Deal reached on background checks in Senate

[Penny Lane 8,159]

(CNN) - Sens. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, plan to announce a bipartisan deal on background checks for gun shows and Internet sales at an 11 a.m. press conference today, CNN's Dana Bash has learned.

A Democratic leadership source says the compromise will likely be the first amendment to gun legislation being considered, after the Senate votes to begin the gun debate Thursday.

The breakthrough background check agreement is a key part of gun legislation. Because it has been struck by two senators with strong support from the NRA, they hope to find the 60 votes that will be needed to overcome opposition to pass their amendment

The senate is expected to debate gun legislation for at least two weeks.

Democrats believe as many as a dozen GOP senators will vote with them, making up for the handful of pro-gun Democrats who might vote against beginning debate on the bill. Fourteen Republicans promise to filibuster taking up the measure.

Several Republican senators told CNN Tuesday they would only vote to begin debate on the bill if they were assured by Democrats they would be allowed to offer amendments to the legislation.

Democratic leaders want to give senators from both parties ample opportunities to amend the bill and are prepared to debate it beyond a scheduled recess the first week in May, if doing so will increase the chances of passage.

“The way you put together a coalition to pass the bill is to allow as many amendment votes as you can. We are willing to take the time to do that and have that process,” the aide said.

Those negotiators will now have more time to find common ground on language, since the gun debate is expected to be lengthy. Democratic leaders also argue any bill they put on the floor will represent a substantial improvement in gun safety.

Many of those additional votes could be politically difficult for centrist Democrats, especially those up for re-election in red states, as Republicans are expected to craft amendments designed to put those senators on the spot. Nevertheless, Democratic leaders have determined it’s a risk they need to take if they want to pass substantive legislation to respond to the mass shootings that have plagued the nation in recent years.

“Once we’re on it we want to have an open process where there are a lot of votes and we really work through that,” the aide said.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/10/deal-reached-on-background-checks-in-senate/

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

(CNN) - Sens. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, plan to announce a bipartisan deal on background checks for gun shows and Internet sales at an 11 a.m. press conference today, CNN's Dana Bash has learned.

A Democratic leadership source says the compromise will likely be the first amendment to gun legislation being considered, after the Senate votes to begin the gun debate Thursday.

The breakthrough background check agreement is a key part of gun legislation. Because it has been struck by two senators with strong support from the NRA, they hope to find the 60 votes that will be needed to overcome opposition to pass their amendment

The senate is expected to debate gun legislation for at least two weeks.

Democrats believe as many as a dozen GOP senators will vote with them, making up for the handful of pro-gun Democrats who might vote against beginning debate on the bill. Fourteen Republicans promise to filibuster taking up the measure.

Several Republican senators told CNN Tuesday they would only vote to begin debate on the bill if they were assured by Democrats they would be allowed to offer amendments to the legislation.

Democratic leaders want to give senators from both parties ample opportunities to amend the bill and are prepared to debate it beyond a scheduled recess the first week in May, if doing so will increase the chances of passage.

“The way you put together a coalition to pass the bill is to allow as many amendment votes as you can. We are willing to take the time to do that and have that process,” the aide said.

Those negotiators will now have more time to find common ground on language, since the gun debate is expected to be lengthy. Democratic leaders also argue any bill they put on the floor will represent a substantial improvement in gun safety.

Many of those additional votes could be politically difficult for centrist Democrats, especially those up for re-election in red states, as Republicans are expected to craft amendments designed to put those senators on the spot. Nevertheless, Democratic leaders have determined it’s a risk they need to take if they want to pass substantive legislation to respond to the mass shootings that have plagued the nation in recent years.

“Once we’re on it we want to have an open process where there are a lot of votes and we really work through that,” the aide said.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/10/deal-reached-on-background-checks-in-senate/

Something needs to be done, too many lives over stupid decisions and folks having guns that shouldn't.

[Darnell 8,479]

Holy Moly ! More back room dealings with the 'we can add amendments' crowd. Sheesh !

Pansies ! Pass it as is, or strike the whole thing. Screw the amendents.

