.
Feedback

Assault Weapon Restrictions First Target on New Congressman's Agenda

Eric Swalwell plans to co-sponsor an assault weapons ban as he gets ready to join the debate on the debt ceiling and Hurricane Sandy aid. Let the congressman know your views on these issues.

New congressman Eric Swalwell isn't waiting long to jump into an issue that is sure to bring him some heat.

The Dublin Democrat plans to co-sponsor a bill that places restrictions on private ownership of assault weapons.

It's the first bill Swalwell will put his name on. That legislation is expected to be introduced by mid-January.

It'll come just weeks after Swalwell and other members of the 113th Congress took their oath of office. It also is one of many politically charged issues the new representatives will debate.

Among them are the debt ceiling, aid for Hurricane Sandy victims and Swalwell's idea to set up a "mobile Congress."

Swalwell may have some influence on these and other issues. On Monday, he was named by Democratic House Whip Steny Hoyer as assistant whip. 

What do you think about all these issues? Use the comments section to let your elected representatives how you'd like them to vote.

Swalwell will also be writing an occasional blog about his experiences in Washington.

Swalwell officially got down to business on Thursday when he and other members got sworn in. They first took the oath as a group on the House floor in the morning and then that afternoon got to individually take the oath again at a re-enactment with House Speaker John Boehner.

Swalwell said both ceremonies provoked different emotions. The House floor vote overwhelmed because as he looked around and saw 435 hands in the air, he realized the importance of the moment.

"I got hit by a semi-truck of emotions," said the 32-year-old congressman. "It was the realization we are designated with leading the country. It's a big responsibility."

The re-enactment had a different feel. He was surrounded by his parents, other family members, friends and constituents.

"That ceremony made me realize how many people it took to get this done," said Swalwell.

The new congressman was also appointed to the Homeland Security Committee and the Science and Technology Committee.

His first vote was in a losing cause. Swalwell joined other Democrats in casting their ballot for Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) for Speaker of the House. Boehner won re-election to that post.

Disarray in Congress

Last week, Democrats watched as Republicans fought internal battles over the speakership, fiscal cliff legislation and spending cuts. Some pundits are saying the Republican House members are in more disarray than ever.

"I think what we're seeing is far right extremists taking over the (Republican) caucus," said Swalwell.

That split showed up again when the House voted Friday on a relief package for Hurricane Sandy victims.

The original bill was for $60 billion in assistance, but some Republicans balked because they felt corresponding spending cuts should be made elsewhere.

The House ended up approving a $9.7 billion aid package for federal flood insurance participants on a 354-67 vote. All the "no" votes were Republicans. The remaining $51 billion is scheduled for discussion on Jan. 15.

Swalwell voted in favor of Friday's bill and will vote "yes" on the $51 billion package, too.

He said it's the federal government's duty to help victims of natural disasters, no matter where they occur.

"We come together in these situations and it's usually bi-partisan," said Swalwell. "We have to assume there will be a need for San Francisco earthquake relief some day."

Assault Weapons Ban

The next major issue is expected to be assault weapon restrictions.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is promising to introduce such a bill in the Senate. Swalwell says he will co-sponsor a House bill on the same topic.

Swalwell says as an Alameda County prosecutor he saw the impact assault weapons have on their victims. It's not just the number and size of the bullets, he says, it's the velocity at which they travel.

"When a person gets hit by assault weapons ammunition, they have no chance," he said. "There is no reason for civilians to carry military-style assault weapons."

Swalwell said he isn't afraid of the political heat he's bound to take from the National Rifle Association and Second Amendment fundamentalists.

"I'm more worried about people who become victims of gun violence," he said.

Swalwell also supports reforming the nation's mental health system and strengthening security at schools.

Debt Ceiling

Within 60 days, Congress will once again square off over the federal government's debt ceiling.

Swalwell plans to vote to raise that limit. He agrees with President Obama that this is for expenses the government has already rang up and we have an obligation to pay them.

However, after the vote, Swalwell said Congress needs to get serious about spending cuts, so the ceiling issue is no longer a factor.

"It's incremental government. We can't keep kicking the can down the road," he said.

Once option Swalwell wants to explore is raising the cap on Social Security tax payments. Right now, Social Security taxes are collected only on the first $110,000 a person earns. After that, no tax is paid.

Swalwell says that's a "regressive tax" and the cap should be raised to bring in more revenue for Social Security.

Mobile Congress

An idea being floated by Swalwell is to make the House more of a "mobile Congress."

With the technology available today, Swalwell says there is no reason to require Congressional representative to be physically present to conduct business.

He said members should be able to video conference and telecommute, so they can spend more time in their districts.

