GAME OVER, FINALLY, GUN GUYS WIN

Political Irony Reigns as President Obama Signs “MasterBlaster Bill”

By Bill Schneider, 5-27-09

	Will these Old Faithful watchers notice the difference next year? National Park Service photo

I suppose I should let it go, but nobody else does, so why should I?

This is my third column about the now-infamous administrative rule to allow loaded, concealed firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges (links at end of column). The rule evolved into a symbolic and high priority political battle, and both pro-gun and anti-gun groups seized on it as a way to find out who had the power.

And now we know. The gun lobby wins, easily, which is no surprise to me.

Twice previously, I editorialized that both sides of this debate should do something important instead of wasting their time and money on a rule that does little more than legalize the status quo i.e. people who take loaded, concealed guns into national parks now still will; people who don’t won’t. But now that the game is over, I’ve retreated from that point of view. Perhaps this epic political battle was worth fighting.

If you remember my past columns, I have a big bet on the table with my gun nut friends. I wagered that no major national gun control law would get through Congress in the next four years. If I lose, I have to re-join the National Rifle Association. If I win, they have to take up a collection and buy me an AR-15.

With that in mind, I view last Friday’s signing by President Obama of H.R. 627, a credit card reform bill with the highly publicized national park gun amendment attached as valuable testimony for my claim that the war to preserve the sanctity of the Second Amendment has been won. Clearly, most politicians are so gunshy about any recordable vote casting them as anti-gun and lowering their NRA grade--and therefore making them vulnerable to defeat in the next election--they go to untold lengths to avoid it. And when they finally can no longer avoid taking a stand, most vote for guns and the 2A.

Gun rights advocates must--and surely will--remain vigilant, but the victory on the national park rule should give them confidence they have the political force with them.

Not convinced? Check this out.

On the gun amendment to the “must pass” credit card bill, now called the “MasterBlaster Bill,” the votes were 67-29 in the Senate and 279-147 in the House, with 105 Democratic Representatives and 27 Democratic Senators joining all but two Republicans in each house to create a veto-proof majority.

Obama could have vetoed the bill, of course, but he not only knew we need credit card reform immediately, but he also knew Congress would either override it or send it right back to him in another bill.

I still regret Congress can’t introduce and pass a bill on its own merits without making it an amendment or rider on an unrelated bill, but in this case, we at least had a recorded vote. How interesting is it to think about whether Obama would’ve signed the national park gun rule if it had come to his desk as a separate bill?

Also interesting, I received several press releases and pronouncements from The White House last Friday when Obama signed the MasterBlaster Bill , but all about the importance and details of the credit card reform, but not one word from about the gun amendment. Bad idea, President Obama. This would have been a great opportunity to praise the sincere efforts of a lot of people to send a message about the importance of the Second Amendment instead of sulking in silence about it.

All that came out of the Beltway was a two-paragraph statement, not from The White House, but from an underling in the Department of the Interior (DOI) reminding us that new law won’t go into effect for nine months (February 22, 2010) and begrudgingly admitting that DOI “will follow Congress’s directive and implement the new firearms law.”

Like the agency had a choice!

From a media perspective, I find this “Interior Spokeswoman’s Statement” quite revealing. Again, it didn’t come from The White House, as it should have, or perhaps more notable, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar didn’t have the moxie to put his name on anything related to the gun amendment, an obvious departure from his policy of grabbing any excuse to send out self-gratifying press releases, four or five every day, it seems, all with his name in the headline. But then, before he got his current job, he was the only western senator who didn’t join 51 of his colleagues in sending a letter to then Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne supporting the national park gun rule.

To me, these MIAs speak loudly, and as they say, the silence is deafening.

The national park rule has given us some major league political irony. Anti-gun groups were delighted to see Obama and a strong Democratic majority in Congress elected and expected to make some progress toward stricter gun control. Wrong! Not only did Obama just sign a controversial pro-gun law, the gun issue has become heavily non-partisan.

And even though “Obamanoia” is still spurring gun and ammo sales, national gun control efforts are going nowhere fast, making me feel even more secure that I’ve bet on the right horse. The reauthorization of Assault Weapon Ban hasn’t even been introduced, perhaps because 65 House Democrats sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder telling him to forget it. Other anti-gun bills that have been introduced, such as H.R. 45, a ridiculous bill requiring firearm registration and photographing, fingerprinting and testing of anybody who tries to buy a gun, haven’t even gotten a hearing and probably will die a silent death. 

Gun rights advocates have a solid majority in Congress and will have it for a long time, even if Democrats remain in control. I suspect this is quite frustrating for the gun control advocates who thought their time had come.

We’ve heard a lot of fear mongering about the national park gun rule mainly by the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA), Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, Association of National Park Rangers and the Brady Campaign. In reality, though, all the new law does is apply the same rules to national parks that apply to state parks. We all go to state parks, I expect, and have we noticed a lot of gun-related problems? No. That’s what it will be like next year in our national parks--no problem.

Letting state lawmakers, not judges or Congress, dictate gun policy for parks doesn’t seem so frightening or radical to me. Federal laws and court decisions can’t really be one-size-fits-all, and if the national park gun law is so intolerable for the residents of any state, they can ask their legislature to pass more restrictive gun laws for state parks, which will then apply to national parks and wildlife refuges in that state.

One thing does concern me, though. The NPCA plays a pivotal role as the primary NGO working to protect for our national parks, and I worry about seeing NPCA on the same list of plaintiffs as the Brady Campaign. The NPCA risks becoming viewed as an anti-gun group, right or wrong, and this could greatly hobble future effectiveness, especially in the West where most national parks are.

Here’s my punch line: The battle of national parks is over. When we visit a national park next year, I doubt we’ll notice the difference, but back in Halls of Congress and The White House, the people we’ve elected already notice the difference, and the resounding votes on this gun rights victory will affect the course of firearms legislation for many years to come.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Guns and the NRA, a Chronology

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.