The proceedings. We will have live coverage wednesday on cspan3. We have peter ambler, the executive director of giffords to talk about gun violence in america. Leader todd ruger, the and staff writer of cq roll call and kevin johnson, Justice Department reporter with usa today. Guest it was a year after that when the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School happened, 20 dead kids in their classroom, six educators murdered when gabby and her husband mark decided to lots launch what is giffords. It was talked at first. The politics of guns had not shifted in the way that we have now seen them. It seem like it was a step forward and two steps back. We had a lot of proverbial doors slammed in our face but we persevered. Today we are a Large National , organization with dozens of staff, offices across the country footprints in many , states. Host todd, go ahead. The democrats app taking control of the house and cite a very political popular idea behind gun control. Yet the bills have gone nowhere in the senate because of republicans. What is your group doing to try to get involved in change the makeup of the senate in the way that some bills could get through . We are doing the same thing in the senate with chump that we did with the house a couple years ago. We believe pressure equals progress. The 2018ad up to midterms, we launched a massive ended eventsaign and appearances and dozens of states in indoor hundreds of candidates. All that resulted not the time thention by the republicanled house of representatives but did result in action in 2018 where we beat 40 nra backed incumbents and elected a gun safety majority in the house and with pulling showing that gun safety was the second most important issue behind health care for voters who the new majority. We delivered a mandate to house of representatives to act and so they did. They passed bills like universal backgrounds background checks and closing loopholes and passing protections. What we are doing now is elevating the lit gun safety issue in swing Senate States and target Senate States in the way we did in swing districts last year. We have started a campaign of the pressure in colorado and texas and we spent roughly half 1 million reminding colorado voters that gardner is somebody who has benefited from millions of dollars of spending all doing everything in his power to stop the protection of kids in communities in colorado and the same thing in texas in the aftermath of the shootings of el have gone outa we of our way to remind voters in texas that it does not have to be like this we can pass laws that would keep guns out of the wrong hands and save lives but that john cornyn has time and time again not been courageous enough to go far enough and pass legislation into law. There is, as you know universal , back ground checks, the bipartisan background check act that passed by a 15 vote margin. It is being blocked by majority leader mcconnell. We are pressuring senators across the country to bring that up. Or, we believe, they are going to pay the political consequences come election day. You have mentioned the politics of guns is often difficult and the democratic discussionfeatured about limiting access to firearms. But did beto orourke go too far when he suggested we should pursue a mandatory buyback of ak47s . Ak47s and ar 15s . Peter i sympathize with him. I think he was rightfully angry his community was targeted by a gunman whose choice of an Assault Rifle was not in any way or form constrained by the policies of the state of texas or the United States of america. He offered his solution, a mandatory buyback. It is not what we as an organization have put forward. We believe that we are an evidencebased organization that believes in Practical Solutions to gun violence because the stakes are high. We need to act now to get the guns off of the streets and get them out of the hands of people who shouldnt have them. What we want to use is a framework that already exists and is already successful called the National Firearms act. It was passed in it has been in 1934 existence for a long time. It regulates fully automatic machine guns and other dangerous firearms implements, like silencers via the atf. I get that. I dont mean to interrupt. How far did that setback the debate, at least on your side . I dont think it set it back. I dont think there is any evidence it set it back. I have had to answer a lot of questions about it and describe the differences between what beto proposed and we did, but we are going to have a democratic nominee whose policies with regard to assault weapons are in line with what we have proposed. That is limiting future production of the salt rifles and regulating those currently in circulation. The shootings in el paso, ohio, there was a lot of momentum. President trump addressed the nation, saying republicans and democrats need to come together to get background checks. He sort of tag that along with some immigration reform. There seemed to be some meetings he had with senators and then it fizzled out. What happened there, who is to blame, how to get around whatever stopped that momentum . Peter it is clear donald trump and Mitch Mcconnell are to blame for the progress that is yet to happen. I think it is remarkable for us to take a step act. To take a step back and see that we have people like donald trump Mitch Mcconnell who have benefited not from thousands of or millions of dollars, but tens of millions of dollars of nra support, to