Congressional Record, Volume 165 Issue 103 (Wednesday, June 19, 2019)

[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 103 (Wednesday, June 19, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3817-S3822]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

Gun Violence

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, 6 years have passed since 20 beautiful
children and 6 wonderful educators were killed in a massacre that
gripped the Nation's attention in Newtown, CT. That tragedy, for any of
us who lived through it, remains as real and vivid and grief-stricken
today as it was then. We have lived with the memories and with the
families and with countless others who found their lives changed--
literally, transformed--in ways they never imagined.
In the day or so after that shooting--it may have been the following
day--I was at one of the numerous calling hours I attended, and I spoke
with one of the moms of those children. I said to her: When you are
ready, we should talk about what can be done about gun violence in
America.
She looked at me, through her tears, and she said: I am ready now.
Many of the families of Sandy Hook were ready then. Our Nation was
ready then. Yet the U.S. Congress proved disastrously and tragically
unready--in fact, failing in its responsibility to react not only with
prayers and thoughts, as it did, but also with action to honor those
wonderful children and educators with action, to honor them before
others would die in the same way, the result of massacres that are
preventable.
The Senate came close to acting. More than 50 votes were there for a
background check bill, which had bipartisan support, but not the 60
votes that were necessary. From this Gallery vividly came the shout:
Shame on you.
It was well justified.
Shame on the U.S. Senate for failing to act 6 years ago. Shame on the
Congress for being complicit in the continuing massacres that have been
added since Sandy Hook: Oak Creek, Blacksburg, Charleston, Chattanooga,
Lafayette, Parkland, San Bernardino, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs.
That is just a partial list, not to mention the 90 deaths every day,
often occurring singularly or in twos or threes or by suicide or by
accident, as claimed the life of Ethan Song in Guilford, CT, when he
was playing with a friend and a gun killed him--a loss that Kristin and
Michael Song have made positive by their advocacy of commonsense
measures to require safe storage of weapons.
The voices and faces of Sandy Hook have continued to inspire and move
us. As of Parkland and all of the other tragedies that have occurred,
they have rallied and written, emailed and called, organized and
mobilized, and they have created a movement. It is a movement that is
turning around this country, and it already has the effect of breaking
the vice-like grip of the NRA on Congress. It is moving us forward. It
has spawned groups at the grassroots, like Newtown Action Alliance and
Everytown for Gun Safety, Moms Demand Action, CT Against Gun Violence,
Brady, and many others, including Sandy Hook Promise, whose dinner we
will attend tonight, their annual gathering.
We have come to the floor of the Senate now to demand action that
honors those victims and prevents more victims, more survivors, more
grieving families. I am here with my colleague Senator Chris Murphy,
who has been an unstinting advocate, a champion, a partner in this
effort. We are here to demand that this body act on a measure that was
passed more than 100 days ago by the House, which would require a
universal background check.
The fact that the House passed that measure is itself evidence of a
change that is moving this country. The change in leadership in the
House is the result of the election of new Members in the House of
Representatives as a result of the gun violence prevention movement
that politically is acquiring an undeniable and indisputable force. Gun
violence prevention was on the ballot in the last election, and gun
violence prevention won. It won in the new Members of Congress who have
championed that universal background check measure and closing the
Charleston loophole, and they have successfully passed it there. They
are making a critical difference, and they are coming here. Their
election is the result of that grassroots political movement that is
changing the narrative, and for the first time, it puts us nearer--in
fact, nearer than ever before, that I can remember--to commonsense
measures that will stop gun violence.
I have been involved in this effort since my earliest days as
attorney general in the early 1990s, when Connecticut passed a ban on
assault weapons. I not only advocated for it but then defended it in
court against many of the arguments that continue to be made today,
even though they have been rejected by the courts and the American
people.
States have moved forward, as Connecticut has done, to adopt these
commonsense measures: universal background checks; a ban on assault
weapons and high-capacity magazines; most recently, a safe storage
bill, Ethan's Law in Connecticut; a ban on bump stocks and 3D weapons;
and, of course, measures that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous
people. But the laws of a State like Connecticut--those strong laws--
are no stronger or more effective than the laws of the weakest States
because guns come across our borders. We are at the mercy of States
with little or no protection for their people. The solution is a
national one. It must apply across the country to make our Nation safer
and to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.
As near as we are and as much as has been accomplished, the work to
be done is right here in this body, on this floor, and it must be done
now. That is why we are here. That is why I have advocated for other
measures. I have introduced Ethan's Law to provide for safe storage. It
has been supported here. A number of you have met with Kristin and
Michael Song, and they will be visiting again. I have introduced an
emergency risk protection order bill that would enable courts and law
enforcement to take guns out of the hands of dangerous people as a
result of a warrant and due process; an incentive program at the
national level that makes States more aware and more inclined to adopt
them, which should be bipartisan; a law that repeals PLCAA, the
protection of lawful commerce in arms. This was adopted with the
promise that no one would be deprived of a right of action, no one
would be barred from the courthouse, but in fact PLCAA has prevented
victims from seeking justice. It has stopped their day in court, and it
should be repealed.

