All last week, U.S. Senator Pat Toomey (R. PA) was getting praise for this:
In a potential shift in the debates on gun laws, Donald Trump and some Senate Republicans are now saying they would consider new laws to limit suspected terrorists’ ability to buy guns – opening a door to action that has long eluded advocates for tougher restrictions on firearms purchases.
Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.), a key figure in the contentious argument, renewed his advocacy Wednesday, taking part in a Democratic takeover of the Senate floor and later saying he would introduce a bill Thursday to bar anyone on a federal terrorist watch list from buying guns, but also creating an annual review of the names on that list. He was hoping for support from a group founded by gun control advocate and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, his office said, though sources familiar with those talks said the organization had balked at some of Toomey's plans, finding them too onerous on federal authorities monitoring suspected terrorists.
"It's time to get something done here," Toomey said earlier on the Senate floor. "Everybody ought to be in agreement in principle: we don't want terrorists to be able to walk into a gun store and buy a gun, and we don't want an innocent, law-abiding citizen to be denied second amendment rights because he's wrongly on the list with a bunch of terrorists. This is not rocket science to figure this out."
Toomey was just the second Republican to join the Democrats’ quasi-filibuster, in which they took control of the Senate floor around 11:30 a.m. and for hours demanded votes to expand background checks for gun purchases and ban buys by suspected terrorists.
In fact, here’s footage of Toomey taking place in the filibuster:
Over the past few hours, Sen. Murphy has been joined by a number of his colleagues including Pat Toomey.
Pennsylvania’s junior Senator has been one of the few Republican members to advocate in favor of gun safety measures.
“I’m of the view that it’s time to get something done here,” Toomey began. “We’ve done a lot of talking.”
Sen. Toomey used his time to explain why he voted against a bill earlier this year that would’ve prevented those on the terrorist watch list from buying a gun, as the McGinty campaign has been critical of that vote recently. The Senator asserted that he was concerned that the previous legislation made it too difficult for someone put on the list in error to be allowed to purchase a gun.
Ok, so he took the time on the Senate floor to defend himself from a line of attack Katie McGinty (D. PA) has rightfully been hitting him with:
His Democratic challenger, Katie McGinty, hammered Toomey for voting last year to block a bill that would have barred suspected terrorists from buying guns. And Senate Democrats vowed to bring the politically charged measure back for another vote.
"Pat Toomey has worked to allow suspected terrorists to buy guns in this country, and that is just an outrageous position," said McGinty, who is challenging Toomey in one of the country's most critical Senate races. "Of all the kinds of tough issues, this one should not be a tough call."
Her comments Monday came hours after Senate Democrats pledged a renewed push on gun laws, starting with their proposal to ban purchases by anyone on federal terror watch lists.
"Are we going to take the painfully obvious commonsense steps and make sure terrorists can't get guns, or are we going to bow down to the NRA?" Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) asked in a conference call with reporters.
So MCginty’s attacks did get under Toomey’s skin, causing him to respond:
Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) dismissed as "nonsense" Katie McGinty's charge that he "has worked to allow suspected terrorists to buy guns."
Asked Tuesday about his challenger's criticism in the aftermath of the Orlando mass shooting, Toomey's sharpest response was a dismissive exhale.
"I don't know where that nonsense comes from," he said, noting that he voted for a Republican bill last year that would have given the U.S. attorney general a 72-hour window to stop terror suspects from buying guns.
Democrats, however, assailed Toomey for voting last December against their version, which would have imposed stronger restrictions on gun purchases by anyone on federal terror watch lists.
Senate Democrats plan to bring that bill back for another politically-fraught vote — but Toomey said he would still oppose it, if it is the same as the earlier version. He and other Republicans worried that people placed on watch lists in error could be stripped of their Second Amendment rights.
"There's absolutely no due process, the attorney general can randomly put anyone on that they like and that is not a reasonable thing to do," Toomey said. "I'm in favor of making it as difficult as we can for terrorists to get guns, but people should have an ability to challenge their status on such a list."
So Toomey went running to Michael Bloomberg’s group Everytown, to craft up his own bill:
Under Toomey's proposal, the attorney general would submit a list of names to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to verify whether each person "has engaged in conduct supporting terrorism and reason to believe the person may use a firearm in connection with terrorism," according to details released by his office.
Those individuals could be blocked from buying or selling a gun, or holding a license for firearms or explosives. The list would be re-evaluated at least once a year.
An emergency process would allow the attorney general to block a gun purchase for three days if someone is not yet on the list.
"I have drafted legislation that takes the best features from both of the previous proposals, effectively preventing terrorists from being able to purchase guns, while also safeguarding the rights of innocent Americans who are mistakenly put on the list," Toomey said in a statement on his new bill.