contemplate the need for universal background checks and what it shows is that there playbook it shows that there that their playbook is stale and they understand americans are clamoring for gun safety reforms, they are angry about the status quo. They are sick of their kids texting them from supplied closets during active shooter drills. I think when you are living in a perpetual infrastructure weak in washington d. C. , where you have a president and administration who cannot move the ball on any one of their priorities, it is hard to tell who the culprit is or where the point of failure was. What is very clear, you have a policy, universal background checks, that receives 90 support from americans across the country. It passed the house on a bipartisan basis. It is waiting for support in the u. S. Senate. Mitch mcconnell and donald trump have refused to bring that bill and others up for a vote. Donald trump has refused to step out and fully support that bill. There has been talk of other sort of background check proposals that members of the administration of walked around congress. When bill barr and others were Walking Around the background checks pozo, the same day it was his pressump via secretary, distanced himself from the proposal, it is hard to know on any given day where exactly donald trump stands. The voters are paying attention. They understand trump and mcconnell and their allies in congress have the opportunity to act and have not. I think they are angry. That anchor is going to manifest itself via the voting booth on election day in 2020. Earlier this month, the Justice Department announced its product Guardian Initiative that relies heavily on atf enforcement of existing gun laws. Your group called that proposal inadequate, if i recall. If President Trump and the senate, as you indicate, are not willing to move, what could the doj or the attorney general do apart from that to address any of your concerns . Peter the administration, i will start with what they can do with the centers for disease control. They could commence research into gun violence. It is something the president and secretary of health and human sources could order immediately. They have yet to do that. In terms of what the white house, doj can do, they could expand background checks administratively. How would they do that . Peter they would define what it means to be quote unquote engaged in the business of dealing firearms. In a way to make sure those who are not licensees but are nonetheless selling a lot of guns online or at gun shows, that they would be in violation of federal law if they continue to sell guns or go through the steps of becoming an ffl, which comes with the acquirement. In the wake of some of these shootings, walmart and Dicks Sporting Goods have curtailed who can buy weapons and how much ammo they can buy, while congress has not done anything. Is it time to give up on congress and look for a solution in the private sector . Where do you see that going . I think it is both and situation. We believe the American People deserve more. We are going to do whatever we can to make sure they get it. Either in the next year or we elect a new congress. That doesnt mean the private sector cannot act. In fact, this is a burgeoning area of support for the gun safety movement. At different, we have new Corporate Partnerships with levis, Dicks Sporting Goods and worked with myriad others and at a time of governmentrust in and governmental institutions, we find Americans Still have trust in, faith in, and connectivity to the brands they love. The companies behind those brands have an opportunity, obligation, to speak out. And also to take action that in in some way, shape, or form, move this country toward a safer future. Dicks Sporting Goods has taken courageous action, taking Assault Rifles and other guns off of their shelves. Thatnk the folks like dix are taking action can feel good going home knowing responsible actions have saved lives. The climate on the hill is not right for gun control policy. So have you and other groups surrendered to the view there is no moving on this issue as long i am not sure impeachment is part of it. Peter the house of representatives is engaged in impeachment inquiries. They are the only ones who have acted, passing several pieces of legislation with more on the way. It is the senate and president sitting on their hands and cashing nra checks while blocking lifesaving measures. I dont think this is a question of the impeachment inquiry distracting legislators from their duties to keep their constituents safe. This is a question of priorities. What we are finding is the house of representatives, the majority ran saying they were going to passed legislation to keep kids and communities safe from gun violence. They passed legislation. The senate and the president have failed to follow suit. We are going to keep the pressure on. We have hundreds of advocates, volunteers, supporters across the country pushing trump, pushing senators to take action. I want to be clear, im not hopeless. This is a bit of a marathon. Or at least an intermediate distance race. It is not a sprint. It has been seven years since we have launched giffords. We are in a scenario where if voters continue to elevate gun safety as a voting issue, and if we vote out the people who have blocked progress, we could have Gabby Giffords in the rose garden with whoever the next president of the United States is signing gun safety reforms into law. If you