After Other States’ Moves, Connecticut Is Still Working on Stricter Gun Law

In January, New York passed the first comprehensive gun legislation in the wake of the killings. On Wednesday, Gov. John W. Hickenlooper of Colorado signed bills mandating sweeping new restrictions on the sales of firearms and ammunition there.

But in Connecticut, which became the epicenter of the debate over guns, legislative leaders have yet to introduce a bill to address gun violence and mental health issues. They continue to meet daily, and now expect introduction around the first week in April.

The result, to some, has been a perplexing process in a state traumatized and galvanized by the killings, where opinion polls show overwhelming support for new gun legislation, and where Democrats control the governor’s mansion and both houses of the General Assembly and thus have the ability to pass whatever they want. But legislators say that given the state’s relatively moderate politics, with a culture of bipartisan lawmaking and a new House speaker who made a commitment that both parties would be involved in writing gun legislation, the process has played out in a largely familiar way.

Some Democrats, including Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, and gun control advocates have expressed frustration with the pace. But the House speaker, Brendan Sharkey, a Democrat presiding over his first session, said he was confident that Democratic and Republican legislators could agree soon on comprehensive gun legislation. And, citing a statement by New York’s governor, Andrew M. Cuomo, that his state’s new limits on ammunition magazines were unworkable and needed to be modified, Mr. Sharkey said Connecticut legislators were wise to take the time to get their legislation right.

“My mantra at the beginning was it is important to act quickly, but it is more important to act intelligently,” Mr. Sharkey said in an interview.

He added, “I’m personally very confident that what we produce will give Connecticut the strongest gun safety legislation in the country when we’re done.”

After the tragedy, Connecticut created a somewhat confusing process, with one commission established by Governor Malloy to research guns, violence and mental health issues and a separate task force set up by the legislature.

Republicans and Democrats on the legislative task force agreed on many elements of a gun-control package but offered separate reports. Both sides called for universal background checks, greater safe-storage requirements and more requirements for buying ammunition. Only Democrats called for expanding the existing assault-weapons ban to cover a broader array of weapons and for a ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

But Democratic and Republican leaders indicated that the fact they were still talking was evidence that those two elements could be part of bipartisan legislation. And Larry Cafero, the House Republican leader, said passing legislation roughly four months after the shootings would be extraordinary given the complexity of the issues.

Colorado’s legislation came eight months after the mass murder in Aurora, Colo., last summer, Mr. Sharkey noted.

Alluding to New York’s experience, Mr. Cafero said, “To be the first out of the blocks and get it wrong is not a success as far as I’m concerned.”

Legislative leaders have largely kept their deliberations private. But one aspect discussed is whether to have multiple bills, with one able to gain broad support and another dealing with issues like assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines that would have a harder time attracting bipartisan agreement. That approach now seems unlikely, people close to the deliberations said.

If there is support for a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, the next question is whether it should apply just to their sale or also to their possession, meaning that those people who now own them would have to dispose of them. The commission appointed by Mr. Malloy, in an interim report, recommended the ban of the “sale, possession or use” of magazines with more than 10 rounds.

Mr. Cafero last week also sharply criticized the State Police for a briefing about the Sandy Hook case it delivered this month at a law enforcement convention in New Orleans. The Daily News, quoting someone who had attended the convention, reported on details of the crime that have not been disclosed to legislators or the victims’ families. Among the details was that the gunman, Adam Lanza, had compiled a large spreadsheet of mass murders and the weapons used in them.

Mr. Cafero said lawmakers should have all appropriate information as they work on legislation before they finish.

Mr. Malloy echoed Mr. Cafero’s disappointment with the leak, and directed the Office of the Chief State’s Attorney to release additional information on the investigation by next Friday.

But, perhaps indicating some limits to bipartisanship and frustration with the progress made, the governor said in a statement that “the vast majority of people in Connecticut can agree on some simple, common-sense things we can do — right now” and that legislators should by now have all the information they need to proceed.

“What more does Mr. Cafero need to know before he’s finally ready to take action?” Mr. Malloy said.

View the original article here

Democrats to the White Working Class -- Drop Dead (ContributorNetwork)

COMMENTARY | A recent piece in the New York Times suggests the Democratic Party is preparing to toss working class whites, who have been part of the winning coalition for the Democrats since Franklin Roosevelt, under the bus.

The new coalition for the Democratic Party will consist of educated elites that will include "professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists" and poorer voters, primarily blacks and Hispanics. Working class whites have long be alienated from the Democrats since the phenomenon of the "Reagan Democrats," who switched to the Republican Party in the 1980s. Democrats lost this demographic group by 30 percent and more in the 2010 midterms.

The educated elites will be bought off with the support of rights to self expression, abortion, gay marriage and a leftward tilt on the environment and defense policy. The less affluent minorities will be bought off by new social spending and government assistance.

While the Democrats hope to hold their losses among working American whites down, one wonders how that could be accomplished if the sense grows that working people have been abandoned. Someone has to pay for all of that social spending that will benefit the poor, after all. Working whites also remain skeptical of government sanctioned hedonism, environmental regulations that stifle jobs, and cuts in defense spending that invite aggression from America's enemies.

Rush Limbaugh, the radio talk show host never slow to pick up on a political trend, suggested the Democrats are saying, on his Monday, broadcast, "If you work, we don't want you."