Toomey said both sides should be in agreement on the other side's key argument: that a suspected terrorist should not be allowed to purchase firearms, and that rights of law-abiding citizens should not be curtailed if they are wrongly on a watch list.
"This is not rocket science to figure this out," Toomey said.
As he seeks to build consensus, Toomey has faced criticism from Democrats, including his 2016 Senate challenger, Katie McGinty. A McGinty spokesman criticized Toomey's efforts as "a political calculation, not a principled stand."
And of course the press like the Washington Post praised Toomey as the GOP savior on guns because of his past record on background checks:
As far back as his time in the House of Representatives — a stretch that lasted from 1998 to 2004 — Toomey is on record as supporting universal background checks, says his staff.
He'd get a chance to demonstrate his commitment to that about a year after joining the Senate. After the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre, Toomey agreed to partner with Sen. Joe Manchin III, a moderate Democrat from West Virginia, on legislation to expand federal background checks to gun purchases online and at gun shows. Politifact Pennsylvania reports that, at the time, Toomey was getting pressure from a gun-control group to support the legislation (as were a lot of Republican senators).
The Senate, then controlled by Democrats, voted on what became known as the "Manchin-Toomey" amendment four months after the tragedy. It came up five votes shy of the key 60-vote threshold, with four Democrats opposing it and four Republicans in favor. President Obama called the day one of his most shameful in public office.
In a statement, Toomey said he was disappointed but also that "it's time to move on."
But McGinty had every right to be skeptical because Toomey’s bill couldn’t even get the support to bring his bill up for a vote:
Toomey said he was trying to find a middle ground to close the loophole that allows suspected terrorists to buy guns.
"We're at a point here where this is really all about whether people want to get something done and they want to accomplish something that is going to make it more difficult for terrorists to obtain firearms, or whether they just want to make political points," he told reporters Thursday afternoon.
But hours later Republican leaders said they would vote on a different GOP plan to address that issue, choosing one put forward by Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas). A Democratic version from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) will also get a vote. Earlier versions of those two measures failed along almost strict party lines in December, shortly after the San Bernardino, Calif. shooting, when 60 were needed.
A background check bill co-sponsored by Toomey then also fell well short of passage.
Democrats said Toomey's plan to stop terror suspects from buying guns included "unworkable" hurdles that would tie law enforcement's hands. The campaign for Toomey's Democratic challenger, Katie McGinty, dismissed it as political posturing — and ultimately ineffective, given that GOP leaders chose a different option.
"Let's be clear, this bill is written to protect Pat Toomey's reelection campaign, not Pennsylvanians," said McGinty spokesman Sean Coit.
McGinty's camp had attacked Toomey for declining to support the Feinstein bill last year.
And so Toomey’s bill didn’t make the cut and McGinty predicted how Toomey would vote:
A spokeswoman for Mr. Toomey couldn’t immediately say how he planned to vote this evening, but Ms. McGinty, a Democrat, said she expects he’ll vote no on all four measures, but hopes he won’t.
“Today is the day to back up words with action. Today is the day for Sen. Toomey to do something,” she said.
She said a failure to support any of the measures would show that he has been disingenuous in the way he has characterized his gun-control efforts.
“The idea that Pat Toomey is moderate on guns just isn’t true and it seems that the senator is going to prove that again today,” Ms. McGinty said.
“Talk is cheap. The power of the senator is the power to cast their vote, and today we’ll see whether the senator will vote to move forward on public safety [and] to move forward on taking on terrorists … or whether he will vote exactly the same way as Ted Cruz and Mitch McConnell and other extreme right-wing Republicans,” she said. “Let’s see Sen. Toomey cast his vote for legislation that actually will make a difference, that actually can save lives.”
Ms. McGinty said if she were in the Senate she would support the Feinstein and Murphy bills.
She said Mr. Toomey too easily dropped his 2013 effort to expand background checks and that he declined the change to reintroduce it in 2015, although he voted for it when Mr. Manchin did. (The bill failed.)
She said Mr. Toomey’s “track record is one of run-and-hide until the pressure gets very hot, and then the senator talks a good game but has not acted in a way that has gotten anything done,” she said.
And she wasn’t far off:
Votes by Democratic Sen. Bob Casey and Republican Sen. Pat Toomey broke along party lines. Casey voted "yea" for bills sponsored by Democrats, and Toomey did the same for measures introduced by Republicans.
"We need to take measurable steps forward like we did after 9/11 to keep our nation safe," Casey said in an emailed statement Monday. "Firearms should not end up in the hands of violent offenders to make sure we never repeat Newtown, Charleston, or Orlando and start to have definable impact on cutting down homicides in inner cities and across the nation."