Those measures should be moved forward, and I am hopeful they will
with bipartisan support. There is no question today about the need for
a universal background check bill that Senator Murphy and I and others
who will speak today have advocated and now offers an opportunity for
bicameral approval.
This movement has indisputable force. It has a dynamism and drive
that will only increase regardless of what happens today. We are not
giving up; we are not going away; and history will judge harshly a
majority leader and a majority that fails to give us a vote. It will
judge harshly opponents of these commonsense measures, and the voters
will judge harshly because gun violence prevention will be on the
ballot again. We will make sure of it. The American people will have an
opportunity to vote again for candidates who support commonsense,
sensible measures to make America safer, to keep guns out of the hands
of truly dangerous people. The grip of the NRA is breaking. The gun
lobby is crumbling from within and losing its traction in the field.
We are on the right side of history, and I hope my colleagues will
see it that way, too, and will give us a vote. Let us vote on universal
background checks, the bill that has come to us from the House of
Representatives. Let's do it today.
Thank you.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I am on the floor to join my colleagues
Senator Blumenthal and those who will speak afterward.
It has been 113 days since the House of Representatives passed H.R.
8, the bipartisan background checks bill. We have a proposal before the
Senate as well, and we are here to make a simple request: Bring this
bill up for a debate. Let us do our work as the U.S. Senate on an issue
that dominates headlines, dominates kitchen table conversation, and
steals from this country 36,000 lives a year, 3,000 a month, and 100 a
day. Those are the number of people who are killed by gunshot wounds.

[[Page S3818]]

Each one of their stories is different. These are mostly suicides;
many of them are homicides; accidental shootings; some are mass
shootings that make the headlines, but no one can escape this horror
today.
In my son's school, he has to go through an active-shooter drill
every year. Think about the trauma we put kids through preparing for a
stranger to walk into their classroom with a weapon.
Just this past weekend, 32 people were shot and 6 were killed in 1
city alone, the city of Philadelphia, including 24-year-old Isiaka
Meite, who died this weekend. He was at a cookout to celebrate a
graduation and to also celebrate Father's Day, and he along with four
teenagers were shot while out celebrating. That is the reality of what
happened in just one single city.
So I get it that the bill that passed the House of Representatives
may not be the bill that could get 60 votes in the Senate, but what is
so offensive to many of us who have lived with this epidemic--it is
personal to everyone here--because I don't think there is an individual
in the Senate who hasn't had a one-on-one experience with a victim of
gun violence or the mother or father of someone who was killed. What is
so offensive is that we are not even trying. We are not even attempting
to find common ground.
The Senate used to do this. The Senate used to take big important
issues, put them on the floor, and spend at least a week's time trying
to figure out whether you could get 50 or 60 votes. We are not doing
that on anything in the U.S. Senate today. This place has become a
complete, total legislative graveyard. There is really nothing more
important to families out there than their ability to protect their
loved ones from harm. The fact that we are not trying to find consensus
on the issue of gun violence, that there is no interest to put H.R. 8
before this body so we can attempt to debate it, amend it, and come to
some consensus in the Senate is unconscionable to many of us.
I want to narrow my remarks on how exceptional this issue is from a
public opinion standpoint. I have been on the floor so many times
before talking about the evidence that points us to why background
checks are the most impactful intervention we can make.
In Missouri, where they got rid of their universal background checks
requirement, and guns started to flow into the community through gun
shows and internet sales without a background check, homicide rates
went up by 40 percent and reports of Missouri-bought illegal guns found
in other neighboring States skyrocketed.
It is the exact opposite effect in Connecticut. Years ago,
Connecticut put in place a universal background check requirement tied
to a local permit. Research showed that reduced our gun homicide rate
by around 40 percent. So the evidence is there.
Let's just talk about public opinion on this matter because there is
really nothing like background checks today in the public
consciousness. Today polls will show that 97 percent of Americans
believe that everybody should go through a background check before they
purchase a weapon. There is nothing else in America today that gets 97
percent support. I mean, there is nothing else that gets 97 percent
support. These are actual numbers. Apple pie is supported by 81 percent
of Americans. Kittens only get 76 percent support from the American
public today, and baseball, the American pastime, has the support of
only two-thirds of Americans. Yet 97 percent of Americans believe
someone should fill out a form proving they are not a criminal or
seriously mentally ill before buying a gun. Universal background
checks, while here in Congress seemingly a very controversial,
politically charged issue, is more popular than apple pie, kittens, or
baseball. These are actual numbers.

