 
May 8, 2003
Bush in Tight Spot With N.R.A. Over Gun Legislation
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
 ASHINGTON,
May 7 — President Bush and the National Rifle Association,
long regarded as staunch allies, find themselves unlikely
adversaries over one of the most significant pieces of
gun-control legislation in the last decade, a ban on
semiautomatic assault weapons.
At issue is a measure to be introduced by Senate Democrats on
Thursday to continue the ban. Groundbreaking 1994 legislation
outlawing the sale and possession of such firearms will expire
next year unless Congress extends it, and many gun-rights groups
have made it their top priority to fight it. Even some advocates
of gun control say the prohibition has been largely ineffective
because of its loopholes.
Despite those concerns, the White House says Mr. Bush
supports the extension of the current law — a position that
has put him in opposition to the N.R.A. and left many gun owners
angry and dumbfounded.
"This is a president who has been so good on the Second
Amendment that it's just unbelievable to gun owners that he
would really sign the ban," said Grover G. Norquist, a
leading conservative and an N.R.A. board member who opposes the
weapons ban. "I don't think it's sunk in for a lot of
people yet."
Advocates on both sides of the issue say the White House
appears to have made a bold political calculation: that the risk
of alienating a core constituency is outweighed by appearing
independent of the gun lobby, sticking to a campaign promise and
supporting a measure that has broad popular appeal. The
president has claimed the middle road — supporting an
extension of the current ban but not endorsing the stronger
measures that gun-control supporters say would outlaw many
"copycat" assault weapons. That position has forced
Democrats in the Senate to reject plans for a more ambitious
weapons ban.
Mr. Bush's position "cuts against the N.R.A.'s
position," said Michael Franc, vice president of government
relations at the conservative Heritage Foundation, "and it
will put the president — for one of the first times since he
signed the campaign finance reform bill — at odds with his own
political base."
"He's built up enough positive political capital in
other areas that it won't be fatal," Mr. Franc added, but
the issue could hurt Mr. Bush in Middle America, considered
critical to his re-election chances in 2004.
The assault-weapons issue puts the president in a precarious
political spot. When Mr. Bush was campaigning for president in
2000, a top N.R.A. official boasted that the group's
relationship with Mr. Bush was so "unbelievably
friendly" that the N.R.A. could practically claim a seat at
the White House. The N.R.A. has been a major donor to Mr. Bush,
and the gun lobby and the Bush administration have been in lock
step on most major gun issues, including the current push to
limit lawsuits against gun manufacturers. The Justice Department
under Attorney General John Ashcroft has been a particularly
close ally of the gun lobby, pushing an expanded view of gun
rights under the Second Amendment and initiating law enforcement
changes sought by the N.R.A.
But White House officials said the assault-weapons ban was
one case in which the president and the N.R.A. did not see eye
to eye.
"There are times when we agree and there are times when
we disagree," said Scott McClellan, a White House
spokesman. "The president makes decisions based on what he
believes is the right policy for Americans." Mr. McClellan
added that the ban was put in place as a way of deterring crime
and that Mr. Bush "felt it was reasonable."
The White House position has heartened gun-control advocates.
Matt Bennett, a spokesman for Americans for Gun Safety, which
supports an extension of the weapons ban, said, "I think
Bush realizes that, number one, this is the right thing to do,
number two, he promised to do this in the 2000 campaign, and
number three, he knows that it's good politics and this is an
extremely popular measure."
The N.R.A. has maintained a polite civility toward the White
House, even though it insists the ban is a violation of the
Second Amendment that deprives hunters and sportsmen of many
high-powered rifles.
Chris W. Cox, the N.R.A's chief lobbyist, said in an
interview that while the defeat of the assault-weapons ban would
be one of the N.R.A's top priorities, the group's focus would be
on convincing members of Congress to vote against it so that it
never reaches Mr. Bush's desk. "Do we agree with the
administration's position on this? No, we don't, but the real
fight is going to be not at that level, but in Congress,"
he said.
A bill will be introduced in the Senate on Thursday by
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Senator
Charles Schumer, Democrat of New York, that would extend the ban
for 10 years in much the same form it exists today. House
Democrats expect to introduce a toughened version of the bill
next week. That version, rejected by Senate Democrats as too
politically risky, would significantly expand the class of
banned weapons.
Mr. Schumer said he believed Mr. Bush's support could be
critical in what he predicted would be a hard-fought campaign to
renew the assault-weapons measure, which bans 19 types of
firearms and others that meet certain criteria.
"We hope the president will not just say he supports the
ban but will work to get it passed," Mr. Schumer said in an
interview. "This will be a good measure of the compassion
in his compassionate conservatism."
Senate Democrats ultimately decided that a stronger version
of the ban would not pass muster with the White House and thus
stood little chance of gaining passage, officials said. As a
result, the Senate proposal will not specifically ban the
Bushmaster rifle type that was used in last year's
Washington-area sniper attacks. The House version would, because
it includes a broader definition of an assault rifle, officials
said.
"I would like to strengthen the bill" beyond what
will be introduced in the Senate on Thursday, Senator Feinstein
said today. "But I don't want to lose the bill, and
important to that is the president's support."
Mr. Schumer said that even with the White House's public
support, "I am worried that the anti-gun-control forces in
the administration will conspire to kill this measure in the
dead of night without a vote."
He noted that Mr. Ashcroft gave a noncommittal response two
months ago when he was asked before the Senate several times
whether he would support the reauthorization of the
assault-weapons ban.
Mr. Ashcroft said Justice Department studies had found that
the ban's impact on gun violence was "uncertain," and
he said more study was needed.
The question of the gun ban's impact over the last nine years
will be a crucial point of debate.
A report due to be released soon by the Violence Policy
Center — a liberal Washington group that supports an expansion
of the ban — examined the killings of 211 law enforcement
officers from 1998 to 2001 and found that one in five were done
with assault weapons, often copycat models that did not fall
under the 1994 ban.
"Unfortunately, the firearms industry has been very
successful at evading the ban," Kristen Rand, the group's
legislative director, said. "Assault weapons remain a huge
public safety problem."
Gun-rights groups insist that the assault-weapons ban has had
little or no impact in fighting crime, and they maintain that
their opponents are wrong to depict high-powered rifles as the
weapon of choice for gangs and rampage killers.
"None of these weapons are used for crimes, and the
Democrats know that," Mr. Norquist said.
For many gun owners, the issue is visceral, and Mr. Bush's
stance has made the debate more emotional.
"There are a lot of gun owners who worked hard to put
President Bush in office, and there are a lot of gun owners who
feel betrayed by him," said Angel Shamaya, an Arizona gun
owner who runs a Web site called "keepandbeararms.com."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