think about the decades in our rearview where gun safety was considered a political third rail, where even in a situation, 2009, 2010, where you had barack obama in the white house a , vetoproof, filibuster proof majority, where nothing happens on guns. Fast forward to today, where the country is ready for reform. You have one Political Party running and winning on this issue. We have made tremendous strides. I think our greatest progress is still to come. In the blink of an eye, we have an opportunity to see significant reforms in the near future. Greta we have 10 minutes left. Lets say that that does happen and there are laws passed. The Supreme Court is hearing a gun case for the first time in about in a decade since landmark ruling since the right was upheld to have a handgun in your home for selfdefense. It is about a new york city gun law about transportation. They have passed on different types of gun regulations. What can you and your group do to ensure if laws do get past, they are not overturned by the courts . Peter lets be very clear about what this case is and what it represents. What it is is a challenge against an arcane policy that existed in new york city. It has never existed anywhere else and does not currently exist anywhere at all. Prohibited from existing in new york city and across the state. It is for all functional purposes mooted out. But what this represents is the nra attempting to make an end run around voters. They see the politics of this issue shifting. In 2018, we spent more on politics than the nra did for the first time ever. Last year, voters elevated gun safety as their second most important issue. This year, in a virginia off cycle election, it was the number one issue. We see guns commanding a more important place in the political debate going forward. We are fighting hard. We have been involved in Supreme Court cases. Organized a coalition of advocates, academics and others , to submit various briefs to the court in support of our position. We think it would be a travesty against the people, also, Public Safety interests. Where the court to use this case as opportunity to expand gun rights under the Second Amendment and potentially endanger our ability to pass gun laws that are specifically enumerated to be allowed. We are watching very closely. I think the facts are on our side, both procedurally and in terms of jurisprudence but we will see how it goes. We will be gathering thousands of advocates in front of the 2, all court on december of d. C. And certainly the country is going to see how passionate the defenders are. You described this as an arcane law. And the issue moot in new york, but obviously, this is no longer in the court of Public Opinion but in the Supreme Court. How concerned are you this threatens to undercut limits on public carry in some states. Peter i think that would be the threat. It is incredibly important from a Law Enforcement standpoint states and the federal government have the ability to regulate who can carry a gun where. I have a lot of confidence the Supreme Court is going to see it our way. That lines up with our Public Safety interests in interest of Law Enforcement with what americans want at large. There are centuries of case law and jurisprudence on this particular topic. That doesnt mean we are not preparing very carefully and doing everything we can to ensure a positive ruling. We do have to understand, as a public, what is happening here. You have a case that should be by all intents and purposes mooted out. That is going to be part of the oral arguments. You have to wonder if the nra brings the case against the policy that has been mooted out in the face of mounting pressure to pass stronger Public Safety across the country laws, what is actually going on here, and we believe what is represented in the new york Supreme Court case is a situation where the nra, upre it sees losses piling and legislatures in the future in congress and at the ballot box, trying to make an end run around the progress we made in standpoint and harm the interest of public , safety in favor of the gun industry moving forward in using its decadeslong investments in the court. We will see what happens. Hasntt say congress acted but they did in a spending 1 billion over the next 10 years for School Safety improvements. Is that enough . Should there be more . Is that the right approach or should use the idea of spending bills to sneak in other revisions that you back . Obviously, we should make schools as safe as they can possibly be. Thesets be very clear, to hardenthe work schools to protect kids in their schools from gun violence is a fig leaf. Enough and not protecting the kids and communities from gun violence. We cannot wall ourselves off from this threat. What we can do is pass laws that we know are effective and we know are going people who should not have them. Universal background checks. Have red flag laws allowing authorities to ensure for individuals in crisis, have access to guns. These are the laws that are going to save lives. We have a lot of activists. One of what they said struck me. A young kid said, i live in a violent neighborhood. There is a lot of gun violence. For me, school is the safest part of my day. It is the walk to school and the walk home where i feel threatened. This is not a threat that manifests itself inside schools. It is a broad social problem. One third of all americans who fear going out in Public Places because of the threat of gun violence. We need