After all, if there were such a thing as a single issue Member of Congress, it would have to be McCarthy. Rep. McCarthy ran for office to ban guns; Hollywood made a movie about her efforts to ban guns; and she is currently the lead sponsor of a bill that makes the old Clinton gun ban pale by comparison.I don't care how many reassurances I hear from the NRA (pardon me while I sarcastically genuflect for a moment), anything that gets backed up by McCarthy and the Brady Campaign is an automatic NO WAY for me.
Even many Democrats wouldn't go near a McCarthy gun bill. They have learned that supporting gun control is a losing issue. Enter Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), the so-called Dean of the House, having served since the Eisenhower administration. Dingell is also a former NRA Board member, and was in that capacity tapped to bring the NRA leadership to the table.
The end result of the negotiations was that this small clique among the NRA leadership gave this bill the support it needed to pass.
But why was it necessary to pass the bill in such an underhanded fashion? If this is such a victory for the Second Amendment, why all the secrecy? Why was a deal forged with the anti-gun Democrat House leadership, keeping most pro-gun representatives in the dark? Why was the bill rammed through on the Suspension Calendar with no recorded vote with which to identify those who are against us?
And on the topic of these unrecorded votes: in my opinion they should not exist, because they sidestep the principle of our allegedly representative government.
UPDATE: Yuri Orlov comments. Note that the email from the Brady bunch said, "Victory for Gun Control in House. NRA Sees the Light." That light must be pretty dim, considering where they apparently have their heads.













