[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18108-18110]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              OUT OF TIME

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, in a matter of hours, the assault weapons 
ban will expire. That moment will mark a turning point--to the wrong 
direction--in our effort to reduce gun violence. Criminals, and 
potentially terrorists, will once again have easy access to 19 of the 
highest powered and most lethal firearms produced. I am disappointed 
that, despite broad bipartisan support for the ban, the Republican 
congressional leadership opposes it and President Bush has done little 
or nothing to support this important legislation.
  At midnight tonight, 19 currently banned assault weapons will become 
legal once again, as well as firearms that can accept detachable 
magazines and have more than one of several specific military features, 
such as a folding/telescoping stock, protruding pistol grip, bayonet 
mount, threaded muzzle or flash suppressor, barrel shroud or grenade 
launcher. Common sense tells us that there is no reason for civilians 
to have easy access to guns with these features.
  Over the past year, I have repeatedly urged the Congress to act. I 
believe that allowing gun manufacturers to restart production of these 
dangerous weapons will increase their number and availability on our 
streets and lead to a rise in gun crimes committed with assault 
weapons.
  Many in the law enforcement community have called the currently 
banned assault weapons ``the weapons of choice for criminals.'' This is 
what the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police has said about the 
expiration of the assault weapons ban:

       We are disappointed in the lack of political will to extend 
     a ban that has apparently worked. In the ten years of the 
     ban's life, there has been a 66% reduction in assault weapons 
     traced to crime.

  The MACP has informed me that 14 police officers have been killed in 
the U.S. by assault weapons already this year. Unfortunately, that the 
number will likely rise as the assault weapons ban is allowed to 
expire.
  Last week, Police Chief Ervin Portis of Jackson, MI, came to 
Washington, DC in support of reauthorizing the assault weapons ban. 
Accompanying him on this trip was David Harvey, retired chief of police 
of Garden City, MI. Chief Harvey was chief of police on December 31, 
2002, when an armed assailant set out to execute a police officer from 
Garden City. His intended victim was Officer Rodney Donald. Officer 
Donald was shot 7 times with a semi-automatic rifle that contained a 
magazine with a capacity of 100 rounds. Officer Donald is now 
permanently disabled and unable to perform duties as a police officer. 
The clip used in this attack is currently banned, but, like many of the 
assault weapons it was designed for, the clip will again become legal 
at midnight.
  As many of my colleagues know, law enforcement support for the 
assault weapons ban is broad. Supporters include the International 
Association of Chiefs of Police, the Major Cities Chiefs Association, 
the Police Foundation, the Police Executive Research Forum, the 
International Brotherhood of Police Officers, the National Association 
of School Resource Officers, the National Fraternal Order of Police, 
the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, the 
Hispanic American Police Command Officers Association, and the National 
Black Police Association.
  On the other side are lobbyists of the National Rifle Association and 
their allies in Congress and the White House. The NRA has said that the 
ban is ineffective and unnecessary. But this assertion is not supported 
by the facts. According to statistics reported by the Brady Campaign to 
Prevent Gun Violence, from 1990 to 1994, assault weapons named in the 
ban constituted 4.82 percent of guns traced in criminal investigations. 
However, since the ban's enactment, these assault weapons have made up 
only 1.61 percent of the crime-related guns traced. It is disturbing 
that the President has sat back rather

[[Page 18109]]

than standing up with our Nation's law enforcement community in support 
of this critical piece of gun safety legislation.
  The Senate majority leader was quoted in a New York Times article on 
September 9 as saying, ``I think the will of the American people is 
consistent with letting it expire, so it will expire.'' I am aware of 
no facts to support that statement. In fact, numerous polls have found 
that large majorities of adults support a reauthorization of the ban. 
In the very same New York Times article, the House majority leader is 
quoted referring to the Assault weapons ban as ``a feel-good piece of 
legislation.''
  On March 2 of this year, I joined with the majority of my colleagues 
in passing an amendment to reauthorize the assault weapons ban for 
another 10 years. The bill to which it was attached, however, was later 
derailed.
  Despite the overwhelming support of the law enforcement community, 
the ongoing threat of terrorism, bipartisan support in the Senate, and 
the pleas of Americans who have already lost loved ones to assault 
weapons tragedies, it appears the ban will expire at midnight tonight, 
as neither the President nor the Republican congressional leadership is 
willing to act. Unfortunately, tomorrow morning Americans will wake up 
less secure than they are today.
  I ask unanimous consent that the New York Times article titled 
``Effort to Renew Weapons Ban Falters on Hill'' be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the following material was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                [From the New York Times, Sept. 9, 2004]

