NHDP - ICYMI: Kelly Ayotte, staunch advocate for gun safety? Not.

Key Point: "It's interesting that Republican Senators who voted No on Manchin-Toomey - such as Ayotte and Jeff Flake - are not staking out a harder stance here by saying only that, hey, I will never apologize for defending the Second Amendment, and you liberals can just suck on it. Instead, even though they are not willing to support expanding the background check system to close a loophole that poses a threat to public safety, apparently because the NRA won't let them, they recognize that support for improving background checks is the politically necessary position to take - and is indeed the one that is tantamount to defending children and families from gun violence."

Full text is below and available here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/05/13/kelly-ayotte-staunch-advocate-for-gun-safety-not/

Washington Post: Kelly Ayotte, staunch advocate for gun safety? Not.

By Greg Sargent, Published: May 13, 2013

A bit of a dispute has broken out over just how much pressure Kelly Ayotte is feeling over her vote against the Manchin-Toomey compromise to expand background checks. The gun control forces have organized to pressure her at town hall meetings and on the air, but conservative media have argued that the pressure on her from the left has been exaggerated.

It's interesting, then, that the major efforts to defend Ayotte by gun rights groups and fellow Republicans tend to emphasize her supposed support for background checks. That seems like a pretty good sign of which way the political winds are blowing on the issue.

Here, for instance, is a new ad that Marco Rubio's Reclaim America PAC is running in New Hampshire. It says this: "Safety. Security. Family. No one understands these things like a mom. Ayotte voted to fix background checks, strengthen mental health screenings and more resources to prosecute criminals using guns."

That message echoes a recent NRA ad that thanks Ayotte for her vote, but also says: "Kelly Ayotte voted for a bipartisan plan to make background checks more effective." Ayotte herself recently defended her vote on the same grounds that she supports.

It's hard not to notice that the thrust of these defenses center on Ayotte's support for background checks, and not her opposition to expanding them.

It's true that Ayotte did vote for an alternative proposal, sponsored by Chuck Grassley, that would have beefed up state sharing of mental health data with the feds, without extending the background check to private sales via commercial portals on the internet and at gun shows. But some gun control groups believe the Grassley approach would actually undermine the overall background check system. What's more, it needs to be stated again that Senators can support improving data sharing while simultaneously expanding the background check to close the private seller loophole, which unquestionably remains a major problem, as detailed in two terrific New York Times pieces recently - here, and here. There is no need to choose between the two.

It's interesting that Republican Senators who voted No on Manchin-Toomey - such as Ayotte and Jeff Flake - are not staking out a harder stance here by saying only that, hey, I will never apologize for defending the Second Amendment, and you liberals can just suck on it. Instead, even though they are not willing to support expanding the background check system to close a loophole that poses a threat to public safety, apparently because the NRA won't let them, they recognize that support for improving background checks is the politically necessary position to take - and is indeed the one that is tantamount to defending children and families from gun violence.

NHDP - Misleading Rubio Ad Ignores Massive NH Support for Expanding Background Checks

"Notably absent from Rubio's misleading new ad are the words 'new' and 'hampshire,' probably because according to multiple independent polls 90% of New Hampshire citizens support expanding background checks - exactly what Ayotte and Rubio voted against.  It doesn't matter how many deceitful and dishonest ads bought by out of state rightwing politicians and PACs for Kelly Ayotte pollute New Hampshire televisions, Granite Staters know the truth.  Ayotte opposed bipartisan commonsense background check legislation that would have helped keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill who could pose a danger to themselves and others." - NHDP Communications Director Harrell Kirstein

FACT: SEN. AYOTTE AND RUBIO OPPOSED A BIPARTISAN AMENDMENT TO EXPAND BACKGROUND CHECKS ON GUN PURCHASES

Sen. Ayotte, Sen. Rubio Opposed The Manchin-Toomey Amendment To Expand Background Checks. [Senate Vote 97, 4/17/13]

Manchin-Toomey Was "Bipartisan Legislation To Expand Background Checks To Gun Shows And The Internet."  "Bipartisan legislation to expand background checks to gun shows and the Internet. This is the Manchin-Toomey proposal that's getting so much press lately. This amendment would essentially become the new gun bill if it passed. It would require all buyers of firearms at gun shows and over the Internet to complete federal background checks first. It would also strengthen laws against gun trafficking and straw purchases and provide funding for school safety."  [Washington Post, 4/17/13]

Manchin-Toomey: "Extends The Existing Background Check System To Gun Shows And Online Sales."  "The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act would require states and the federal government to send all necessary records on criminals and the violently mentally ill to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The bill extends the existing background check system to gun shows and online sales."  [Pat Toomey Press Release, 4/10/13]

FACT: SEN. AYOTTE VOTED FOR AN AMENDMENT THAT WEAKENED GUN SAFETY PROTECTIONS

Sen. Ayotte Voted For The Grassley-Cruz Amendment. [Senate Vote 98, 4/17/13]