In a way, the new Democratic election strategy is a reaction to the tea party movement, which has risen from discontented working and middle class people who feel that their government has become too big and too intrusive. Instead of listening to the complaints of the tea party and adjusting their agenda to attract tea party voters, the Democrats have done the equivalent of extending them the middle finger. Instead they have embraced the Occupy Wall Street crowd, which is crying out for government handouts and entitlements.

This is a dangerous strategy. The tea party, consisting as it does of people who work and make the country run, are more numerous and more organized than the constituencies the Democrats are embracing. Thus the Democratic Party might have considered itself to permanent minority status.

View the original article here

Democrats working to undercut Perry, Romney (AP)

WASHINGTON – Democrats are sharpening their arguments against the two candidates leading the Republican presidential field, hoping to soften up Rick Perry of Texas and Mitt Romney of Massachusetts before next year's general election.

Democrats want to undercut the economic records that Perry and Romney developed while serving as governors of their respective states. They also hope to tie Republicans to the tea party and raise concerns about their support for Social Security for seniors.

Republicans won't settle on a challenger to President Barack Obama for months, but Democrats are trying to turn next year's election into a choice between Obama and his opponent.

Obama's weakened standings in the polls and a struggling economy make it likely that next year's campaign will turn negative and draw sharp contrasts between the candidates.

View the original article here

DNC chairwoman looking forward to working with Republicans, beating the crap out of them in 2012 (Daily Caller)

It was a kinder, gentler Debbie Wasserman Schultz who spoke with Politico’s Mike Allen on Wednesday.

The Democratic National Committee chairwoman was the guest at a breakfeast meeting held by the publication and she spoke on several occasions of working together with her conservative counterparts.

“We can’t satisfy the extremes of either political party, we have to try to come together,” said Wasserman Schultz. “And that’s what we’re hoping Republicans will make an effort to do.”

The one-month-in DNC chairwoman prided herself in “knowing where I stand,” although that self-assurance has recently brought press scrutiny for her tendency to lob hyperbolic, and occasionally flat-wrong, attacks at her Republican counterparts. While Wasserman Schultz was moderately tame during the morning conversation about the upcoming presidential election, she still expressed excitement over engaging Republicans, particularly in her home state.

(American Crossroads launches ‘Debbie Downer’ ad against DNC chairwoman)

“I hope the Republican candidates campaign in Florida with the [Paul Ryan budget plan],” said Wasserman Schultz, who a few minutes earlier attempted to highlight the differences between mainstream Democrats and Republicans.

“There are two completely divergent directions that this country could go,” said Wasserman Schultz. “We could go in the direction that the Republicans want to take us, which would end Medicare as we know it, which would pull the safety net out from under our senior citizens, which would focus tax-cutting policy as Tim Pawlenty unbelievably doubled down on … ”

Wasserman Schultz gave the audience a peep of her bulldog style, calling the 2012 Republican candidates “deeply flawed”and politely tweaking Jon Huntsman for not having differentiated himself from Obama. And current front-runner Mitt Romney?

“Mitt Romney’s problem is that Mitt Romney needs to have a debate with himself about who he is,” said the DNC chairwoman to audible chuckling. ” … [Voters] don’t like to see people who from year-to-year, from month-to-month, from week-to-week people who are sticking their fingers in the wind and checking which way it blows.”

As for Democrats’ fingers before the 2012 winds, Wasserman Schultz continued with the party’s plan of attack, saying that despite the rough economy Obama inherited, the president will continue to “quicken the pace of the economy.” Pressed by an CNN’s Ed Henry as to when Democrats will “own the economy” Wasserman Schultz said “”Oh, I think we clearly are responsible for the — I am going to take ownership right now.”

Actual unemployment figures aside, pundits and strategists predict the economy may be Republican’s biggest weapon against Obama in 2012. The Republican National Committee’s rapid response team gleefully posted a clip of the aforementioned quote before lunchtime.

Apart from taking credit for the economy, Wasserman Schultz repeated that Democrats plan to target the Hispanic voting bloc in 2012, although she was “not optimistic about immigration reform.”

As general of a party’s attack machine, partisan characterizations — Democrats are a “coalition of diverse groups” while the Republicans need to break away from the “fringe” element — were to be expected, but Wasserman Schultz did repeat her call for fellow Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner to step down.

“I think that the best conclusion is that he should focus on addressing his problems and resign from the House,” she said. Wasserman Schultz added later, “When we got to the end of one week — that’s what expired, one week — and he had not reached that conclusion, I felt it was important to publicly state what I thought his decision should be.”

Wasserman Schultz said she was unsure if or when Weiner may make a decision, although there is speculation he may resign by the end of the week.

Asked by Allen what opportunities the DNC chairwoman has had to work with House conservatives, Wasserman Schultz said there were “individual Republicans that I’ve found are wonderful to work with,” including Aaron Schock, Dan Webster, and Lamar Smith.

That compliment, however, ended with a caveat.

“[Republicans] know how to compromise, they just can’t seem to break their fear of what the ramifications would be from the Tea Party, the right-wing fringe, if they listened to what their inner-self tells them what’s the right thing to do.”

Such a wonderful thing to say!

DNC chairwoman looking forward to working with Republicans, beating the crap out of them in 2012

Republican senators step up calls on Obama to produce Medicare plan

Bill Maher's favorite GOP candidate: 'I would vote for Ron Paul if I had to pick'

Bethesda Lululemon to reopen for first time after employee slaying

Florida Senate candidate says no Medicare reform until 2035

View the original article here