              Effort To Renew Weapons Ban Falters on Hill

                        (By Sheryl Gay Stolberg)

       Washington, Sept. 8--Despite widespread popular support, 
     the federal law banning the sale of 19 kinds of semiautomatic 
     assault weapons is almost certain to expire on Monday, the 
     result of intense lobbying by the National Rifle Association 
     and the complicated election-year politics of Washington.
       While President Bush has expressed support for legislation 
     extending the ban and has said he would sign it into law, he 
     has not pressured lawmakers to act, leading critics to accuse 
     him of trying to have it both ways.
       Efforts to renew the ban, which polls show is supported by 
     at least two-thirds of Americans, have faltered this year on 
     Capitol Hill. Democrats are well aware that they lost control 
     of the House of Representatives in 1994, the year President 
     Bill Clinton signed the original legislation, and have shied 
     away from the issue of gun control, while Republican leaders 
     have opposed the ban.
       ``I think the will of the American people is consistent 
     with letting it expire, so it will expire,'' Senator Bill 
     Frist of Tennessee, the majority leader, said on Wednesday.
       The House majority leader, Representative Tom DeLay of 
     Texas, dismissed the ban as ``a feel-good piece of 
     legislation'' and said flatly that it would expire Monday, 
     even if Mr. Bush made an effort to renew it.
       ``If the president asked me, it would still be no,'' Mr. 
     DeLay said. ``He knows, because we don't have the votes to 
     pass the assault weapons ban. It will expire Monday, and 
     that's that.''
       Democrats decried the influence of the rifle association 
     and said the ban could be renewed if the president wanted it 
     to.
       ``If you support something, you have a responsibility to 
     advocate for it,'' said Senator Dianne Feinstein, the 
     California Democrat and chief sponsor of the ban's renewal. 
     Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who was a 
     lead sponsor of the ban 10 years ago when he was in the 
     House, blamed ``a dysfunction of our politics'' for what he 
     called ``this Alice in Wonderland situation of repealing a 
     law that everyone agrees has been overwhelmingly 
     successful.''
       The act prohibits, by name, the sale of 19 specific weapons 
     that have the features of guns used by the military, and also 
     outlaws magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of 
     ammunition. While backers acknowledge that the law is riddled 
     with loopholes, they cite federal statistics showing crimes 
     traceable to assault weapons have declined by two-thirds 
     since the law went into effect.
       But the N.R.A., which has made overturning the ban its top 
     legislative priority, says the law bans only ``cosmetic 
     accessories'' on guns, and does little other than place a 
     burden on gun manufacturers. ``We felt from the very start it 
     was bogus legislation,'' Wayne LaPierre, the association's 
     chief executive, said.
       On Wednesday, in a last-ditch effort to persuade lawmakers 
     to renew the law, supporters of the ban--including police 
     chiefs from around the country and victims of gun violence 
     and their relatives--converged on Washington for a news 
     conference.
       Tom Mauser, whose 15-year-old son, Daniel, was killed in 
     the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, 
     arrived wearing his son's sneakers and took them off while 
     addressing reporters, a pointed physical reminder of his 
     loss.
       James S. Brady, the former White House press secretary who 
     suffered brain damage after being shot in the head by a 
     handgun during the 1981 assassination attempt on President 
     Ronald Reagan, sat, mostly silent, in a wheelchair.
       ``The assault weapons are coming, they're coming next 
     week,'' warned Mr. Brady's wife, Sarah, who has been a vocal 
     advocate for restrictions on gun ownership for the past two 
     decades.
       Noting that Mr. Reagan had supported the weapons ban in 
     1994, Mrs. Brady said she felt deserted by the party she and 
     her husband had worked so hard for. ``I am angry,'' she said. 
     ``I am angry at our president. I'm so disappointed.''
       The White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, repeated 
     on Wednesday that ''the president supports the 
     reauthorization of the current law.'' But when asked by 
     reporters what, if anything, Mr. Bush was doing to make that 
     happen, Mr. McClellan replied: ``The president doesn't set 
     the Congressional timetable. Congress sets the timetable. And 
     the president's views are very clear.''
       Democrats hit hard at Mr. Bush. ``We cry out for 
     leadership,'' said Senator Schumer, adding that, ``The 
     president talks about flip-flops. Well, flip: I'm for it. 
     Flop: House, don't do anything, don't pass it.''
       The Democratic presidential nominee, Senator John Kerry of 