I don't mean to make light of this. I just need to drive home the
point that no matter if you represent a Republican-leaning State or a
Democratic-leaning State, a State that voted for Donald Trump or a
State that voted for Hillary Clinton, your constituents want you to
vote for universal background checks.
Let me just give the full panoply of public opinion on this. The
number of people who support background checks is 97 percent today.
That includes 90 percent of gun owners. I can back that up with plenty
of anecdotal experience from my State. When I talk to gun owners, many
who assume I have a hidden agenda and who believe I want to confiscate
their guns--when I sit and talk to them about background checks, they
say: Of course. It took me 5 minutes. I don't want people who are
criminals to get their hands on guns. Everybody should go through a
background check. Ninety percent of gun owners think this is a good
idea.
This is not new data. Back in 2012, prior to the shooting in Sandy
Hook, 74 percent of NRA members who were polled said they supported
requiring criminal background checks. A year later, in April 2013, a
Washington Post poll showed that 91 percent of Americans supported
background checks.
In July of 2014, a Quinnipiac poll found that 92 percent of Americans
supported background checks, including, in that poll, 86 percent of
Republicans and 92 percent of Independents, 90 percent of men and 94
percent of women and 92 percent of gun-owning households. You don't get
below 90 in any constituency.
In September 2015, another poll showed 93 percent of Americans
support it and 90 percent of Republicans.
A CBS poll from 2016 shows that 89 percent of Americans supported it,
including 92 percent of Republicans.
In March of 2017, a Pew Research Center poll found that 77 percent of
gun owners and 87 percent of non-gun owners supported background
checks.
Then the February Quinnipiac 2018 poll found 97 percent of Americans
support background checks.
These are stunning numbers. They are stunning numbers. Again, they
don't require everybody in this Chamber to support the bill that passed
the House of Representatives, but it has been 113 days since H.R. 8
passed, which is broadly supported by 90 percent of Americans, and we
still have not had that bill or any version of this measure brought up
before this body for debate or an attempt to find consensus.
This is the running theme. We are talking a lot about the Senate
becoming a graveyard for legislation because, in my lifetime, I have
read stories about the Senate working through big issues, having
serious debates--sometimes not coming to a completed product, sometimes
ending up stymied but more than not figuring out a way where 50 or 60
votes could be achieved.
The House is passing legislation--healthcare legislation, anti-
violence legislation, clean elections legislation--and all of it is
coming here to die, not because we can't find consensus but because we
don't even try to find consensus. In those 113 days, approximately,
11,000 people have been killed by guns. That is a number that finds no
equal in any other high-income nation. I can talk to you about the
variety of reasons for it. Some of them can be solved by us; some of
them can't.
America is a unique nation with a unique history. We are, indeed, a
melting pot of races, ethnicities, and backgrounds. By virtue of that,
we were likely going to be a more violent nation from the start. I
admit that, but we have poured kerosene on this fire by having the
loosest gun laws, a set of laws that are not supported by 90 percent of
Americans who are asking us to do something different.
So we are on the floor today asking, begging, pleading with Senator
McConnell and Republican leadership to at least bring H.R. 8, the
Bipartisan Background Checks Act, or some version of it before the
Senate so we can have a debate on the most important, most vital issue
to Americans today--their physical safety.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from
Connecticut for leading this discussion today on gun violence. We want
to focus on one bill in particular, one piece of legislation, but I
want to step back for a moment and talk about this issue more broadly
in terms of what it means for the American people.
We are talking about a problem, the problem of gun violence, which is
a uniquely American problem. No other country has this problem. No
other country has the amount of mass shootings. I don't know the exact
number,

[[Page S3819]]

but we have had so many that we know them by the name of the community.
When we say Newtown, CT, or Sandy Hook Elementary School, when we talk
about places like Columbine, or Parkland, you know what happened at
those places because they have become so common. So this is a uniquely
American problem that Americans have to solve. Some of those Americans,
obviously, have to be Members of Congress.
You would never know there was this problem based upon the inaction
by Congress, by the Senate, and, until recently, the House over many
years.
The one question I have to ask is, are we going to surrender to this
uniquely American problem--because the inaction by Congress over many
years now would indicate to me that the answer to that question is yes;
that a lot of Members of Congress, House and Senate, have concluded
that there is absolutely nothing we can do to reduce even the
likelihood of another mass shooting or reduce the likelihood of more
and more gun violence.
So here we are. The House has passed background check legislation
that, as Senator Murphy just outlined, is overwhelmingly popular with
more than 90 percent of Americans who support it, and we are in day
113. It has been 113 days since the House passed it, and there is no
action on the Senate floor. There hasn't even really been a debate of
any kind here in the Senate on gun violence or what to do about it.