He wants to try the idea at the committee level first, then see if it can work on the House as a whole.

"The goal is to make Congress more accessible," he said. "It's time. It's the 21st century."

Kevin Gove January 11, 2013 at 04:14 pm
How many rounds of ammunition did they find in the Aurora massacre? more than 6000. Someone wants to buy thousands of rounds of ammunition, I think BATF and other law enforcement agencies should know about that. The information that is collected helps paint a picture. It may be for very legitimate reasons like you suggest for competitions but allowing unchecked purchases of ammunition is not the best interests of public safety. Perhaps like the screening procedures with TSA there could be relaxed requirements for "frequent fliers".
Michael Ford January 11, 2013 at 04:38 pm
See and that line of thinking leads down a slippery slope. What amount of profiling is ok? Because someone buys 6k rounds of ammo does not make them a criminal....just as much as someone wearing a Turban isnt a terrorist.
Kevin Gove January 11, 2013 at 04:51 pm
It is not a slippery slope at all. I'm not advocating profiling, I'm advocating monitoring, collecting information and taking appropriate action when warranted. For those deemed "frequent and safe fliers" perhaps they submit to less frequent comprehensive checks.
Michael Ford January 11, 2013 at 04:53 pm
Isn't that what the background check is for when you purchase the firearm?
Mr.G January 11, 2013 at 06:47 pm
Many people find 1,000 rounds of ammo an amazingly large amount. For serious shooters/competitor, it is no big deal. Trap shooters, for example, will shoot 300+ rounds a day. In a four-day competition they will shoot over 1000 rounds. Many defensive handgun classes will shoot near 1000 rounds in a four day class--some even more. I common package of .22LR come packaged in boxes of 525 rounds--a couple of those is 1000 rounds. On top of that, many people buy bulk purchases over a thousand round to get better deals. So again, the enforcement agency will get flooded with data about law-abiding gun owners rather than useful information about criminal activity.
BobG January 11, 2013 at 07:26 pm
A round of trap is 25 birds. Doubles would be 50 so I am suspect that that a typical club shooter will shoot 300+ rounds in a day. Also, teaching or training facilities are different from individuals, they should have a special license to buy and re-sell, but must share in the regulation and responsibility. The simple fact is that anyone can buy any amount of ammunition, over the Internet and without any background check or information collection. This should make even the most conservative gun owners cringe and I expect the majority of gun owners support changes. It seems to me that when you get right down to it most of the posts are self serving and do not represent views to make schools, mall, movie theaters, and society safer.
Mr.G January 11, 2013 at 09:42 pm
BobG, most of the Assault Weapons ban legislation has been done before and had very little effect on violent crime. California has much of the proposed legislation in place and it not having a large impact on violent crime. The fact is if all long guns evaporated tonight, it would have very little effect on violent crime. Most violent crimes, including mass shootings don't require you buy thousands of round of ammo. So much of this will be ineffective and only burden law-abiding gun owners.
So you are correct, I don't support much of the proposed legislation because it won't make our schools safer and won't reduce violent crime. Instead it pushs forward an old tired political agenda. If you thought they were really interested in preventing shootings like that in Connecticut, they would wait until the investigation was wrapped up and a final analysis was available. The information in the media regarding the guns actually used in the shooting has been all over the place. We seem more interested capitalizing on the emotional response to the shooting that getting actual data about the shooting. So please explain how background checks, ammo reporting, registering so called "assault rifles, and limiting the round count of magazine would have prevented the Connecticut tragedy. Or, the one in Colorado.
BobG January 11, 2013 at 10:03 pm
There is always some "pork" in any legislation. The TSA gets slammed all time for doing things that don't really stop terrorist or at least could be more effective. They are getting better with time and terrorist find it much harder to use airplanes as their weapons. All we ask is that home grown terrorist find it much more difficult to use guns as their weapon of choice. By limiting (not removing) the ability of anyone to be able to just "shoot up a place", and controlling the flow of ammunition, we might be able to head off a massacre. Guns are always going to be part of our society but the link in all the recent shootings has been the excessive amount of ammunition purchased. There will be some amount of legitimate gun owners buying 1000s of rounds over the Internet and they will pass a background check. If background check liars are prosecuted then either the mentally ill or desperate will not bother or will at least be questioned before they act.
Mr.G January 11, 2013 at 10:10 pm
Two thoughts. As I understand it, people that fail the current background check to purchase a gun are denied from buying that gun but seldom pursued other than that.
