Gun Control Moving to Front Burner in Senate

Gun control is dead in this town. That’s the conventional wisdom that members of Congress who support toughened gun laws are hearing from fellow lawmakers, from the media, even from their constituents in the grocery stores back home.

But a cadre of vocal proponents--led by senators with such heavyweight names as McCain, Lieberman and Clinton--isn’t ready to deliver the last rites just yet. They are determined to put the gun control issue back on the public agenda, two years after a disastrous defeat in Congress in the wake of the Columbine High School shootings.

Their first target is an old standby: a notorious legislative “loophole” that allows people in 32 states to buy weapons at gun shows without undergoing background checks designed to spot criminal convictions and other red flags.

“This issue is very much alive,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).

The resurrection of the issue portends another messy fight over gun control--but not necessarily a different outcome.

One measure to close the loophole was introduced in the Senate this week, and a second version is expected soon from Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.). Gun control advocates consider the support of McCain crucial because he voted against a similar measure in 1999.

But the National Rifle Assn., always an influential player in Washington, already is gearing up for a protracted fight. And Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft has competing plans of his own. He is expected to introduce details next month of a major gun initiative that aides say would focus on pumping more resources into enforcing existing laws.

Ashcroft wants to spend an additional $154 million next year--a nearly 10% increase--on gun law enforcement. The added funds would be used to hire more federal gun prosecutors, support expanded police crackdowns, target juveniles with guns and promote safety locks.

Gun rights advocates are heartened by Ashcroft’s emphasis on enforcement and by a new president who “is not pummeling the rights of gun owners every chance he gets,” NRA chief lobbyist James Ray Baker said in an interview.

The NRA’s second-ranking officer boasted during last year’s presidential campaign that the group would practically have an office in a Bush White House because of their “unbelievably friendly relations.”

President Bush has indicated his support for instant background checks at gun shows, and politicians on both sides of the aisle say the looming fight could set up an important test in determining how hard a line he takes.

A bill proposed this week by Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), which would require a three-day waiting period for gun show purchases, is virtually identical to one that failed in 1999.

That proposal was spurred by public concern over the Columbine shootings weeks earlier on April 20, 1999, in which 13 people were killed and the two young gunmen committed suicide. Some of the weapons used in that attack originally were purchased at gun shows. With a dramatic tie-breaking vote cast by then-Vice President Al Gore, the Senate voted to require background checks at all gun shows, but the measure stalled in the House.

But gun control advocates point to several developments that they say could tilt the debate in their favor this time around:

* Two states--Colorado and Oregon--surprised gun control opponents last year by requiring background checks at gun shows.

* Several members of Congress who opposed gun control have been voted out of office.

* Last year’s Million Mom March, calling for tougher gun laws, drew widespread attention.

* And, perhaps most critical, McCain has now changed his position.

“You didn’t have a conservative senator from the West leading the charge for gun control before now,” said Michael Barnes, head of Handgun Control Inc.

Gun control supporters also point to new data to bolster their case.

A report released last week by Americans for Gun Safety, a Washington research and advocacy group, concluded that the 32 states that do not require background checks are “flooding” other states with guns that are often used in crimes.

Of the 10 states supplying the most guns to out-of-state criminals, nine do not require background checks at gun shows, the group found. California is the lone exception.

But gun control opponents have a statistical arsenal of their own. They point to federal data showing that less than 2% of the guns used by criminals are bought at the nation’s more than 4,500 annual gun shows.

“We have the same problems that we had the last time around: It’s a registration system tantamount to a gun show ban,” the NRA’s Baker said.

Those on both sides of the debate predict that the Senate will pass a measure closing the gun show loophole. But prospects are far more uncertain in the House, where some moderate Democrats also oppose the move.

“I don’t see any sign that the Republican leadership wants to do anything on this,” said Steve Elmendorf, chief of staff to House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.). “It’s a conversation that we’d love to initiate . . . but there’s been no real change.”

Lieberman said in an interview that the potential logjam in the House is prompting him and McCain to cobble together a proposal that might be more politically palatable to moderates.

“Our intent is to find a common ground,” he said.

Their proposal, expected out in the next few weeks, is essentially a backup measure if the bill proposed this week by Reed--with the backing of Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles E. Schumer of New York, Richard Durbin of Illinois and other prominent Democrats--should fall short.

There are several key differences between the two versions, including how a gun show is defined, how much time would be allowed for the background check and who would be authorized to execute those checks.

The Violence Policy Center, a liberal advocacy group, considers the McCain-Lieberman proposal a watered-down compromise.

But supporters say it might represent a last-gasp effort to bring about any change at all.

“This is one of the most polarized debates we’ve got going here, and you’ve got to move off the poles if you’re going to get anything done,” one Democratic aide said.