Graham Predicts Background Check Bill Will Fail

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) predicted Sunday that a universal background check bill will not pass the Senate.

"I don't think" it will pass, Graham said on CNN's "State of the Union." "I don't think it makes any sense. The current system is broken. Fix the current system, don't expand it to individual transfers. Nothing we're talking about would have prevented Newtown from happening."

-30-

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/graham-predicts-background-check-bill-will-fail

---

Graham On Immigration: ‘Conceptually, We Have An Agreement’

PEMA LEVY 10:43 AM EDT, SUNDAY MARCH 31, 2013

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said Sunday that the eight senators working on immigration reform "conceptually have come to an agreement" with only a few details yet to be worked out.

"It's gotta be written up, we haven't signed-off, there are a few details yet," Graham said on CNN's "State of the Union." "But conceptually, we have an agreement between business and labor, between ourselves."

Graham said he believed the Senate bill would pass in both Houses of Congress.

-30-

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/graham-on-immigration-conceptually-we-have-agreement

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

Marco Rubio Cautions ‘No Final Agreement On Immigration’ Bill Yet

Following news that big labor and business have come to an agreement over a low-skilled worker program, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) -- one of eight senators crafting immigration reform legislation -- cautioned in a statement Sunday morning that a "final agreement" on a bill had not yet been reached.

“I’m encouraged by reports of an agreement between business groups and unions on the issue of guest workers. However, reports that the bipartisan group of eight senators have agreed on a legislative proposal are premature.

“We have made substantial progress, and I believe we will be able to agree on a legislative proposal that modernizes our legal immigration system, improves border security and enforcement and allows those here illegally to earn the chance to one day apply for permanent residency contingent upon certain triggers being met. However, that legislation will only be a starting point.

“We will need a healthy public debate that includes committee hearings and the opportunity for other senators to improve our legislation with their own amendments. Eight senators from seven states have worked on this bill to serve as a starting point for discussion about fixing our broken immigration system. But arriving at a final product will require it to be properly submitted for the American people’s consideration, through the other 92 senators from 43 states that weren’t part of this initial drafting process. In order to succeed, this process cannot be rushed or done in secret.”

-30-

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/marco-rubio-cautions-no-final-agreement-on-immigration

[COLGATE4]

1. These Republican assholes are really

one-trick ponies. Can they do anything except obstruct?

[MjolnirTime]

2. I predict Graham never serves another term in the Senate. We'll see who's right.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. So, is Graham saying that any legislation that couldn't have prevented Newtown

should be ignored/obstructed/defeated? He acknowledged the system is broken but that proposed changes wouldn't have prevented it and we just shouldn't do anything? Did I read that correctly?

[Swede Atlanta]

9. Graham is a loathsome salamander...he is not worthy of the category of "homo-sapien"......

Enforcing universal background checks will be difficult. We know shady characters would continue to sell and transfer guns without background checks.

But does that mean we should not have those laws on the books? Does it not mean that if we find person A has transferred a firearm to person B without a background check we don't sentence that individual to 20 years in prison?

We need to make securing our nation a priority. We need to require universal background checks a priority.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. Yeah, talk about defeatism

If we follow that logic, then we shouldn't have ANY laws on the books............because somebody, somewhere, sometime, is going to not follow them.

[secondwind]

15. yes, you did. They are against universal background checks, and they are sticking with that.

[Botany]

4. I loath that man ...... 20 babies were cut to pieces and yet Lindsey and the other M.F.s still ....

.... do nothing or worse yet stop anything from getting done.

[marmar]

5. Because we have a crazy party with absolute contempt for the people.......

...... and another party, to borrow a Jay-Z lyric, that wouldn't bust a grape in a fruit fight.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. The gunners and the gun industry are loathe to give up their pipeline to the illicit market

They know how the game works: legal guns become illegal guns through straw purchases and other standard trafficking scams. The legal gun dealers know a significant minority of their business comes from the movement of guns on to the illicit market. The gun makers know it, too. The question is how much? Twenty percent? Thirty percent? That's enough billions to make universal background checks anathema. The imbecile gun nuts are told it is all about freedom and the big bad government, and they're so fucking foolish and in love that they lap it up, and so it goes.

[Smilo]

7. Well the republicans see to be getting their way on

everything else, so why would he not think this?

[The Wizard]

8. The Senate is a failed institution

disconnected from democracy and reality. Mitch McConnell has essentially paralyzed government and Harry Reid let the minority totally corrupt the political process. If the Senate were to disband tomorrow the whole world would be a better place.
When one senator who represents 650,000 people can stop the will of 300 million something has to change.

[msongs]

12. with a proper senate majority leader things would improve greatly nt

[DallasNE]

10. Rubio Is Right On Process

But what he says on process also applies to the other business of Congress as well. A prime example of that is the continuing resolution to fund government operations through September 30th. Nobody knows what is in that bill. Early news accounts said that while it had spending cuts it toned down many of the severe cuts in the sequester. Later reports said that it included all of the sequester cuts except for defense. But that was the House bill and it failed on a 40-59 vote so those reports are not likely accurate, leaving us not knowing even the broad outlines of the bill. That is what a broken government does. So Rubio is right that immagration legislation needs to go through committee where there is transparency and news coverage on committee hearings -- the way government used to operate. So far we know very little about the details. Too often these type of agreements have a little bit of everything, including provisions that are in direct conflict with one another. That is the purpose of these committee hearing -- to flesh out these conflicts. Let it begin.

[brett_jv]

13. By 'won't pass the Senate'

What he means is that fucknuts from HIS party (who represent only like 30% of the population) will SUBVERT and thwart the collective will of the MAJORITY of people and their representation (i.e. the Democratic party) by using the procedural clusterfuck known as the Filibuster.

[Joey Liberal]

14. Sen Graham (R-Fabulous) is an NRA shill

Just sayin...............

[Llewlladdwr]

16. The NRA and Republicans aren't the problem.

There aren't even 40 DEMOCRATIC votes for expanded background checks in the Senate.

What's up with that?

[jmowreader]

17. Someone needs to pin people like this down

When Republicans go off on their "fix the current system, don't change anything" and "enforce current laws, don't pass new ones" tangents, would someone PLEASE ask them "how?"

Lindsey says he wants the current system fixed. I want to know how he intends to "fix" the current system.

Think about it this way: Say your front porch breaks. A Senate Democrat would fix the porch in one of two ways: by removing the bad boards and replacing them with good boards (or in legislative terms, repealing the parts of laws that don't work and writing new parts that will), or by tearing off the whole porch and building a new one (replacing all the old laws that aren't working with new ones that will). A Senate Republican would go to Home Depot, buy a box of mending plates and a case of construction adhesive, and try to stick the broken boards back together. Which do you think would work better?