So consider that time frame and all the time that has gone by since.
The one bill that dealt with this issue of gun violence that passed
either House in probably 25 years is now 113 days from having any
action in the Senate. So with no action on something as popular and as
well-supported as that bill and on such an important issue as gun
violence, I have to conclude that without any action here in the
Senate, in this particular legislative graveyard, the Senate is
surrendering to this problem. It is just letting this bill die in the
Senate over time.
Among the many examples we could talk about, I will give you two
examples from both ends of our State of Pennsylvania. In the city of
Pittsburgh, we witnessed the deadly act of violence against the Jewish
community. The worst act of violence against a Jewish community in
American history was at the Tree of Life synagogue back in October,
when a shooter opened fire on three congregations worshipping during
Shabbat services. Three different congregations were worshipping at the
same place. This deadly mass shooting--a targeted, cowardly, hateful
attack on the Jewish community--resulted in the deaths of 11 innocent
Pennsylvanians and injured 6 more, including 4 members of law
enforcement. Eleven people were gone in a matter of minutes, and in
this case they range in age from the ages of low fifties, I guess, to
the oldest being 97 years old, if memory serves me.
While this attack was horrific for so many reasons, it is just one
example of the ongoing and systemic problem of gun violence across our
country. It is an epidemic. I will say it. It is a uniquely American
problem, and we are acting as if there is no problem at all here in the
Senate.
Just consider this. Through the month of April, nearly 400
individuals have been shot in the city of Philadelphia. In many cases,
if that doesn't lead to death itself, it leads to grievous permanent
injury.
Just this past weekend in Philadelphia, there were 19 shootings in
one city--19 shootings in one weekend with 5 deaths and 28 others
wounded. One of the shootings occurred in a public park during a
graduation party. Six people were shot and one was killed. They were
all under the age of 25.
Here is what the toll so far is this year. This year the gun-related
death toll in Philadelphia is 152--in one city. Needless to say, the
national statistics on this--the national numbers--are staggering, in
addition to the numbers I cited from Philadelphia. Gun violence affects
more than 100,000 people every year, impacting their lives year after
year in numbers like that.
On February 27, as I mentioned, the House passed H.R. 8, the
Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019--113 days ago--but the
majority leader has refused to call this bipartisan bill to the floor
of the Senate. Shouldn't we even debate it? Is that really where we
are--that this uniquely American problem of gun violence is not even
worthy of a debate? We are looking for a vote, obviously, but is it not
even worthy of a debate and then a vote?
We know that there may not be the votes in the Senate to pass this,
but we are not even going to debate something on such an important
issue? This is a piece of legislation supported by more than 90 percent
of the American people. If you don't want to be for it, just tell us in
the debate and register your vote. At least we will have debated the
one bill that passed the House in 25 years. We have this one
opportunity on one bill, and it is not even worthy of a debate here in
the Senate.
I am a proud original cosponsor of the Senate version of the bill,
the Background Check Expansion Act, because it is a type of commonsense
legislation that makes Americans safe from the horrors of gun violence.
In fact, expanding background checks is supported by more than 90
percent of Americans because they know--we all know--that background
checks make our community safer.
Since 1994, background checks have prevented more than 3.5 million
gun sales to dangerous criminals and others prohibited from owning
guns. Yet these background check bills haven't seen the light of day
since H.R. 8 was passed in the House. I will say it again: 113 days
ago. They were sent to this legislative graveyard. I have to ask my
Republican colleagues: Why don't you ask the majority leader to
schedule just one debate? It could be a limited debate. Then, let's
have a vote up or down. I hope there may be a vote on some other
measures, but at least let's debate and vote on a background check bill
that passed the House of Representatives.
The time for talk about this issue and the time for lamenting the
problem has long passed. We have to do something about it. That means
debating and voting. That is what we are supposed to do here--debate
big issues and vote. Vote how you want, but at least debate and vote on
this issue, which will reduce the likelihood that we will see more and
more tragedies like we have seen.
We are told that 100 people are shot and killed every day in the
United States of America. One hundred people are shot and killed every
day. We go not just days but weeks and months and now years without a
single bill getting the kind of debate and vote that it should get and
without a single bill passing.
At least let's get a start with this piece of legislation. Let's
debate it and vote on it.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Scott of Florida). The Senator from
Maryland.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Casey for his
passion on this issue, and I want to thank Senators Blumenthal and
Murphy for bringing us here together.
The logic here is inescapable. I can't explain to my constituents,
nor can Senator Casey explain to his, why the universal background
check has not been on the floor of the Senate for a vote.
Let us do our will. This is an issue that we have talked about for
years. The majority leader has refused to bring this up for a vote so
that the will of the majority can prevail. That is what we are simply
asking for.
It was in February of this year that the House of Representatives
passed a bipartisan bill to deal with universal background checks. It
passed by a large majority, and we now understand the urgency of our
considering legislation.
Inaction is not an option. We have to do what we can to deal with the
crisis at hand. What is the crisis? One hundred people are killed every
day in this country by gun violence; 310 are shot, by the way; 210 are
injured; and 100 are killed every day of the week, 7 days a week.
Since the House has acted on this bill, about 11,000 Americans have
been killed. This is urgent. Every day makes a difference. In my State
of Maryland, over 180 people have been killed by gun violence since the
House passed the bipartisan universal background check legislation in
February of this year. It is the second leading cause of death among
children and first among African-American children. Rarely does a month
go by without our having another mass shooting take place here in the
United States.

