atlantic coast including New York, Maryland and Virginia. At least 10 dead whales have beached in New Jersey and New York alone since December.

Last week, a 35-foot humpback whale washed up on a beach along the New Jersey coastline. Days later, a 25-foot whale was found dead in Rockaway Beach, New York. And three whales were discovered dead in southeastern Virginia in close proximity to an offshore wind farm within the span of seven days.

"Today, the whales are sending us a tragic message that demands transparency and accountability — both of which has been sorely missing from Governor Murphy’s plan to use New Jersey’s coast as the prime location for the offshore wind industry in the U.S.," Smith said on Sunday.

"Questions and concerns raised by me and many others have gone unanswered concerning the unexplained deaths of at least 10 whales."

The Republican congressman delivered the remarks at a rally held in Point Pleasant Beach, New Jersey, in opposition to offshore wind development until the whales' deaths were better understood. Hundreds of locals attended the rally to express their concerns.

Federal officials, meanwhile, have thrown cold water on claims that offshore wind is causing whale deaths. During a press briefing in January, officials with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration noted there has been an unusual mortality event in relation to whale deaths along the East Coast dating back years and that recent whale deaths couldn't be attributed to energy operators.

#nunyas news