Thanks for posting this, O Evylin. Tis the pattern of 'adding amendments' that's turned the Senate into a huge cesspool - this bill is just another example.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Darnell

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

(CNN) - Sens. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, plan to announce a bipartisan deal on background checks for gun shows and Internet sales at an 11 a.m. press conference today, CNN's Dana Bash has learned.

A Democratic leadership source says the compromise will likely be the first amendment to gun legislation being considered, after the Senate votes to begin the gun debate Thursday.

The breakthrough background check agreement is a key part of gun legislation. Because it has been struck by two senators with strong support from the NRA, they hope to find the 60 votes that will be needed to overcome opposition to pass their amendment

The senate is expected to debate gun legislation for at least two weeks.

Democrats believe as many as a dozen GOP senators will vote with them, making up for the handful of pro-gun Democrats who might vote against beginning debate on the bill. Fourteen Republicans promise to filibuster taking up the measure.

Several Republican senators told CNN Tuesday they would only vote to begin debate on the bill if they were assured by Democrats they would be allowed to offer amendments to the legislation.

Democratic leaders want to give senators from both parties ample opportunities to amend the bill and are prepared to debate it beyond a scheduled recess the first week in May, if doing so will increase the chances of passage.

"The way you put together a coalition to pass the bill is to allow as many amendment votes as you can. We are willing to take the time to do that and have that process," the aide said.

Those negotiators will now have more time to find common ground on language, since the gun debate is expected to be lengthy. Democratic leaders also argue any bill they put on the floor will represent a substantial improvement in gun safety.

Many of those additional votes could be politically difficult for centrist Democrats, especially those up for re-election in red states, as Republicans are expected to craft amendments designed to put those senators on the spot. Nevertheless, Democratic leaders have determined it's a risk they need to take if they want to pass substantive legislation to respond to the mass shootings that have plagued the nation in recent years.

"Once we're on it we want to have an open process where there are a lot of votes and we really work through that," the aide said.

http://politicaltick...ecks-in-senate/

As a strong pro gun guy I don't have a bit of problem with universal background checks. Is it going to stop criminals from getting guns... NO. However we check that you are legal to buy alcohol why not check that you are legal to buy a gun also.

While they are it lets tack on a universal background check for voting.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

As a strong pro gun guy I don't have a bit of problem with universal background checks. Is it going to stop criminals from getting guns... NO. However we check that you are legal to buy alcohol why not check that you are legal to buy a gun also.

While they are it lets tack on a universal background check for voting.

Why do they need to impose a background check on voting?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Why do they need to impose a background check on voting?

You smarter than that...don't toy with me...Voter Id

I almost hate to open that old argument

[Penny Lane 8,159]

What's the argument AGAINST voter ID?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

You smarter than that...don't toy with me...Voter Id

I almost hate to open that old argument

There's nothing wrong with Voter ID, you mentioned background checks on voters. I was just asking why.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

There's nothing wrong with Voter ID, you mentioned background checks on voters. I was just asking why.

It was an analogy.. I was just saying Vote Id makes sense, so does 100% gun background checks

[mota bhai 2,675]

Holy Moly ! More back room dealings with the 'we can add amendments' crowd. Sheesh !

Pansies ! Pass it as is, or strike the whole thing. Screw the amendents.

Thanks for posting this, O Evylin. Tis the pattern of 'adding amendments' that's turned the Senate into a huge cesspool - this bill is just another example.

What a strange thing to object to, O Darnell. I could agree with your objection to amendments when said amendment has nothing to do with the core issues of the bill being considered. But in this case? Your opposition is bewildering.

[mota bhai 2,675]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/10/deal-reached-on-background-checks-in-senate/

The title of the original article is "Deal reached on background checks in Senate". Per new TOS rules, thread title should be changed.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

The title of the original article is "Deal reached on background checks in Senate". Per new TOS rules, thread title should be changed.

No it shouldn't. The title reflects the subject of the article.

[mota bhai 2,675]

No it shouldn't. The title reflects the subject of the article.

That's not the new rule. The new rule requires the title be identical. Go read penguin's post.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

That's not the new rule. The new rule requires the title be identical. Go read penguin's post.

Okay then.

[Ban Hammer 13,785]

The title of the original article is "Deal reached on background checks in Senate". Per new TOS rules, thread title should be changed.

thank you for pointing that out.