[[Page S3820]]

It was 1 year ago, on June 28, in Annapolis, MD, at the Capital
Gazette, that we saw the shooting that took the lives of reporters. At
that time, I took the floor with others saying: What more does it take
for us to debate gun safety in this country? Why can't we take up
legislation and have a debate? Isn't that what our job is here in the
Senate?
The Gun Control Act of 1968 established a framework for legally
prohibiting certain categories of people from possessing firearms. The
list of prohibited persons has grown over the years, but it includes
felons, fugitives, domestic abusers, and those found by the court or
other tribunal to be seriously mentally ill. I would hope that all of
us agree that these individuals shouldn't have guns. How do you know
that they are going to get a gun without a background check?
Since the Brady Law took effect, it has blocked more than 3 million
prohibited gun sales and processed over 278 million purchase requests.
The technology is there. We know how it works. We have the FBI run a
background check. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System
is there to see whether you have been a convicted felon or are a
fugitive, a domestic abuser, or other prohibited purchasers. We have
the technology. We know that background checks work at the State level
as well.
According to the Brady Campaign, States that have expanded the scope
of their background checks have seen impressive results, including that
53 percent fewer law enforcement officers are shot and killed in the
line of duty, 47 percent fewer women are shot by intimate partners, and
cities in States with expanded background checks have seen a 48-percent
reduction in gun trafficking.
Does it solve the problem? No. Does it take a bite out of gun
violence? Yes. It is a significant improvement in dealing with gun
violence. It is part of the solution. Yet when the Brady Law was
enacted, it was before the internet. America has changed, and our
Nation's gun laws need to change with it.
Today about one out of every five gun sales is either made online,
made privately, or made at a gun show and they are not subject to the
background check which is the law. It is our responsibility to make
sure that the laws are kept up-to-date and are effective. These sales
are largely unregulated and unchecked. That is simply wrong. These
sales can avoid the background check.
Passing legislation to expand background checks to nearly every gun
sale, including those conducted online, at gun shows, and through
private transfers should be a top priority in Congress for commonsense
gun safety legislation to save lives.
I am not going to repeat the numbers that Senator Murphy and Senator
Casey mentioned about the popular support. It is over 90 percent--97
percent, the last poll showed--and by all categories, because it is
common sense. In fact, I think the public has a hard time understanding
why we haven't passed this long before now.
I agree that gun laws alone can't solve the problem, but it will make
a difference. There is no single answer, but we should take steps that
can help us deal with this crisis. Sitting on the sidelines is not an
option when our children are being killed, sometimes by other children.
Surrendering to the false logic that the problem is too big to
address falls well short of what the American people deserve and expect
us to do. They sent us here to the Senate to make tough decisions. This
isn't even a tough decision, but we have to make decisions.
From my hometown of Baltimore to many towns across America, there
have been names in the headlines because of gun-related tragedies or
mass shootings. People are calling on us to act. My message is simple:
Let's bring the bill to the floor of the U.S. Senate. Let's follow the
example of the House of Representatives. Let's not be the graveyard.
Let's be the greatest deliberative body in the world. Let's take up the
issue. Let's debate it. Let's vote on it, and let's do right for the
American people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I rise to echo the comments of my
colleagues on these bills that are pending here in the Senate.
I hold up the Calendar of Business for the Senate for Wednesday, June
19, 2019, which is today. On page 15 of the calendar, item 29 is H.R.
8, ``An act to require a background check for every firearm sale.'' The
status, which is listed in every Senate calendar, is ``Mar. 4, 2019.--
Read the second time and placed on the calendar.'' It is pending here
before the Senate.
The next item, No. 30, is H.R. 1112, an act to amend chapter 44 of
title 18, U.S. Code, to strengthen the background check procedures to
be followed before a Federal firearms licensee may transfer a firearm.
On March 5, 2019, it was read the second time and placed on the
calendar.
In this body, we are not asking for something that isn't before us.
No. The Senate calendar for today says these bills are before us. Yet