comprehensive solutions with regards to gun access to address. Lets talk about what is happening in the state level. That has been one of our larger and unheralded areas of success. We passed 325 bills in 45 states. Those have arranged to expansions, red flag laws and others. It is satisfying to see even when Congress Seems stuck, the nra has bought off the congress and president , we are able to make lifesaving progress at the state level. We thank you for being this weeks newsmaker. Let me turn to our two reporters and talk about what is the mood like on capitol hill . And in the white house for enacting some sort of compromise in Gun Legislation . In the white house, we have seen a lot of conflicting messages sent. From the days after the parkland shooting and florida where President Trump convened a meeting of lawmakers at the white house, he talked about taking the guns. And then asking questions later. It startled the group. Within days, that position was no longer viable. We have seen the same position. We saw the president come out, indicating he would be willing to consider background checks or some a movement along those lines. And then finding that off the table. It is trying to corral where he is at any point in time that is the challenge. When you talk to lawmakers, democrats know the public is with them. There was a Research Poll that showed 91 of democrats and 80 of republicans favor universal background checks. Democrats think this is our issue, even if it does not get through. You see republicans feeling that pressure. If trump feeling that pressure. Not willing to go that step. They have concerns about the bill. The white house had a veto threat on it. You have a stalemate. There is not a lot of optimism. Given what happened in 2018, with democrats taking the house, describe the influence of this group and others. Others trying to curb gun violence versus the nra, the troubles they have had recently. I think the rise of these groups has been an important part squaring the debate, if you can square it against the nra. That has been what has been missing. Viable, wellfunded groups. I think, perhaps, the emergence of Michael Bloomberg in the democratic field, candidates, may raise the issue further. I think these groups are important, if only to equalize the debate. I think they have a lot of momentum from the students who spoke out. Parkland, there was an outpouring of students willing to put their face to this problem. They got a march in d. C. , across the country. You see people with the courage of youth, seeing their friends being killed, saying, we dont want this to happen. That has had a lot emotional impact. Some lawmakers had family members who are victims as well. It is a personal story for those running for office and those voting. The Supreme Court case next week, talk about the implications. The door is open to the Second Amendment. They could rule narrowly. The case could be move or they could strike down this new york law. Or they could have a broader nationwide impact. A lot of this impact you are seen. Things i concealed carry purposes permits, assault weapons bans limits on the size , of magazines, all of that could be in jeopardy. It depends how conservatives want to go. I think that is what peter was mentioning. Their biggest concern is the Court Strikes a broader decision and sends a signal to the lower courts to look with more skepticism in these laws that limit public carry. Concealed carry. The Supreme Court did not take these cases for 10 years. A lot of people speculate that President Trump ran that was because Justice Kennedy was in the middle. Now you have kavanaugh. President trump ran on appointing prolife justices and progun justices. Kavanaugh has been against gun regulations. It looks like the Supreme Court has a majority who might strike some of these laws down. It is a problem. Even if they passed the law, get it through a president , the courts might be another obstacle. You can follow the reporting if you go to cq roll call. Thats on usa todays website and on twitter. Thank you both for being part of newsmakers. Thank you for having me. Cspan has more from campaign 2020 later today with president ial candidate elizabeth warren. The massachusetts democrat will be holding a town hall in iowa city at the university of iowa. Cspan,4 4 45 on online at cspan1 cspan. Org or on the free cspan radio app. Tonight, on the communicators, the chair of u. S. Telecoms board of directors and ceo of consolidated. You have 30s where is that cable . Its in the ground. It is everywhere. Mentioned those 23 states. It is typically outside of those urban markets. The large towns we are really in the downtown area are places like portland, maine. Roseville, california. Those are the places where we have Fiber Networks in every street. Thats from every neighborhood on the polls and connecting with neighbors on the street. Watch the communicators, tonight 8 00 eastern on cspan two. The House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing wednesday with constitutional scholars as part of the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, focusing on the constitutional grounds for president ial impeachment. The president was invited to attend, as was his legal counsel. White has declined to participate this week. Online at cspan. Org, and cspan3 or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Robert costas with us. National reporter for the
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.