Mayor Michael Bloomberg's (I. NYC) Super PAC, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, is making good on it's threat to come after Senator Mark Pryor (D. AR):
http://www.usatoday.com/...
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's gun-control group launched a new ad campaign aimed at Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor, who is up for re-election next year in Arkansas.
Pryor was one of four Democrats who voted last month against a Senate bill to expand background checks on gun buyers. Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the group co-founded by Bloomberg, had targeted Pryor and other senators in a multimillion-dollar ad campaign in late March ahead of the vote.
Angela Bradford-Barnes, former chief financial officer for the Arkansas Democratic Party, says in the ad that a friend was shot to death and that she was "heartbroken" by Pryor's vote. Bill Gwatney, at the time chairman of the Arkansas Democratic Party, was shot to death in 2008.
"This bill may not be perfect, and it cannot undue my tragic loss, but if it stops even one person from causing this pain to another family, it's worth it," Bradford-Barnes says in the ad. - USA Today, 5/24/13
And of course this ad infuriated Pryor:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg didn’t know Bill Gwatney. I knew Bill Gwatney. He was my friend and he was killed by someone with severe mental health issues. The Mayor’s bill would have done nothing to prevent his death because it fails to adequately address the real issue and common thread in all of these shootings -- mental health. That’s why I voted for separate legislation that strengthens funding for mental health programs; requires states, courts, and agencies to report mental health records to the background check system; increases penalties for straw purchases; reauthorizes and funds the COPS program to improve safety in schools; holds the Department of Justice accountable by forcing them to prosecute cases where individuals tried to purchase firearms illegally; and conducts a study on violence in the media. This legislation would have done all of this while protecting people’s 2nd amendment rights.
Mayor Bloomberg’s attack ad politicizes the death of my friend by misleading people into thinking that his bill would have prevented Bill Gwatney’s tragic death. The fact is it wouldn’t have, which makes Mayor Bloomberg’s ad even more disgusting. - Huffington Post, 5/24/13
Here's the thing, I have mixed feelings about how Bloomberg is attacking Pryor on this issue. For the record, I am neither a fan of either men. I think Bloomberg is a police-state loving egomaniac who's too cozy to Wall Street and I think Pryor is a dumb redneck. Now I have found myself agreeing with them on separate issues. Pryor has co-sponsored Senator Tom Harkin's (D. IA) legislation opposing the chained CPI, which I fully agree with and I applaud Pryor on this issue. But I do heavily agree with Bloomberg on gun control and gun safety and I appreciate his efforts to get Congress to stand up to the NRA and pass smart gun control legislation. My concern isn't that Bloomberg could help put Pryor's seat in even more danger and threatening the Democrats majority in the Senate. It's more about how Bloomberg's strategy could backfire:
Some analysts think that going after Pryor from the left on gun control could actually work to his political advantage in a general election.
“Pryor could be so lucky to have people attacking him on [gun control],” Arkansas Democratic strategist and Talk Business columnist Michael Cook said before news of the Bloomberg group broke. “In some ways, that’s the best news for him, so he can say, ‘Look, I’m getting heat for standing up for your right to own guns.’ ”
Primary races may be more fertile ground to get pro-gun control legislators elected. That’s the influence Bloomberg exerted in the Baca race, where Baca lost to a pro-gun control Democrat, or in Illinois, where the Bloomberg-backed candidate won the primary to replace former Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.
Instead of spending money on attack ads, another approach would be to funnel money into state-based, pro-gun control efforts to force the hands of senators such as Pryor, in conservative or pro-gun states.
“Investing money in partnering with local groups and getting Arkansans to bring this up from the grassroots, I think that’s sometimes more effective in accomplishing the end goal,” says a strategist with a Democratic outside group. “Every senator listens to their constituents... In the end, that’s the people who matter to them politically, but more importantly, the people they’re there to serve.”
Pryor certainly wasn’t swayed by Bloomberg’s group before, when it spent $12 million on ads in 13 states, including Arkansas, to pressure Senators to vote for gun control measures last week.
“I don’t take gun advice from the mayor of New York City,” Pryor said in a statement then. “I listen to Arkansans.” - National Journal, 4/25/13
Pryor was already going to have distance himself from President Obama running in a deep red state during a mid term election. But if there's one person rural Arkansas gun owners might hate more than Obama, it's Bloomberg. A wealthy, Jewish billionaire from New York talking about gun control to rural Southern voters is like having an oil executive telling environmentalists how to be environmentally friendly. Bloomberg could only be giving Pryor not only potential political cover to run against Bloomberg's agenda but also cause him to continue to vote against common sense gun safety regulations like background checks. It would deliver the exact opposite of what Bloomberg and his group were trying to achieve.
However, Bloomberg's ad campaign might work because he's going for the right demographics that could play an instrumental role in Pryor's re-election chances:
http://www.politico.com/...
Bloomberg’s group has made its choice: Its radio spots in Arkansas will target the state’s African-American community, “without which Mark Pryor doesn’t have a prayer of getting reelected,” said Mark Glaze, director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns. - Politico, 5/7/13
If Bloomberg can succeed in getting black voters in Arkansas to put the pressure on Pryor to change his vote in support of background checks, then Bloomberg's efforts will be a success. Now I must admit, Pryor responded harshly towards Bloomberg's ad but he's calmly been explaining his vote against background checks:
http://www.thecitywire.com/...