one individual, the Senate majority leader, is keeping us from having a
debate and a vote on these two matters. We could vote on it. Maybe we
wouldn't have the votes, but we ought to be able to at least vote and
be accountable to the American public for the positions on these
issues.
I rise in the shadow of yet another tragedy in Virginia. Every
Senator in this body has had tragedies like these. I know the Presiding
Officer has suffered multiple tragedies in Orlando and Parkland. I was
the mayor of Richmond when we had one of the highest homicide rates in
the United States, which had been driven by gun violence. I was the
Governor of Virginia when the shooting happened at Virginia Tech. I was
in the U.S. Senate when two Virginia journalists were murdered on live
television by a disgruntled ex-colleague. Then, three Fridays ago, on
May 31, in Virginia Beach, just as I had left the city after giving a
talk there to a local bar organization, the news came about the
shooting of 12 innocent people--11 city employees and 1 contractor who
was at the city just to get a building permit--who had been gunned
down, in this case, by an individual who had used weapons that had
massive magazines--the 30-round magazines. They were the kind of
magazines that were also at issue in the shooting in Parkland. This is
why I take to the floor today.
In thinking about these tragedies in Virginia and the repetitive
nature of them, when the shooting happened at Virginia Tech when I was
Governor, I had always hoped that it would have been the worst shooting
in the history of the United States. It is a weird thing to say about
your own State. What a bizarre thing to say about your own State--that
this tragedy had happened on April 16, 2007, and that I had hoped it
would have been the worst shooting in history whereby there had been 32
people killed. Yet, at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, 49 people were
killed. In Las Vegas--and my colleague from Nevada is here--over 50
people were killed, and hundreds were injured.
There is an escalating nature to these. Our teachers now have to do
live shooting drills because of school shootings. They didn't have to
do that when they were going through ed schools 10 or 15 years ago.
They have to hold practices with little elementary school students. A
teacher was telling me the other day about what it is like at the
beginning of the year to take a group of second graders into a
restroom, which is their designated spot near their classroom. The
teacher is then instructed to stand in front of the door so that if a
shooter starts to shoot through the door, it will be the teacher who
will be killed rather than the students.
The fact that we have normalized this and that we have practiced it
is evidence of a sickness. Yet there are cures for sicknesses. These
bills are cures for a sickness. We don't have complete cures, but they
would make us safer.
As was indicated, the Federal background requirement has prevented 3
million people since 1994 from getting weapons that they shouldn't have
had. Some of those individuals, no doubt, may have found weapons in
other ways, but the moment people are turned away from getting weapons
they can't have, society is safer on those days. Sometimes they are
turned away, and they never get the weapons--3 million times. Yet,
because of glitches and weaknesses in the background check system, too
many people who have

[[Page S3821]]

been prohibited for decades from having weapons are still able to get
them.
The New York Times recently did a study of 19 mass shootings in which
the firearms that had been used had been bought legally after there
having been Federal background checks--19 instances in which the
firearms had been legally purchased after there having been background
checks. It discovered, though, in looking at those 19 cases that at
least 9 of the instances had been those in which the background check
systems had had glitches and flaws so that the people were able to get
the weapons even though they shouldn't have been able to. Let me give
you just three powerful examples.
The young man who murdered 32 people at Virginia Tech was a student
by the name of Seung-Hui Cho. He went to high school in Fairfax, which
is not far from here. He had a serious mental illness. His counselors
and teachers at his high school knew this young man. They knew his
capacity and strengths, and they knew he had problems. They were able
to wrap services around him so that he not only graduated but was a
successful student.
Then he went on to a college campus that was 200 miles away, and all
of that knowledge was locked up in his high school and didn't transfer
to the college campus. He was then with a new group of 35,000 people.
The folks didn't know him, and they didn't know of the challenges he
had. They didn't know what it took for him to be successful, because he
would have been able to have been successful if the right things had
been done.

