Friday, July 29, 2005

Hatch Unloads..

I was glad to see there was still a republican with balls enough to come to the floor and set things straight yesterday!

Let me set this up for ya.

For the last few days the dems have been saying the Repubs moved off the DoD bill and went onto the Gun liablities bill.

But the reason they went onto the gun bill is because the DEMOCRATS didn't vote for cloture on Tue.

Here's what Frist said BEFORE they voted for cloture.

Frist:(7-26) "If cloture is invoked, we will stay on the Defense bill until that is completed, something I am very hopeful we will be able to do shortly. If cloture is not invoked, we would proceed to a cloture vote with respect to the motion to proceed to the gun manufacturers liability bill "

-------------

Well, yesterday Kennedy and Durbin kept up with the lie and Hatch called them on it.

--------------

PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT -- (Senate - July 28, 2005)

Kennedy: We have spent 3 days on the Defense authorization bill. And then we have the Republican leadership pull that down? It makes no sense to me.

Mr. DURBIN. If the Senator would further yield for a question, I would say to the Senator, through the Chair, that the Army Times, the publication for our U.S. Army and its soldiers who are risking their lives in Iraq, ran a headline story that the Senate pushed off the Department of Defense authorization bill, which included amendments which were being offered to provide additional financial assistance to the widows and orphans of those soldiers who lost their lives in combat, took away the bill which included an amendment to allow additional payment for totally disabled veterans, and instead moved on the floor this bill for one special interest group, the gun lobby.

The Senator has made it clear the Republican leadership considers this bill, a National Rifle Association sponsored bill, more important than the Department of Defense authorization bill.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized to conclude the morning business.

I think the Senator from Massachusetts has laid out the case. Can you imagine? We took the bill off the floor for the Department of Defense, for our soldiers and their families, and said we didn't have time to finish it this week because we had to go to this bill, the National Rifle Association's most important bill, which says that gun manufacturers and gun dealers selling their firearms to those on the FBI Most Wanted list, or to those in terrorist organizations, would not be held accountable for their misconduct? Where are the priorities of this Senate?

--------------------


Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I have heard a lot of arguments on the floor in my day, but some of these arguments are some of the worst ever heard. I don't know, maybe I missed something. We were moving ahead on the Defense authorization bill when all of a sudden we couldn't get cloture. We couldn't move ahead because of the very people who have been making these arguments, in a holy fashion, that they want to help our soldiers. Yet they filibuster by preventing cloture and preventing a full acceptance of the Department of Defense authorization bill, and then turn around and say we stopped them from amending the bill. If they were stopped, it is because their amendments were not germane.

I have never heard arguments like this, that we are just going to give gun dealers an absolute right to violate the law. They haven't read this legislation at all.

And then they bring in an antiterrorism argument. What they do not tell the American public is that there are millions of guns out there in the underworld that people can get. But that doesn't justify holding liable gun manufacturers--who manufacture guns for our soldiers, by the way; if they all go broke we will not have the guns for our soldiers--when somebody takes one of their guns and misuses it. The person misusing it ought to be liable, not the gun manufacturer who cannot supervise the persons to whom they legitimately sold guns.

Let's face it. The folks on that side of the aisle hate guns. They talk in terms of, We want to take care of our hunters and our gun collectors and people who love guns who are decent, law-abiding citizens. But look over the years how they have argued against anything that makes sense with regard to the right to manufacture weapons that we have always had in this country, and the right to keep and bear arms, which is explicitly in the Constitution. These are the same people who are constantly arguing about things that are not explicitly in the Constitution, claiming that they should be given the sanctification of constitutional protection. Yet something that is expressly written in the Constitution, they turn around and blast.

I could spend a lot of time on that, but that is not what I came over here to do. All I can say is I find it amazing that an argument would be made, after they voted against cloture--in other words, proceeding with the Defense authorization bill, they voted against proceeding--and now they are saying, Why didn't we proceed. I missed something maybe. But I don't think so. This is just typical: Politics trumps everybody. No one is saying, with regard to this issue of the gun manufacturer's right to manufacture guns that are legal, they have a legal right to do so--nobody is making the argument that dealers who are honest and decent and honorable should not be able to sell those guns to decent, honorable people. We have plenty of restrictions already in law against illegality with regard to the sale of weapons.

My gosh, is there no end to politics in these issues? This argument that this modest bill gives criminals a free pass and aids and abets terrorists is as phony an argument as I have heard. And the argument that it lets manufacturers off the hook for their wrongdoing--if they do wrong, they are on the hook under this bill.

They are not doing wrong. That is the problem. What is wrong is the chief fundraiser of our friends on the left happens to be--the chief hard-money funder in this country happens to be the personal injury trial lawyer for liberals. And those people literally are the reason why we have these, I think, misconceived arguments.

I could not sit here without saying something about it because it is hard to believe that they can stand and make these kinds of arguments. Much as I respect my fellow Senators, it is mind-boggling that they can make an argument that we are preventing going ahead with the DOD bill when they are the ones who stopped it. My gracious. Let me shift gears. I could talk for hours on that subject.