National Review:  "There Is No Expansion Of Background Checks In The Grassley And Cruz Legislation."  "There is no expansion of background checks in the Grassley and Cruz legislation. Instead, there is funding devoted to increasing gun prosecutions: $50 million over five years for prosecution of felons and fugitives who try to buy guns (in 2009, according to the NRA, 77,000 people failed the NICS background check, yet fewer than 100 were prosecuted). An additional $45 million will be distributed over three years to hire assistant U.S. attorneys and Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm agents in especially violent areas."  [National Review, 4/17/13]

New York Daily News: "Beefed Up Background Checks" Were Not Part Of Grassley Cruz.  "The amendment Ayotte referenced, known as the Grassley-Cruz amendment, for the senators who co-wrote it, contained several Republican proposals, but beefed-up background checks were not among them."  [New York Daily News, 5/7/13]

Politico: Grassley-Cruz "Ignored Gun Shows And Internet Sales Entirely."  "Instead, the Granite Stater backed an alternative measure written by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that ignored gun shows and internet sales entirely, instead focusing on encouraging states to submit mental health information to the background check database."  [Politico, 5/7/13]

Washington Post:  Grassley-Gruz "Would Loosen Gun Restrictions By Making It Easier To Purchase And Carry Guns Across State Lines." "The main Republican alternative to gun control, proposed by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Ted Cruz (R-Ariz.) failed with 52 senators in favor and 48 opposed. It would increase funding for criminal prosecution, school safety, and mental health resources and create a task force to go after felons who fail background checks. It would also criminalize trafficking and straw purchasing and increase the penalties for them. At the same time, the amendment would loosen gun restrictions by making it easier to purchase and carry guns across state lines."  [Washington Post, 4/17/13]

Grassley Cruz Would Make It Easier For People Who Had Been Involuntarily Committed To Buy Guns.  "The NRA-approved substitute Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) offered today would actually make it easier for some mentally ill people to obtain guns. The bill states that it strengthens the federal background check system to ensure that mentally ill people don't purchase guns. But it defines that term narrowly and would allow patients who had been involuntarily committed and treated for mental illness to pass a federal background check and buy weapons.  For instance, current law prohibits people who are ordered by a court into involuntary treatment from buying weapons - even though individuals can petition to have their rights restored in 22 states. Under the bill, individuals who are released could seek to have their name removed from the federal database immediately and would not have to go through a formal adjudication process to prove worthiness to buy a gun. People who were determined to be a danger to themselves or others would only be prohibited from gun ownership if they are proven to be imminently dangerous."  [Think Progress, 4/17/13]

FACT: MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT POLL SHOW 9 IN 10 NH VOTE SUPPORT EXPANDED BACKGOUND CHECKS - EXACTLY WHAT AYOTTE AND RUBIO VOTED AGAINST

NEC POLL: "Voters Overwhelmingly Approved" Of Proposal For Universal Background Checks 88% To 10%. From the Director of the New England College Poll, Dr. Ben Tafoya "New Hampshire voters show surprisingly strong support for these gun control move.  There are deep and lasting effects on the  public from the heightened level of sensitivity toward these issues in light of the tragic  shootings in Newtown, CT. We have seen in this NEC poll and other numbers from other  organizations strong national support for increased efforts to restrict access to assault  weapons and guns in general by those who do not pass background checks. The numbers of voters in support of universal background checks are so high as to make demographic examination worthless. It is difficult to imagine the voting public has a great consensus on anything than they show on this issue." [NEC.ed, 1/24/2013]

PPP: "Gun Show Background Checks Are Pretty Universally Popular In New Hampshire" And "Ayotte Is Facing Some Serious Backlash From Voters." From Public Policy Polling, "Ayotte now has a negative approval rating with 44% of voters giving her good marks and 46% disapproving. That's down a net 15 points from the last time we polled on her, in October, when she had a 48% approval with 35% disapproving. 75% of New Hampshire voters- including 95% of Democrats, 74% of independents, and 56% of Republicans- say they support background checks. And 50% of voters in the state say Ayotte's 'no' vote will make them less likely to support her in a future election, compared to just 23% who consider it to be a positive." [PPP Poll,4/24/2013]

UNH Poll: 94% Favor Background Checks To See if Buyer Has Been Convicted Of A Felony, 95% For Buyers At Gun Shows.  From the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, "In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, lawmakers in Washington are debating several measures aimed at curtailing gun violence. New Hampshire residents show very strong support for background checks for the purposes of keeping  guns out of the hands of felons, people with mental illness, and for background checks for gun purchases at gun shows." [UNH Poll, 2/8/2013]

Headline: "NRA Misrepresents Police Survey, Legislation." FactCheck.org wrote, "On the day the Senate voted down a series of gun control bills, the National Rifle Association made false and misleading claims in opposing a measure to expand background checks. Online ads from the NRA wrongly claimed that "80% of police say background checks will have no effect" on violent crime. The survey cited in the ads by the NRA says nothing of the sort." [FactCheck.org, 4/18/2013]

NHDP - Fact Check: Ayotte Op-ed is Full of Holes

Kelly claims to support background checks after voting against them

Concord  - After weeks of harsh criticism from across the state, Kelly Ayotte's attempts to explain away her vote against expanding background checks are becoming more and more desperate.  Her latest op-ed plays fast and loose with the truth about the bi-partisan Manchin-Toomey compromise legislation she voted against.

