[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 37 (Thursday, March 1, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1302-S1304]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Gun Violence
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the mass murder
in Florida this month, and I rise to ask a simple question that
millions of Americans in every part of this country are asking at their
kitchen tables right now: Is Congress finally going to do anything
meaningful about gun violence? When will enough be enough? What will it
take for this body to move beyond the same talking points that we hear
after every mass shooting and actually do something to prevent more
deaths? Will Congress finally see what the vast majority of Americans
see--gun owners and non-gun owners alike--that America's gun problem
isn't going away unless Congress musters up the courage to take it
head-on, or will Congress continue to give the lipservice of thoughts
and prayers and then do absolutely nothing?
We have to act because once again there was a massacre on American
soil. Once again it was inside a school. Once again American children
were gunned down. We keep living through a nightmare of gun violence
that repeats itself in schools, movie theaters, churches, nightclubs,
concerts, and every single day on the streets of cities in every State
around this country--Sandy Hook, Aurora, Charleston, San Bernardino,
Orlando, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, and most recently, Parkland,
FL.
We can help stop this. We have the power to help stop this. The
question is whether Congress has the political will to do it, whether
this institution will finally put families first, our children first,
and stand up to the gun manufacturers and the NRA.
I urge every Member of Congress to reflect on why they first ran for
office. We are here as public servants to serve the people who sent us
here, not to serve the gun industry's profits, not to serve the
organizations and companies and lobbyists who demand political
retribution when we do the morally right thing. Does Congress have the
will to act? Does Congress have the basic courage this country needs? I
am sorry to say, I don't know, but we can put it to the test.
There has been a lot of talk--more than normal even--about our need
to act in this Chamber. So I will say this to my colleagues: Let's make
this time different. Let's listen to the children from Stoneman Douglas
High School. Let's seize this moment. Let's take action.
I implore my colleagues to listen to what the country is saying about
gun violence today, listen to the families, listen to the survivors
from Parkland and tune out all the other noise. I did. It is possible.
Ten years ago, I had an A rating from the NRA, just like many of my
colleagues today, but then I met the mother of Nyasia Pryear-Yard. Then
I met her classmates. Nyasia was an honor student from Brooklyn. She
was dancing with her friends, having fun, loving life. She was killed
by a stray bullet in her community. Now I have an F rating from the
NRA.
I don't understand how, after meeting with all of these families,
after meeting with all of these children whose lives have been
destroyed and torn apart by gun violence--I don't understand how any
public servant would not vow to do what is necessary to make sure it
never happens again.
It is what we do after a terrorist attack, rightfully so. It is what
we do as a country. We come together. We say never again, and we do
whatever it takes to protect our country. We have to have the very same
sense of urgency now.
Plain and simple, it is a lie to say we have to choose between
protecting law-abiding gun owners' rights and protecting our children
from being murdered by assault rifles. It is a false choice to say we
cannot end gun violence without violating people's constitutional
rights. It is time for Members of Congress to stand up for what is
right for America and do what is right for our communities, and say no
to the NRA.
I commend one of our colleagues in the House of Representatives--a
Republican from Florida and an Army veteran--who is seeing this crisis
differently now too. He wrote:
I know that my community, our schools, and public gathering
places, are not made safer by any person having access to the
best killing tool the Army could put in my hands. I cannot
support the primary weapon I used to defend our people, being
used to kill children I swore to defend.
That is what leadership looks like.
I implore my colleagues in the Senate to see our gun violence problem
differently. See it with your heart. See it for what it is. It is a
matter of national security, of public health, of public safety that
will never go away unless Congress does its job.
So, once and for all, let's pass laws that actually are meaningful,
that actually can do something, not just something simple so we can say
we did something and move on. I strongly agree with my colleagues that
we need to improve the mental health system. Let's make those
investments, but it should not stop there.
We have to address the fact that we have weapons of war on our
streets today. We have to address the fact that it is so easy for
people to buy a gun--people who should never have that privilege. Let's
vote to ban semiautomatic assault rifles.
Congress has already banned fully automatic weapons. Congress has
already recognized that some weapons have no place in the civilian
world, and a weapon of war that was designed for military use, that can
fire up to 100 rounds in 1 minute or 100 rounds if you just add a bump
stock, a weapon that can completely outgun a police officer has no
place in the civilian world.