     Massachusetts, supports renewing the ban, and took a break 
     from campaigning earlier this year to return to the Senate 
     when it came up for a vote as part of a broader piece of gun 
     legislation. Fifty-two senators voted in favor of renewing 
     the ban, but the underlying measure was defeated.
       On Wednesday, a senior adviser to Mr. Kerry, Joe Lockhart, 
     signaled that the ban would become a campaign issue. He said 
     that Mr. Kerry planned to discuss the ban Monday, at an event 
     timed to coincide with its expiration. Mr. Kerry, he said, 
     ``believes the cynical deal between the president and the 
     House Republican leadership, hiding behind procedure, is 
     completely unacceptable.''
       A poll released this week by the Annenberg Public Policy 
     Center of the University of Pennsylvania found that 68 
     percent of Americans--and 32 percent of N.R.A. members--
     support renewing the ban. The findings, drawn from interviews 
     with 4,959 adults, had a margin of sampling error of plus or 
     minus one percentage point.
       A separate national survey, conducted by Doug Schoen, a 
     Democratic pollster, on behalf of the Brady Campaign to 
     Prevent Gun Violence, found that 74 percent of voters support 
     renewing the ban, but that support is highest--79 percent--
     among independent voters who are being courted by President 
     Bush and Mr. Kerry. That survey of 800 voters had a margin of 
     error of three percentage points.
       Mr. Schoen, who is not advising the Kerry campaign, also 
     surveyed voters in the swing states of Ohio, Florida and 
     Pennsylvania and concluded that support for the ban was high 
     enough to make it a significant issue. ``If Kerry wants to 
     distinguish his position from Bush, this provides a very 
     convenient vehicle,'' he said.
       But over all, Democrats have not talked much about the 
     weapons ban. Senator Patty Murray, the Washington Democrat 
     who is in a tough re-election fight, said voters, unaware 
     that the ban was set to expire, had not made it an issue, and 
     that neither had she.
       ``There are so many issues, education and health care and 
     jobs and the economy in my state right now,'' Ms. Murray 
     said. ``People are really focused on that.''
       And over the years the ban has been a losing issue for 
     Democrats. After Republicans took control of the House in 
     1994, President Clinton remarked that the ban might have cost 
     Democrats 20 seats. Some believe that former Vice President 
     Al Gore lost crucial states, including his home state, 
     Tennessee, in the 2000 election because he came out too 
     strongly for gun control.
       Even the ban's chief Democratic backers in Congress, 
     Senator Feinstein and Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New 
     York, acknowledged that Democrats were afraid to be too vocal 
     in their support. ``In the small states in particular, and 
     the rural states, the control of the N.R.A. is much 
     greater,'' said Ms. Feinstein, adding, They will specifically 
     target a member, including a House member, and go after 
     them.''
       The N.R.A. has also said it will not endorse a candidate 
     for president until after Congress recesses for the fall 
     election, a pronouncement that the ban's backers say is 
     tantamount to a threat not to endorse Mr. Bush until the ban 
     expires. Mr. LaPierre said the claim was ``100 percent 
     untrue.'' But he blamed Democrats for the bill's undoing, 
     saying they had tried, unwisely, to use it to gain political 
     advantage when Mr. Clinton was president.
       ``I guess you could say politics is what enacted it in the 
     first place,'' he said. ``Politics is going to be the undoing 
     of it.''
       On Wednesday, as the police chiefs and victims' relatives 
     fanned out across Capitol Hill to lobby lawmakers, a chief 
     target was the

[[Page 18110]]

     House speaker, Representative J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois. 
     In recent weeks, advocates for the ban have been approaching 
     Mr. Hastert at bookstores around the country, where he has 
     been signing copies of his new autobiography, ``Speaker.''
       Several, including Mr. Mauser, said that Mr. Hastert seemed 
     supportive. ``He said yes, I support that,'' said Penny 
     Okamoto, who said she saw Mr. Hastert on Aug. 16 at a Barnes 
     & Noble store in Beaverton, Ore. ``I was so surprised, I 
     actually asked him twice.''
       But on Wednesday, the speaker was noncommittal, saying that 
     if the Senate was to adopt the bill, ``then we'll take a look 
     at it.''
       Mr. Mauser said he was not satisfied with that, and would 
     knock on Mr. Hastert's door on Thursday. He said that he had 
     already spoken with an aide to his own congressman, 
     Representative Tom Tancredo, a Republican who opposes the 
     ban, and that the meeting did not go well.
       ``It ended on a pretty bad note,'' Mr. Mauser said. ``Not 
     even a shake of the hand.''

                          ____________________