Democrats, who have called for much more sweeping gun control steps, have said that if passed, it would be the most important piece of legislation in decades. Republicans, fearful of crossing their anti-arms base, are focusing on proposals they have kept out of the deal, including a ban on guns or ammunition and raising the age for buying firearms. The contrast between the way Democrats and Republicans describe the proposal – large and monumental versus targeted and limited in scope – reflects the difficult politics surrounding the issue and the fragility of the coalition that has rallied to try to deadlock. “It will undoubtedly save lives and be the most significant action for weapons the Senate has taken in nearly three decades,” said New York Democrat and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on Tuesday, acknowledging that the framework is far from everything Democrats want to achieve. Earlier, Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who played a critical role in the talks, showed an oversized chart on the floor of the Senate entitled “Ideas Rejected in the Negotiations,” as he carefully explained what his party had agreed and – exactly as important – what he did not have. He noted that the Democrats’ proposals, which were rejected by Republicans, included universal history checks, a ban on large-capacity magazines, and a ban on assault weapons for young people between the ages of 18 and 21. Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, the leader of the minority, said Tuesday that he was “comfortable” with the bipartisan framework that had emerged and would support a final bill that follows his parameters, another indication that Republicans aim to keep the coalition behind it and prove to their colleagues that it would be politically safe to support it. The effort comes at a critical juncture, as negotiators on both sides struggle to translate an agreement in principle into legislative language that could garner 60 votes in the Senate. The measure in question would require enhanced background checks on potential arms buyers under the age of 21, make it more difficult for domestic thugs to obtain firearms, and provide federal grants to states to enact so-called red tape laws. weapons from the hands of dangerous individuals, among other steps. Democrats began negotiations two weeks ago with moderate hopes, merely willing to show that it was possible to break the deadlock and pass some sort of gun safety legislation after the mass shooting, and acknowledging that it would have to be limited to attract enough support from Republicans to pass. The political stakes were high, even if there were no expectations for any major discovery. With President Biden’s poll numbers falling as he struggles to advance most of his agenda, he and Democrats are desperately seeking any legislative victory to boost his presidency and prospects for the midterm congressional election. At the same time, after the massacre of 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, Republicans recognized that they had to come to their own political reality: that the vast majority of voters, including their own, support at least some gun safety measures. , including enhanced history checks. Nevertheless, they met with a backlash on their right, trying to underestimate the idea that they gave ground to the Democrats on the issue of weapons. Appearing on Fox News this week, Mr. Cornyn assured viewers that “states that do not have red flag laws will not be required to approve them” and that the proposal did not include “any new restrictions on law-abiding gun owners.” . “Part of the problem we have is that people are reading things in the bill that do not exist, so this is a process of trying to explain what is inside and what is outside,” Cornyn said in a brief interview Tuesday. . This is a matter of political necessity for Republicans as the right wing mobilizes against compromise. Lauren Boebert, a Colorado Republican, described the senators as “pure RINOs” – Republicans by name only – while the American Firearms Association, a grassroots rights group raises money for possible anger. deal, he said, referring to Republicans involved as “traitorous bastards” who want to “disarm the whole country.” A spokeswoman for former President Donald J. Trump said he was angry with Republicans who had adopted the framework. “We must stop these RINOs from joining the Democrats,” spokeswoman Liz Harrington told a conservative media outlet, arguing that red flag laws would turn the United States into a “Soviet Union.” (After a series of shootings in Dayton, Ohio and El Paso, Texas in 2019, Mr. Trump called for red flag laws.) “I think we’re more interested in the red wave than in the red flags, frankly,” North Dakota Republican Kevin Cramer said Tuesday after Mr. Cornyn presented an outline of the bill during a closed-door GOP Senate lunch. Democrats have their own challenges in staying united behind the proposal, as progressives have expressed concerns about its limited scope and approach. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat from New York, said she was concerned that the proposal, which would allow law enforcement authorities to review juvenile and mental health records for gun buyers under the age of 21 for the first time, could lead to “criminalization”. of children. Mr Schumer went on to talk about everything the bill would do, noting the importance of enhanced history checks for people under the age of 21 and closing the so-called friend’s window, a long-standing priority for gun safety activists. However, critical sticking points remain unresolved. Mr Cornyn told reporters on Wednesday that he was concerned that states without red flag laws could not receive funding for crisis response programs. Both Democrats and Republicans have also hinted at disagreements over who exactly would be covered by closing a friend’s window, which aims to include comrades in a ban on domestic abusers acquiring weapons. The ban currently applies to spouses. “At some point, if we can not reach 60, we will have to reduce it a bit,” said Cornyn, warning that the drafting stage could be extended until next week. Connecticut Sen. Christopher S. Murphy, the Democrats’ chief negotiator, said he did not expect anything in the box to fall outside the final bill and was confident it would pass. As they spread different messages about what the arms deal would and would not do, both Democrats and Republicans have a legitimate case to make. Because the bar for a historic gun discovery in Congress is low – no major federal gun legislation has been passed since 1993 – a modest move still counts as an important moment. That momentum may not satisfy Democrats who are frustrated because they have to accept gradual progress and implement only a handful of policies that they believe will save lives, but it could be tantamount to a political win-win for them, the generals said. “They have a major breakthrough to talk about, and they still have plenty of room for a very fruitful debate about what else needs to be done to address gun violence and mass shootings,” said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster. “The reality of Senator Cornyn’s position is that the provisions that Republicans kept out of the bill are very popular with the vast majority of voters. “These are the policies they will claim in the by-elections.” And while the difference in emphasis may reflect how divided the country is on arms, some have said it was also a sign of progress. “The way both Republicans and Democrats are sending this message shows me that they are really serious about doing something,” said James P. Manley, a former top adviser to former Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid.