Toomey, in a statement, said Monday's votes were nothing more than a partisan charade.
"They are symbolic of why most Americans have so little faith in Washington, and why Washington too often does so little to address the serious problems our country faces," he said.
Toomey has worked on gun-control legislation for nearly four years, but he said the Senate chose to vote on a more extreme plan with less bipartisan support than his bill.
"There should be a sensible middle ground on issues such as expanded background checks and keeping guns out of the hands of terrorists, but today's votes mark another missed opportunity to find it," he said.
There’s been arguments about how the gun debate will shape Toomey’s re-election bid. Some argue that it could piss off his base:
On Friday 1210 WPHT’s Chris Stigall, a conservative talk radio show host who frequently has Sen. Toomey as a guest, commented on this delicate balance.
“And so understand, he’s not doing it for you and me. This is what I talk about all the time,” Stigall explains. “There’s two Pat Toomeys and he is a magnificent politician. And I am not excusing or defending him, I’m just explaining it’s key to know. He is a masterful politician. When he comes on show like this, when he’s in front of NRA groups, when he’s in front of conservative groups — because I’ve seen it with my own eyes, I’ve heard it, I’ve heard it here, you’ve heard here — the man can sound every bit as conservative as Ted Cruz when he wants.”
“But he believes there’s a path to victory that is necessary, that necessitates him kissing up to people like Whoopi Goldberg and Raven Symone and others, because he thinks that’s what’s going to tip the scales in his favor and give him the slight edge,” Stigall continued. “This is where reasonable Pat Toomey comes in, because you see he’s doing this now for the Philadelphia media market.”
Stigall then pointed to Helen Ubinas’ story about buying an AR-15 in seven minutes that was published by the Philadelphia Daily News last week as an example.
“Okay, so people like Toomey are reading this and seeing this,” he states. “They’re running in a tight race in a moderate — particularly in a moderate area like the collar counties of Pennsylvania — and they assess the Helen Ubinas’s, the media types that are doing these stories, will like him. He will seem reasonable. And they won’t pick on him as much. They’ll even maybe write editorials, and watch for them. Watch for the today, maybe over the weekend. I bet you’ll hear some liberal enclaves write and say things like, ‘you know in a sea of all this bitter clinging gun redneck wacko madness in the Republican Party, there is but one bright light. And that is the reasonable moderate Republican Senator Pat Toomey from Pennsylvania.’”
“Watch for it. Toomey will be rewarded somewhere, in some liberal outfit for being a reasonable Republican. And that’s understandable,” Stigall concluded. “Politically now, that’s why he needs and that’s what he’s calculated he needs to have to win against Katie McGinty. You follow me here? This is — we’re talking about two different things. There’s the Pat Toomey and what he believes, and I don’t actually think he believes any thing about — in fact I have proof he doesn’t believe that this law’s going to do anything. I have proof of it. It happened on this show two years ago. He doesn’t believe what he’s selling. He needs to coverage that he’s the reasonable one, not the gun nut like the rest of you wackos Republicans.”
But some argue that Toomey has bigger things to worry about than guns:
His threat isn't guns. It's a loose cannon: Donald Trump - McGinty's strongest asset.
Toomey tightropes on Trump as other Republicans distance themselves because Toomey needs Trump supporters in order to win in November.
Trump won every county in the state's April GOP primary. He got more than 900,000 votes. Let's say 20 percent to 30 percent of that is hard-core Trump support in November. That's potentially 180,000 to 270,000 votes, including tens of thousands of new GOP voters.
Toomey won his first term in 2010 beating Joe Sestak by 80,000 votes.
Also, the structure of the vote and recent tendencies not to split tickets don't favor Toomey.
There are 936,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans (and 1.08 million independent and other-party voters). And while the state split tickets in past, there's evidence it's part of a national trend of one-party voting, the result of ongoing excessive polarization.
In 2012, for example, a Democrat won every statewide race, president to auditor general. In 2014, Democrat Tom Wolf won the only statewide race. In 2015, Democrats won all five statewide judicial races.
So Toomey's at high-risk. As McGinty continues to tie Toomey to Trump, Toomey needs to find a way to keep some ties, even if few in number and loose in nature.
That might be true but Toomey’s whole re-election pitch is he’s the guy who wants to keep you safe and stands by law enforcement:
Combine the notion that black protesters are criminals with the desire to boost police resources and you get Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), “the voice of hardworking law enforcement families in Washington,” according to a new campaign ad.
Toomey hasn’t been shy about his stance on these topics on the Senate floor, but now he’s bringing the issues onto the campaign trail with a re-election ad that chastises protesters who oppose police brutality.