Will my colleagues vote with me to ban semiautomatic assault rifles?
Then, let's vote to ban the high-capacity magazines that go with
them. They are made for wars; they are not made to be in our schools,
not in our cities. High-capacity magazines let killers fire dozens of
rounds without having to frequently stop and reload. They are designed
to let someone fire bullets at as many people as possible in the
shortest amount of time.
Let's vote to ban high-capacity magazines, and let's vote to pass
universal background checks. That is something that is so commonsense,
so obvious. Too many people who should not get their hands on these
weapons are easily able to get them, and there are so many loopholes
that allow people to buy semiautomatic assault rifles online, where
there are no background checks. They allow people to buy semiautomatic
assault rifles at gun shows, where there are no background checks.
It simply doesn't make sense that every person who buys a firearm
doesn't go through a basic background check system. Do you know who
agrees with that? Ninety-seven percent of the American people. I can't
think of any other issue where there is such near-universal agreement
across our entire population.
So let's do what our constituents are demanding from us--not what the
NRA is demanding from us--and vote to pass universal background checks.
When we do it, let's make sure the effort is actually sincere. If we
are only voting on universal background checks, when it is tied to the
issue of concealed carry reciprocity, then that is not a sincere
attempt to fix our broken background check system. If Congress is
saying we will only pass universal background checks if we pass a new
law that says a stranger from one State has to be allowed into my State
or your State when he has a gun hidden under his jacket, that is an
insult to 97 percent of the American people who want Congress to pass
universal background checks now.
Then, let's finally vote to overturn the outrageous law that has
banned the Centers for Disease Control from even studying the issue of
gun deaths. The CDC can study any other cause of death--heart disease,
cancer, car crashes, plane crashes--unless it involves a gun. Don't you
think it is strange that when we debate this issue, the two
[[Page S1303]]
things related to gun violence that Congress has actually banned in
recent years are research--research on gun violence--and a ban on the
ATF from using computers to keep records? Let's vote to allow the CDC
to conduct research on gun violence so we can finally have the
information and the data we need to fight gun violence as effectively
as possible.
Let's also pass a law that finally makes gun trafficking a Federal
crime. Over and over again, law enforcement officers keep finding
illegally obtained guns being used in crimes. Numerous NYPD officers
have been killed by guns that were illegally obtained by criminals, and
there is literally no Federal law to stop someone from loading his
truck with guns in Georgia, driving up I-95, and selling them in a
parking lot in the Bronx directly to criminals and gang members.
I have a bill that would make this illegal. It is called the Hadiya
Pendleton and Nyasia Pryear-Yard Gun Trafficking and Crime Prevention
Act. It is bipartisan, because both parties agree that gun trafficking
is a source of gun violence in our cities.
This bill is named after Nyasia, whom I mentioned earlier, and
another teenager from Chicago who was also killed by a stray bullet.
Both guns in those crimes were trafficked. So let's pass this bill and
finally make gun trafficking a Federal crime.
If we are not trying to solve this problem now, then we are failing
as elected leaders. Congress must solve America's gun violence crisis
now. It is urgent. Our country is demanding it. Americans deserve more
from Congress than just banning bump stocks, just fixing NICS, which,
while I strongly support both of them, will not do enough on their own.
So let us not fail our country again.
I would like to ask our colleagues to immediately vote to ban
semiautomatic assault rifles and bump stocks, to pass a universal
background check system and close all of the loopholes, to allow the
CDC to research gun violence as a cause of death, to close the gun show
loophole, and to finally make gun trafficking a Federal crime.
I yield the floor.
Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, it was 2 weeks ago yesterday that the
tragic incident in Parkland took place--one of many that have impacted
our country over the last decade and beyond. That community in
Parkland, FL, and the residents of the State of Florida whom I
represent--and, frankly, the entire Nation--have demanded not just
action but immediate action.
We know--and anyone who watches this process is well aware--that
there are deep differences on how far and how much we should restrict
the Second Amendment right of every American. We know there are deep
differences about whether some of those proposed restrictions work. I
imagine those debates and those differences will not be easily resolved
and will continue, but I also know there is widespread support and
agreement that we must act now--as soon as possible--to do everything
we can to prevent another tragedy like Parkland from happening anywhere
else ever again. That is a consensus position. No matter where one
falls on this debate, no matter how one feels about how far or how
restricted restrictions on gun sales in America should be, no matter
what your views are on that, I don't know of anyone who is in favor of
school shootings, and I don't know anyone who is in favor of seeing
another one happen. There is common ground in that regard.