The other thought is that many law-abiding gun owners go through several background checks a year in the course of buying and selling guns. If you add ammo on top of that, that is even more background checks. This is an unreasonable burden for the law-abiding gun owner since he/she will most likely be paying for those checks. All that in addition to $200/"assault weapon" to register them. How much money do you want to suck out of law-abiding gun owners? Especially considering the marginal effectiveness.
BobG January 11, 2013 at 10:18 pm
Well, this has turned into quit a good debate both civil and about the issues. I think you hit on two very good points. The first is that there are way too many ways to purchase a gun without a background check. You know what those are and that needs to stop. Second, we are not talking about ammo meaning a box of shot gun shells, we are talking about buying thousands of rounds in a short period of time. I would expect that the vast majority or recreational and law abiding gun owners would never be effected by the new laws.
Mr.G January 11, 2013 at 10:21 pm
Here is an example of a felon that is not being arrested or prosecuted for violating current gun laws. Does anyone believe he was a threat to public safety? Probably not but we keep the misguided law. I wonder how they decide who to prosecute and who to let off.
http://news.yahoo.com/no-charges-nbc-host-over-ammunition-magazine-215152419.html
Al Phillips January 12, 2013 at 03:51 pm
Thank You Matt McCormick for the encouragement to run for Congress. Many of the patch loyal readers know that I ran for the State Assembly district 16 seat which covers the tri-valley area during this past election. As an unknown candidate with no prior political experience, I came within 8 points of winning. With the support from folks like you that are concerned about the erosion of your rights I can win in 2014! We need some common sense thinking elected officials that won't just support the whim of the moment
BobG January 12, 2013 at 04:06 pm
Al, so if this is your conclusion to the gun violence in the USA: "The root of our problem is the decline of moral responsibility and respect to our fellow man." - What bills would you sponsor to address this? Maybe you can expound upon your views on how morality would be legislated without "erosion of your rights".
Also, if your position on arming the populace is to address your question: "What will we use to fight for our freedom" . Who are we fighting? It sounds to me that your platform is arming individuals without restrictions and implementing laws to restore moral responsibility. Is this what you beleive is "common sense thinking"?
Al Phillips January 12, 2013 at 05:27 pm
Thanks Bob, I agree with your previous statement that this is a good debate. We need more conversation not more confrontation. It is true that I support the second amendment as written, but I do agree with you on high capacity clips. This is not one of those subject that can be painted with a broad brush. In the end, criminals will always be able to buy things on the black market. As stated before, we have a problem with not respecting the life of our fellow man and we do have a decline in morality. However, you can not legislate morality. I have real concerns for our children's future and pray that we leave the world better with a brighter future.
Matt McCormick January 12, 2013 at 06:23 pm
Al, I voted for you.
That said, I'd like to help you get elected this time around. Please let me know the best way to reach you. Thanks.
Michael Ford January 12, 2013 at 06:38 pm
Hey Al, are you going to be running again? I have a large following of Libertarian friends who are looking for someone to represent us that is not named Stark and now Sowell. However we need to know stances and what not. We are very vocal on social media, so can help spread the word when the time comes.
Mr.G January 13, 2013 at 03:03 am
Bob G, in response to this statement "A round of trap is 25 birds. Doubles would be 50 so I am suspect that that a typical club shooter will shoot 300+ rounds in a day."
In competition, you shoot four rounds of trap for 100 birds. Different shoots will set up a day differently but in is not uncommon to have 3 events for each day. They might shoot 100 singles (16 yards), 100 handicap, and 50 pair of doubles. Some shooters will shoot a round or two to warm up for even more targets. Here is a flyer of a local upcoming trap shoot that is a one day shoot: http://www.lprg.org/pdf_files/LPRG_ATA_20130127.pdf Many shoots will go over multiple days. Two, three and four day shoots are not uncommon. Here is an example of a three day shoot. The shooters shooting all the event in this shoot would shoot 900 rounds. Including practice rounds, they would probably exceed 1000 rounds. www.cooncreektrap.com/pdf/2009-september-5-6-7.pdf
Mr.G January 13, 2013 at 03:21 am
BobG, Here is program for a 7-day trap shoot with 15 events. So the shooters shooting all the events will shoot 1500 birds in addition to any practice rounds they might shoot. http://www.shootata.com/pdfs/programs/2013_dixie_web.pdf
Mr.G January 13, 2013 at 03:59 am
This handgun class is another example of shooters exceeding 1000 rounds in a couple days of training. This class says attendees will shoot 1000-1200 rounds.
http://www.combatfocusshooting.com/calendar/view/533
Al Phillips January 13, 2013 at 11:49 pm
Thank you so much Matt. I can be reached at 925 262-9009 or www.voteforalphillips.com