“When rioters destroyed American cities, Pat Toomey stood strong with police,” says the ad, which was posted to YouTube Wednesday. “Toomey fought for better police equipment and benefits — and denounced the riots when others wouldn’t.”
Combine the notion that black protesters are criminals with the desire to boost police resources and you get Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), “the voice of hardworking law enforcement families in Washington,” according to a new campaign ad.
Toomey hasn’t been shy about his stance on these topics on the Senate floor, but now he’s bringing the issues onto the campaign trail with a re-election ad that chastises protesters who oppose police brutality.
“When rioters destroyed American cities, Pat Toomey stood strong with police,” says the ad, which was posted to YouTube Wednesday. “Toomey fought for better police equipment and benefits — and denounced the riots when others wouldn’t.”
Toomey’s ad appears to be referring to the protests and riots that rocked Baltimore and Ferguson, Missouri, following the high-profile deaths of Freddie Gray and Michael Brown. Gray died last April from a fatal spinal cord injury sustained while in police custody. Brown was shot and killed by a Ferguson police officer following a much-disputed altercation in August 2014.
Support for law enforcement and criticism of protesters has been a common refrain among some presidential campaigns this cycle, notably that of Donald Trump. But the topic isn’t new to Toomey.
In May, following Gray’s death, Toomey delivered a speech on the Senate floor commending law enforcement officials and largely dismissing the rampant police violence that has plagued Baltimore’s black community for decades.
“Far from the epidemic of police misdeeds that some claim to be happening out there, I think just the opposite is true,” Toomey said. “The overwhelming majority of police are honest men and women. They have very high ethical standards, they don’t have a racist bone in their body.”
Toomey was back on the Senate floor in June discussing the unrest that followed a grand jury’s November 2014 decision to not charge former Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson in Brown’s death.
It’s a different campaign tune he ran on from 2010 where he campaigned on be a fiscal hawk but he can’t run on that this time:
Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey has missed about four out of five hearings held by the Senate Budget Committee — of which he is a member — since 2013, according to an analysis by BuzzFeed.
The website's report Wednesday said after a review of transcripts and videos, it appeared that Toomey wasn't in attendance for 46 out of 57 hearings, or about 80 percent, since the start of the 113th Congress through this past April.
During the hearings Toomey missed, the senator attended at least two fundraisers and appeared on CNN to endorse Florida Sen. Marco Rubio for president on Feb. 3. Rubio has since dropped out of the race.
So yeah, with Donald Trump already causing him so many headaches, Toomey’s re-election bid has become a high profile race:
According to Politico, Republican Senator Pat Toomey's reelection bid is the fifth-most likely to be knocked off by a challenger.
Democratic nominee Katie McGinty is looking to claim her first elected office after beating former U.S. Representative Joe Sestak, Braddock Mayor John Fetterman and businessman Joseph Vodvarka in April's primary.
Politico's Kevin Robillard writes:
"Toomey, a favorite of the Koch network, the Chamber of Commerce and the Club for Growth, looks set to get help from the full breadth of the GOP coalition. Those outside groups also believe they can define Democrat Katie McGinty using everything from her long career in government and consulting to a recent false claim that she was the first member of her family to go to college. Democratic outside groups have had to buck her up, from the DSCC’s big primary spending to a recent (and rare) contrast ad from Senate Majority PAC."
Hence why groups like the Chamber of Commerce are spending money on ridiculous attack ads like this:
If Katie McGinty hears you use the word energy, she’ll hop in her car, have her driver jet over to the playground and try to catch little Jimmy so she can tax him.
That’s apparently the message of the latest Chamber of Commerce commercial.
The thirty-second spot, titled “Run Jimmy”, focuses on McGinty’s energy record. It mentions a 1993 plan from the Clinton Administration to tax carbon that passed the House but stalled in the Senate. In 2009, the Obama Administration’s cap and trade plan met the same fate. McGinty supported both proposals.
But McGinty is going to be getting a huge boost:
EMILY’s List, a group who works to help elect Democratic women, has placed a $1 million advertising buy in Pennsylvania to assist Democrat Katie McGinty in her challenge to Republican Sen. Pat Toomey.
The buy is its first in a House or Senate race for the general election, and an EMILY’s List official told Morning Consult that voters in the Keystone State will begin seeing ads next week.
Pennsylvania is a top target of national groups, from Democrats looking to flip a seat and Republicans looking to defend their majority. Already, McGinty has had more than $5 million spent against her (some by Republican groups during her primary) while Toomey has been opposed by $1.6 million, according to OpenSecrets.
But lets not wait for EMILY’s List, let help McGinty get ready to win now. Click here to donate and get involved with McGInty’s campaign.