What I have tried to do, over the last couple of weeks, is undertake
efforts to determine what changes in Federal law not only could have
prevented this attack but could prevent future ones. In that vein, I
have met with State and Federal law enforcement investigators involved
not just in this case but in gun laws in general. I have met with
students and with teachers from Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School,
including two teachers who were injured in the attack. I have met with
school board administrators. I have met with the community at large,
including an appearance last week at a nationally televised townhall. I
have been in contact with several of the parents of the victims who
lost their lives. I have also spoken to experts in firearm sales. I
have spoken to a number of federally licensed firearm dealers who
talked about some of the frustrations they have with our existing law
and their inability to address people who ultimately turn out to be
individuals who should not own any gun of any kind.
So based on these meetings, based on all of this input, and based on
all of the other research that is out there leading up to now, the
first thing I want to say is, I actually believe this attack could have
and should have been prevented if current law had been fully enforced.
This killer was a well-known danger to the school district. He was a
well-known danger to the Broward Sheriff's office. He was a well-known
danger to his neighborhood. He was also the subject of two separate and
specific warnings to law enforcement agencies: a call to the Broward
Sheriff's office last November, a call to an FBI hotline in January.
In essence, we are always telling people, if you see something, say
something. People saw something and people said something and other
people saw it as well over a course of time. Yet somehow this deranged
and violent individual was able to pass a background check and purchase
not 1 but 10 separate firearms, and this deranged and violent
individual was ultimately able to walk right into the school a few
minutes before dismissal and take the lives of 17 innocent Floridians.
This tragedy is the result of a massive multisystemic failure--a
failure involving Federal agencies, State agencies, and local
authorities who all failed to both identify the threat he posed and
coordinate a response to stop him before he took action. It is this
failure I hope we will focus on by addressing the shortcomings and
vulnerabilities in our current laws and in our current policies. We may
still have a debate on the broader issues of regulating gun sales, but
irrespective of that debate, we still must and should do this.
So today I wanted to come here for a few minutes and announce a
comprehensive plan--not a simple bill you just vote on and move on but
a series of measures I believe could prevent these attacks before they
happen and that also help schools protect their students and their
teachers. I believe these ideas should all enjoy bipartisan support,
and, if passed, could and should help prevent the next potential mass
shooting.
These are ideas I outline not just because they work, but because I
believe we can get the votes to pass them. Sixty votes in the Senate, a
majority in the House, and the signature of a President--that is what
it takes to turn an idea into a law, and these ideas I am about to
outline both work and, I believe, could enjoy that widespread support.
One of the things we have learned is, our schools are woefully
unprepared to prevent an attack before it occurs. Furthermore, during
my visits to the site of the attack and my followup meeting with
teachers at the school, I learned of various changes to school
facilities and practices which could have stopped this attack or
improved the response. Therefore, I will be joining later today with
Senator Orrin Hatch and others in introducing the STOP School Violence
Act.
If passed, this law would provide Federal grants to do some important
things that would have been really helpful in this case: strengthen
school security infrastructure of the school, provide school training
for everyone--administrators, teachers, even students--to be able to
identify threats and to report them. Something that really would be
helpful is the creation of a school threat assessment and crisis
intervention team. There is a successful program in Los Angeles that
does this. That is a team that is a coordination between law
enforcement, other State agencies, school districts and the like where
they are all talking to each other about students and former students
who may pose a threat of violence and intervene before they act.
A second issue we identified is that even if law enforcement, school
administrators, or family members believe an individual poses the risk
of committing an act of violence, they have very few options to prevent
them from purchasing any gun or taking away the guns they already have.
[[Page S1304]]
Therefore, I intend to present a new law--perhaps in coordination
with others who are working on it now--that will lead to the creation
of gun violence restraining orders, something that will give law
enforcement and close family members the option of obtaining a court
order to prevent gun sales or remove guns from individuals who pose a
threat. To be clear, the due process in such a situation would be on
the front end, not on the back end.