Over the course of his college career, he experienced increasing
instances of mental illness and, at one point, was adjudicated by a
local behavioral services board as being mentally ill and dangerous.
That is one of the nine categories under Federal law. It is not just
one's being mentally ill, because mentally ill people are, more often,
the victims of violence rather than the perpetrators of violence. You
have to be adjudicated mentally ill and likely be a danger to others.
He was adjudicated in that way, and that prohibited him from getting a
weapon.
The local court system failed to introduce the record into the
national criminal background check system. So, a few months later, when
he went to a federally licensed gun dealer in Roanoke to purchase the
weapons that led to the mass atrocity, even though he was prohibited,
the weakness in the background check system allowed him to get the
weapons and carry out the murders.
I was able to fix some of this glitch by executive order when I was
the Governor when what I really needed at the time from my legislature
in Virginia was a commitment to universal background checks. The better
the system, the safer we are. I could not get that from my legislature,
but that was an instance in which, clearly, glitches in the background
check system had led to this massive atrocity.
In Charleston, this deranged young man who had sat in on a Bible
study, had worshiped with people who had prayed for him and who had
later forgiven him, and had then used his weapon to murder nine people
had acquired a weapon despite his having been prohibited. He had been
prohibited under Federal law from having a weapon.
There is a part of the Federal law that is the subject of one of the
two bills that is pending now before the Senate that says, if you are
buying at a licensed gun dealer's and if the background check can't be
completed within 72 hours, the dealer has to put the weapon in your
hand even though you are prohibited from having the weapon.
In the case of Dylann Roof, they could not complete the background
check within 3 days. The weapon was put in his hand, and he murdered
these people as they were at a Bible study in the middle of the week.
Again, there was a weakness in the background check system.
How sad they are, these shootings. They are sad however and wherever
they occur--at a nightclub, at a school, at a corner in Richmond. We
had the murder of a 9-year-old and the injury of an 11-year-old 2 weeks
ago in a neighborhood park because of a driveby. Wherever it happens,
it is horrible--but at synagogues and churches in Charleston?
You will remember the instance in Sutherland Springs, TX, in November
2017 when someone went into a church and killed 26 people. Again, there
was a weakness in the background check system. The gunman had been in
the Air Force. While in the Air Force, he had been convicted and
sentenced to 12 months confinement and had had his rank reduced because
he had assaulted his wife and had broken the skull of his infant child.
He had had a bad conduct discharge from the Air Force.
With that adjudicated offense and with that discharge, he should have
been prohibited from getting a weapon. Yet, in 2016 and 2017, he had
purchased two firearms and had passed the Federal background check
because the military adjudications had not been introduced into the
system.
The two bills I mentioned that are on the floor would do two things.
They would make the background check system universal. However a weapon
is transferred--in a Federal gun licensing, in a gun show, or between
relatives and whether for payment or as a gift--you must determine
before the gun is placed in the hand of an individual whether that
individual is allowed to have a weapon or is prohibited. That is the
first bill.
The second one I mentioned would fix the Charleston loophole. It
would establish that you don't just get the gun put in your hand if
there is a glitch and it slows down the processing of your request. You
have to be approved. There has to be a green light that says you are an
allowed person before you get the weapon. To the extent that it might
take longer than 3 days, it is in the interest of public safety to make
sure that the person who is getting the weapon isn't prohibited.
These measures are effective. The States that have gone to universal
background checks can compare data pre and post, and they can compare
their data with that of their next-door neighbors. The States that have
moved to universal background checks have seen a reduction in gun
violence. It is not the complete elimination. We are not able to do
that. We didn't completely eliminate auto deaths when we required that
there be air bags, but we have made people a lot safer, and that should
be the standard here too. These laws are effective, and they are
popular. Overwhelmingly, Americans support background checks.

Finally, this is not even, really, a new law. The NRA used to take
the position that it didn't want new laws but that it wanted to enforce
existing laws. The background check bill isn't even a new law; it is
just the enforcement of existing laws. If you have a group of people
who are prohibited from having weapons but the only way to enforce that
is through a comprehensive background check system, then the way to
look at these two bills is that these are bills that are necessary to
enforcing existing laws that have been on the books since 1968 and with
a bipartisan consensus.
We deserve a vote. These matters shouldn't just sit here on the
Senate calendar day after day, week after week, and month after month
without there being the opportunity to have a vote.
As I conclude, there was a time in the Congress when there was
something called the gag rule--for decades in the 1820s and 1830s. I
think my timing is right. There was, essentially, something called the
gag rule. Petitions with respect to the abolition of slavery were not
able to be debated, and I fear that this is what we have come to in
this body with respect to these issues. We haven't had a meaningful
debate and vote on the floor of the U.S. Senate about the scourge of
gun violence since the debate and vote in April of 2013, which was in
the aftermath of the shooting in Sandy Hook. It has been more than 6
years, and I think it is time to do it. The bills are pending on the
calendar. We should have that debate and have that vote.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Ms. CORTEZ MASTO. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Virginia
for his eloquence and passion on this issue.
I have never talked to him about this, but there is one thing we had
in common across the country when I was the attorney general for the
State of Nevada and when he was the Governor of Virginia. It was the
Virginia Tech shooting.
As the attorney general, after that horrific, horrific shooting, I
wanted to