Ayotte claims she is in favor of improving the national instant criminal background check system, also known as NICS.  But Ayotte voted against strengthening NCIS.  The Manchin-Toomey compromise would have improved the "existing instant check system by encouraging states to put all their available records into" NCIS.   [Manchin.senate.gov]

Further, Ayotte's votes don't back up the claim that she is focused on "fixing the existing system, which criminals are flouting."  The compromise legislation Ayotte voted against would have expanded background checks to "commercial sales, including sales at gun shows and internet sales," making it harder for criminals to flout the system by purchasing a gun without going through a background check. [Manchin.senate.gov]

"The fact of the matter is that Ayotte voted against commonsense gun violence prevention legislation supported by 90% of her constituents and no NRA talking point exists to justify why," said New Hampshire Democratic Party Communications Director Harrell Kirstein.

Ayotte closed her op-ed by committing to "continue to try to work across the aisle to prevent violence, enforce and improve our broken background check system" - unfortunately that too is exactly what she voted against in the U.S. Senate.  The compromise bill was co-sponsored by a member of each party, improved the background check system, and expanded it.  [Manchin.senate.gov]

"It is insulting that Senator Ayotte thinks the people of New Hampshire would actually believe she voted against legislation to improve and expand background checks as a way to improve them," added Kirstein.

NHDP - NH Republicans Double Down on Failed O'Brien-Bradley Cuts to Critical Access Hospitals, LCHIP, Scholarships

Senate Republicans follow through on O'Brien Promise to slash NH budget

Concord - New Hampshire State Senate Republicans revealed this afternoon they plan to continue the failed O'Brien-Bradley budget policies voters rejected last fall with 300 million dollars in cuts.  Already they have vowed to cut dedicated funds for LCHIP, scholarship programs for underprivileged students, and reduce funding even below the reckless O'Brien-Bradley budget levels for critical access hospitals.  But even those programs combined aren't likely to add up to the 300 million dollars in cuts Republican Senator Morse is calling for. 

"Jeb Bradley's Tea Party Republican caucus is doubling down on the same failed budget policies from 2011 that killed hundreds of New Hampshire jobs, made the largest cut to public higher education funding in American history, and devastated essential services for thousands of Granite Staters," said New Hampshire Democratic Party Communications Director Harrell Kirstein. "What else will the Tea Party Senate Republicans put on the chopping block?  Are they going to make deeper cuts to the University and Community College Systems, forcing another round of costly tuition increases?  Will they slash domestic violence prevention funding again? What about funding for snow plows for next winter?"

Last May, disgraced Speaker O'Brien promised that if re-elected he would "go further next year, paring as much as $400 million more." [Nashua Telegraph, 5/8/2012] Almost one year to the day from O'Brien making that Tea Party oath, Republicans in the Senate announced they will be following through on his disastrous plan. 

"Clearly Republicans in Concord didn't learn anything from last fall's elections when voters rejected the O'Brien-Bradley budget's mindless cuts undermining education and quality of life in communities across the state," continued Kirstein. "Instead of trying responsible ways to balance the budget while investing in priorities that will grow the economy and move New Hampshire forward, they are reverting to the same failed Tea Party policies of the past."

NHDP - Helicopter

Dear Friend,

Former Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown continued his desperate attempt to re-enter the United States Senate this weekend with another trip to New Hampshire.  


Despite what he may think, Senator Scott Brown is not like the rest of us.  He is a high-profile television star on Fox News 

and a powerful Wall Street lobbyist.  And on Saturday night, he hopped into a helicopter for a flight to Nashua.  

 

I don't know about you, but when I make the 25 minute drive down to Nashua, I take the Everett Turnpike.  And when I head out to the Seacoast, I drive on 101.  And every day when I go into the office, I hop on 93 North.  Wall Street lobbyist Scott Brown is so out of touch with our state, his well-heeled friends have to fly him in via helicopter.  

Help us spread the word about Wall Street's favorite Senator, Scott Brown.  Like us on Facebook and share this photo with your friends.  Or write a letter-to-the-editor today telling Scott Brown he is not right for New Hampshire.  

 

Thank you for your continued activism,
Raymond