GOP sees reason to blur party lines on gun debate

By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff, May 18, 1999

WASHINGTON -- During last week's Senate debate over gun control, Senator Larry Craig, Republican of Idaho, called Governor George W. Bush of Texas with an urgent question. Did Bush support an amendment requiring mandatory background checks of purchasers at gun shows?

The answer: Yes and no. Yes, Bush supported the mandatory checks, but, no, he did not support the amendment for other reasons.

The muddled answer reflects what happened in the Senate last week -- and is expected to continue today -- as Republicans struggle with an issue that could blow up in the party's face in the 2000 presidential campaign.

Republicans, initially at Craig's behest, rejected the background check. Then, after a conversation between aides to Bush and Craig on the following day, the Senate Republicans reversed themselves.

To some GOP strategists, the back-and-forth over guns is a case study of how the line between the two parties can be blurred, rather than highlighted, as occurred in the political revolution led by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

"The congressional Republicans have just decided their main function in life is to get the presidential candidate elected in 2000," said Republican strategist Bill Kristol. "They think Bush is ahead by 15 points, so why pick a fight? They have decided, 'Let's blur all the issues.' "

Bush, who has far more endorsements from congressional Republicans than any other candidate, could benefit from this strategy.

But the Senate votes last week could also help another candidate, Elizabeth Dole. Just days before the Senate action, Dole called for the party to take a tougher stance on gun control, drawing a flurry of headlines and criticism from conservatives.

But when the Senate Republicans reversed themselves, it showed that "Dole cracked the code," said her spokesman, Ari Fleischer. "She got there first, and now the party is chasing to catch up."

Dole is basing much of her exploratory campaign on the notion that she is an outsider willing to take on her party and the National Rifle Association. Fleischer proudly noted that Dole is "a target of the NRA," although it is unclear whether that would help in the early caucus and primary states.

The presidential campaign of Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, also has been affected by the vote. Last Wednesday, he voted against the mandatory background check. But 24 hours later, after the amendment was modified at the urging of several Republicans, McCain issued a news release headlined: "McCain closes loophole, requires background checks at gun shows."

The NRA, through its mobilization of voters and campaign contributions, clearly has influence in presidential and congressional elections. Bush's father, former president George Bush, tried to lead the Republican Party out of the NRA's grip by resigning from the organization in May 1995 after it sent out a fund-raising letter referring to federal agents as "jack-booted government thugs" who wear "Nazi bucket helmets and black storm-trooper uniforms."

"I am outraged," Bush wrote, asking to be removed from the NRA rolls as a life member.

But a few days later, his son, who is not an NRA member, won accolades from the gun lobby for signing a law that allows Texans to carry concealed handguns, a position that could become an issue in the presidential campaign.

In the last couple of weeks, especially since Dole began criticizing Bush's stance on gun issues, the governor has appeared to be carefully maneuvering his way on the subject. Bush said through his aides last week that he opposed the Democratic amendment that included mandatory background checks on gun-show purchases. Craig, who led the opposition to that amendment and instead pushed for voluntary background checks, called Bush last Wednesday, according to Bush spokesman David Beckwith.

Beckwith said Bush told Craig he was not familiar with the senator's proposal but could not back the amendment on background checks. The Democratic proposal was rejected 51-47.

The following morning, Senate Republicans faced a deluge of criticism for rejecting checks. Bush then asked for a detailed description of the amendments, so he could figure out what the fuss was about. Bush told his aides he could support a modified version of the Democratic proposal. A Bush aide called a Craig aide to relay that message, Beckwith said. Craig offered a modified proposal for mandatory checks, which passed the Senate 48-47 on Friday.

A Craig aide said Bush had no influence on changing the legislation, and Beckwith said it was not clear whether Bush played any role.

"At some point they switched their position," Beckwith said about the GOP senators. "Whether Bush had anything to do with it, I don't know. They happened to then adopt our position."

In any event, Bush has not supported another Democratic proposal, which calls for safety locks on certain guns.