[[Page S3822]]

make sure that we were passing commonsense laws so that nothing like
that could ever happen again. So, in the State of Nevada, when I was
the attorney general, I introduced legislation to ensure that when our
courts would adjudicate an individual who was mentally ill, the
information would get to our law enforcement by way of a background
check. We passed that legislation. Yet I am here to tell you that more
needs to be done.
I agree with my colleague in that I would have hoped that the
Virginia Tech shooting would have been the last that we would have ever
seen in this country, but it was not. Almost 2 years ago, hundreds of
people were wounded, and 58 were killed in my hometown of Las Vegas at
the Route 91 Harvest music festival. It remains the deadliest mass
shooting in modern American history. It is not something for which we
would have ever imagined citing a statistic in the State of Nevada nor
could anyone ever want that.
Two weeks after that shooting, I delivered my first official address
on this Senate floor. My maiden speech, I called it. I called for
action to prevent the next mass shooting. Among other things, I asked
for universal background checks on firearms.
Americans support these virtually unanimously, and you have heard the
statistics from my colleagues on the floor today--that 97 percent of
them want sellers to look closely at who exactly is trying to buy a
gun. Yet the Background Check Expansion Act, which is supposed to close
loopholes on background checks, hasn't received a vote in this Chamber.
Not only has it not received a vote, but we can't even debate it. We
can't even come to the floor and debate the issues about which we know
Americans across the country want us to do something. Not only have we
not had a vote on the Background Check Expansion Act, but neither have
we had a vote on dozens of other vital pieces of legislation that would
make us safer.
I have sat here for the last 2 years and watched as the Republican
leadership has been perfectly happy to have stopped the Senate from
voting on these laws. In fact, I have heard, unfortunately, Senator
Mitch McConnell jokingly call himself the Grim Reaper, whose job it is
to bury legislation. That is why we have this legislative graveyard. I
will tell you that the American people don't think that it is funny.
The mothers and fathers of children who have died as a result of gun
violence aren't laughing, and neither is my hometown of Las Vegas--a
community that is still healing from the pain of that night. It does
not have to be this way.
In the State of Nevada, we have closed the loophole that lets private
sellers skip background checks before they hand over a gun. I am so
proud of my State. Voters in Nevada approved this commonsense reform in
2016 for universal background checks. Thanks to our newly elected
Governor Sisolak, Attorney General Aaron Ford, and other fierce leaders
in the Nevada State Legislature, as well as the incredible people in
the State of Nevada, we have finally made it law. This is just basic
common sense. It is supported by Americans throughout the political
spectrum and households with and without guns.
Listen, I support the Second Amendment. We own guns in my family. My
husband is former Federal law enforcement. I come from a family of
sportsmen. Throughout Nevada, we have friends who are sportsmen. But I
will tell you, those Nevadans who are gun owners and almost every
American agree we need to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists,
violent criminals, domestic abusers, and others who may pose a threat
to themselves or their communities. Nevada, with a strong western
history of self-reliance and a culture of safe, responsible gun
ownership, has done this.
It is long past time for the Senate to do what the House has done and
what the American people demand and pass commonsense gun reform. The
Senate majority leader must stop putting a roadblock in the way and let
us act. At the very least, let us have a debate and move this issue
forward--a debate the American people want us to address and an issue
they want us to find a solution for.
Listen, we can't take back what happened that day in Las Vegas or
Orlando or Sandy Hook or Charleston or so many cities and towns all
across this Nation that are scarred by mass shootings and daily gun
violence. We can't heal the pain of those whose friends and family
members were killed. We can't erase the trauma so many survivors
continue to endure. But we can save lives in the future, and isn't one
life saved worth it? Isn't one life saved worth it?
So I ask all of my colleagues, let's stop the delays and denials and
excuses, and let's pass this bill. Let's bring back to the floor of the
Senate the time for debate on important policy issues that address the
problems we see in this country. At the very least, let's save a life.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.