The state’s senior senator has come under heavy criticism from groups who disagreed with his vote against the Manchin-Toomey bill, which expands background check measures.
Pryor voted for the Grassley amendment, which also failed on the Senate floor.
“I think on that vote, I’m right where Arkansas is,” said Pryor. “The vast majority of folks I’ve talked to in the last few weeks in Arkansas have come up and thanked me for my vote. The folks who are following this understand what I did and why.”
“Here’s the thing: I did vote to expand background checks. We had two background check bills on the floor that day,” Pryor added. “I think Grassley is where Arkansas is. Basically, what it does is eliminate the straw purchases, which are a problem, but it fixes our background check system we have on the books and it enforces the law we have on the books.”
Pryor said not all federal and state agencies are required to put background check data in the national system. He argued that Grassley fixed that as well as added definitions for mental health funding for the COPs program, which would add police officers in schools.
“You can read the Manchin-Toomey bill a dozen times and you know what? There’s not one thing in there that would have prevented Sandy Hook or Aurora or Tucson or Jonesboro. Nothing in that legislation that would have prevented those events,” said Pryor. “I think Grassley was a much better way to go.”
He said there is some talk that another effort for gun legislation may surface this year, but he contends Arkansas has a different gun culture than more urban parts of America.
“We’re very comfortable with gun ownership in our state,” he said. “I think guns are a different issue here than they are in New York City.” - The City Wire, 5/23/13
You can take Pryor's argument however way you want but by aligning himself with someone like Senator Chuck Grassley (R. IA) on this issue over Bloomberg could be winning strategy for Pryor in Arkansas.
So you can see why I have some dilemmas about Bloomberg going after Pryor. I can even see why Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D. NV) sees this as a bit of dilemma:
Democratic senators and aides also note that Pryor has backed President Barack Obama and the leadership on other big issues such as Obamacare, banking reform and taxes, and Reid will need him on upcoming immigration votes.
“How does hurting Mark Pryor help them?” asked one top Senate Democrat, speaking on condition of anonymity. “I just don’t see how it gets them where they want to go.”
For his part, Pryor says he’s not too concerned.
“In today’s world, whether it’s a wealthy donor or a super PAC, sometimes they come in these races and throw a bunch of money around,” Pryor said in an interview. “I think in Arkansas, people know me pretty well, and they know I work very hard to try to listen and be responsive to the state. I’m always going to have people make these political threats.” - Politico, 5/7/13
Now I do think that Reid needs to stand up and tell guys like Pryor to get in line in terms of gun safety but I can also see how someone like Bloomberg could unintentionally be a thorn in Reid's side. Plus as much as I don't like Pryor the idea of seeing someone like this take his place in the Senate quite frankly scares and sickens me:
http://www.upi.com/...
Republican Representative Tom Cotton of Arkansas offered an amendment to the Nuclear Iran Prevention Act of 2013 which would "automatically" punish family members of people who violate U.S. sanctions against Iran with up to 20 years in prison.
“There would be no investigation,” Cotton said during the Wednesday hearing before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, reports the Huffington Post. "It'd be very hard to demonstrate and investigate to conclusive proof."
Cotton seeks to punish any family member of those people, “to include a spouse and any relative to the third degree,” including, “parents, children, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, grandparents, great grandparents, grandkids, great grandkids.”
The proposal drew immediate debate from members of the Foreign Affairs Committee. "An amendment is being offered literally to allow the sins of the uncles to descend on the nephews," said Florida's Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson. "I really question the constitutionality of a provision that punishes nephews for the sins of the uncles." - UPI, 5/23/13
Cotton is the same guy who said this:
Now Cotton hasn't officially declared his candidacy yet but he's keeping the door open to a run for Pryor's seat:
http://arkansasmatters.com/...
After the speech at the Clinton School of Public Service, Cotton was asked how he felt about being a prospect to challenge Pryor for his Senate seat in 2014.
"That goes to show you how slim the prospects are. I am really focused right now on some of the work I described in there. The House still has significant legislation ahead of us, like the debt ceiling that should be coming up in the next few months. And it's very early in the political process. I haven't made any decisions, you know, I don't really have campaign staff or campaign offices so there's not much going on for me right now on the political front," said Cotton, who is serving his first term in Congress.
When asked as a follow-up whether the door was open or closed for a Senate run, Cotton responded, "I learned in the Army that it's never a good idea to say 'never' and always a bad idea to say 'always'." - Arkansas Matters, 5/2/13
Whether or not Cotton does run for Senate, he's just a prime example of the Arkansas GOP has to offer in this race.
Plus there still might be some hope to persuade Pryor to change his stance on background checks:
http://www.fox16.com/...
Senator Mark Pryor says he would look at another proposal on universal background checks for guns.
Speaking at the Delta Caucus Conference in Little Rock on Friday, Pryor says he did not support the failed proposal, which was put together by two Senators, called the Manchin Toomey Option.
Pryot did vote for a separate gun control option, put forward by Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley.
"Look, I don't know if this is going to happen but there's some discussion of taking best part of (the)Grassley(proposal) and Manchin Toomey and put something together.
They may happen.
If someone wants to put something together I will look at it and I'll make a judgement based on what they put together." - Fox 16, 5/3/13
Maybe Bloomberg needs to run a few more ads to put the pressure on Pryor to not only take another look at background checks but also get behind them.