Al Phillips January 14, 2013 at 12:00 am
Hi Michael, I was endorsed by the RLC (Republican Libertarian Caucasus), Howard Jarvis taxpayers association and groups that are concerned with the preservation of Property and Individual rights. I am a vocal opponent against California’s high speed rail to nowhere and I am against the One Bay Area plan to force Agenda 21 down our throats. I believe that Politicians are stewards of the taxpayer’s money and should use it prudently. These are the high points of my beliefs. Please call me at 925 262-9009 or visit my web site at www.voteforalphillips.com . I would love an opportunity to speak to your group
Matt McCormick January 14, 2013 at 12:57 pm
The truth about assault weapons is that there is no such thing.
I strongly encourage all people on both sides if this debate and those part of this discussion to visit this website, especially Mr. Swalwell. http://www.assaultweapon.info/
BobsyourUncle January 14, 2013 at 04:53 pm
John Noveske's last Facebook post.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/content/last-post-john-noveske-made-his-facebook-page-he-was-killed Addresses the over prescription of psychiatric drugs. I can't attest 100% to the validity of the post but I did Google some of the names listed and it did pan out true. Maybe the large pharmaceutical lobby $$$$ in Washington will have a say in how far the politicians look into this as a contributing factor to today's problems????? How about it Mr. Swalwell?
d January 17, 2013 at 02:21 am
Its amazing how people suddenly give a s&%@ about the constitution when it comes to guns and Congress... what about the so-called peace officers who wipe there @$$e$ with that constitution on a daily basis? Guns can be as legal or illegal as you want, but if you live in California you'll still get shot for having one. Or if your Oscar grant, trayvon Martin or Kenneth Chamberlain you could get shot just for not having one
Dora the Explorer January 17, 2013 at 02:41 pm
d - the police are what protect us when we don't have a gun. Why all the hostility towards the police. Did you get a ticket or something
Eloise Hamann January 24, 2013 at 06:23 pm
Thanks Eric for representing me and the majority in this district. What does it tell you when no Republican made it in the top two primary? Gun control worked super well in Australia. Are we a lesser people? (On a passing note, did anyone hear that the chair of Gun Appreciation day claimed MLK would appreciate honoring guns. He went on to say if blacks had had a right to own and carry guns, slavery might not have happened. I am NOT making this up.)
Eric, I'm excited you're jumping in and working on issues your real supporters care about instead of waiting to test the waters. Congratulations on your appointment to be assistant whip! Eloise Hamann
Kenn Hamann January 24, 2013 at 06:28 pm
Thanks Eric for representing me and the majority in this district. What does it tell you when no Republican made it in the top two primary? Gun control worked super well in Australia. Are we a lesser people? (On a passing note, did anyone hear that the chair of Gun Appreciation day claimed MLK would appreciate honoring guns. He went on to say if blacks had had a right to own and carry guns, slavery might not have happened. I am NOT making this up.)
Eric, I'm excited you're jumping in and working on issues your real supporters care about instead of waiting to test the waters. Congratulations on your appointment to be assistant whip! Eloise Hamann
TPH January 24, 2013 at 07:40 pm
I think the majority of this District cares about the out of control spending in Washington not gun control which won't do anything. Our rep sold his soul to Pelosi and spending cuts is not in their genetic make up. Typical tax and spend socialist, simply a younger version of Fourtney Stark. On a different note Eloise, do you always post for your husband (poor Kenn good luck with this one buddy).
TPH January 25, 2013 at 01:05 am
Yep gun control worked "super well" in Australia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGaDAThOHhA&feature=player_detailpage
Mr.G January 25, 2013 at 02:42 am
I am hoping for more from our representation. I want much more focus on "common sense" spending control but this administration seems to want to arrange the deck chairs rather than deal with the the sinking of the Titanic. The Assault Weapons Ban is a waste of time and ineffective as proven from previous legislation. Focus on a strong economy, job growth, spending reductions, and debt reduction to leave a legacy.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Dublin Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Smithman June 6, 2013 at 09:10 am
Also Family and Friends will gather at Georgie's home following the service to celebrate her life.
Camaro on Cinderblocks June 7, 2013 at 03:47 pm
How about creating new freeways and wider lane freeways. Freeway parking lots causes the crap air.Read More There shouldn't even be a Bay Area Air Quality Management District. That money should go to expanding highways.
It's a simple body wrap that helps shrink your fat cells.  You can do it in the comfort of your own home!
Rosielina June 6, 2013 at 09:13 am
I'm also looking for college students, stay at home mom/dads, or anyone who would love to earn extraRead More cash! Ask me how. It's simple and easy to start your own business!
Rosielina June 7, 2013 at 06:11 am
Follow my Happy Slimming blog and you will be entered in the Wrap me up FREE drawing!!!