The third issue we uncovered is, Federal law appears to discourage
school systems from reporting dangerous students to law enforcement. I
don't support criminalizing all school misconduct, but a student who
has threatened violence, who has exhibited violent behavior needs to be
reported to law enforcement. A student who has committed a crime by
issuing a threat of death using social media--a crime under Florida
law--that needs to be reported, but under Broward County school
policies, pursuant to something called the PROMISE Program, reporting a
student, a dangerous one, to law enforcement is the sixth step--step
6--in their plan. Therefore, I intend to propose changes to the Federal
Youth PROMISE Program so a school district plan under this program does
not delay and does not discourage law enforcement from being alerted to
dangerous and violent or hazardous behavior.
Fourth, we need to strengthen background checks. That is why I have
joined with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle pushing for the
immediate passage of Fix NICS--something that will require all Federal
agencies and incentivize every State to fully report relevant
information to the national background check database--because a
background check is only as good as the information that is on it. This
deranged killer was able to buy guns on 10 separate occasions because
he would have passed any background check because none of this stuff
that was known about him was reported to that system.
Fifth, we must begin to prosecute the purchase of guns by people
prohibited from doing so. Next week, I hope to be joining a bipartisan
group, led by Senators Toomey and Coons, in filing the ``Lie and Try''
bill, which will require the FBI to notify States when someone who is
not allowed to buy a gun, tries to buy a gun and fails the background
check, so they can be investigated, so they can be prosecuted.
In addition, we will be presenting a new law to provide more
prosecutors to go after straw purchases, which is where someone buys a
gun on behalf of someone else because that someone else could not pass
the background check.
Now, there are some additional reforms that I am open to: the
possibility of looking at age limits on semiautomatic rifles, the
notion of looking at what could be done with high-capacity magazines.
We will continue to explore and look at those. These reforms do not
enjoy the sort of widespread support in Congress that the other
measures I have announced do, and, in order to successfully pass, these
ideas will have to be crafted in a way that actually contributes to
greater public safety but also do not unnecessarily or unfairly
infringe on the Second Amendment right of all law-abiding adults to
protect themselves and their families, to hunt, or to participate in
recreational shooting.
Ultimately, there are things we can do that have widespread,
bipartisan support that we can act on, that we can get passed, that
will actually make a difference. These are impactful things.
I urge the Senate and the House, all of my colleagues here, do not
hold hostage a piece of legislation that would work and that we all
support because it doesn't have everything you want. There are things
we can act on and do, and there are things we can continue to argue
over, debate, and perhaps do in the future, but on the things we agree
on--and they happen to be things that could have prevented this attack
and will prevent future attacks--let's get those done. I have outlined
those here today. There may be others, but we owe it not just to the
victims and the families of Parkland but to all Americans everywhere;
for this attack may have happened in Southern Florida, but there is no
reason it can't happen somewhere else and, I fear, will happen
somewhere else if we do not fix the deficiencies and the flaws in our
policies, in our laws, and in the way they are enforced.
We have learned from this incident what is wrong with our system. Let
us fix it. We have an opportunity to do so while we continue to debate
and work on the issues we do not agree on. That is what I hope we will
do, and that is what I commit to doing everything I can to achieve.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the
Quattlebaum nomination?
Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. Flake), the Senator from Arizona (Mr.
McCain), and the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds).
The result was announced--yeas 69, nays 28, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 42 Ex.]
YEAS--69
Alexander
Baldwin
Barrasso
Bennet
Blunt
Boozman
Burr
Capito
Carper
Cassidy
Cochran
Collins
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Donnelly
Enzi
Ernst
Fischer
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hassan
Hatch
Heitkamp
Heller
Hirono
Hoeven
Inhofe
Isakson
Johnson
Jones
Kaine
Kennedy
King
Lankford
Leahy
Lee
Manchin
McCaskill
McConnell
Moran
Murkowski
Nelson
Paul
Perdue
Portman
Reed
Risch
Roberts
Rubio
Sasse
Scott
Shaheen
Shelby
Sullivan
Tester
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Warner
Whitehouse
Wicker
Young
NAYS--28
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Casey
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Harris
Heinrich
Klobuchar
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Peters
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Smith
Stabenow
Udall
Van Hollen
Warren
Wyden
NOT VOTING--3
Flake
McCain
Rounds
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). Under the previous order, the
motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the
remaining votes in this series be 10 minutes in length.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________