In an indicator of the continued influence of the nation’s largest gun-owners’ group, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, and other Republican politicians addressed the National Rifle Association’s annual meeting in Houston Friday, celebrating the defeat of gun legislation in the Senate, assailing the media, and offering a strong defense of the powerful lobbying organization.

Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin speaks during the 2013 NRA Annual Meeting and Exhibits at the George R. Brown Convention Center on May 3, 2013 in Houston, Texas.

Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate, delivered a wide-ranging attack not just on President Barack Obama, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and other proponents of gun control measures, but on what she portrayed as attempts to curtail all personal freedoms.

In the wake of the Newtown, Conn., shootings, Palin accused Obama and other gun control proponents of emotionally manipulating voters and “exploiting emotion for their own agenda.” And news media organizations, she said, are “the reliable poodle-skirted cheerleaders for a president who writes the book on exploiting tragedy.”

In a reprise of her use of a 7-Eleven “Big Gulp” as a prop during the Conservative Political Action Conference to mock Bloomberg’s ban on large-sized sodas, she displayed a pack of cigarettes at the NRA event to poke fun at the mayor’s call for banning store displays of cigarettes.

Alluding to the defeat of a Senate measure two weeks ago to expand background checks for gun buyers, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas told the crowd that gun control measures a month ago had “looked like an unstoppable freight train” but that they and fellow gun owners across the nation had mobilized to stop it in a victory that was “truly amazing.” But he said Obama and his allies have said “that they intend to come back at us” with another attempt to pass gun legislation in the Senate.

Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

Attendees walk on the show floor during the 2013 NRA Annual Meeting and Exhibits at the George R. Brown Convention Center on May 3, 2013 in Houston, Texas.

“We must do everything we can to stop violent crime,” the Texas Republican said, as he accused the Obama administration of not doing enough to prosecute felons and fugitives who try to buy guns as well as criminals who use a gun in the commission of a crime.

Cruz also challenged Vice President Joe Biden, who like Cruz is a potential 2016 presidential contender, to an hour-long debate on how to stop crime. “If Vice President Biden really believes the facts are on his side … I would think he would welcome the opportunity to talk about the sources, the causes of violent crime and how we do everything humanly possible to stop it.”

Chris Cox, the head of the group’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in Friday’s session that since Newtown, “We’ve seen the politicians, the national media, and their billionaire supporters attack us, ridicule us, and, worst of all, blame us for the acts of violent criminals and madmen.”

Also speaking Friday were Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum -- two other possible contenders for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

Santorum praised gun owners saying that -- in the wake of Newtown -- “when the entire tide of the national media and the popular culture was trying to erode a fundamental freedom, you stood tall -- as unpopular as it seemed -- you stood for the truth.”  

Two weeks ago, the NRA scored a major victory when the Senate rejected an amendment sponsored by two senators who had gotten NRA backing in their past campaigns, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., and Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa.

The Manchin-Toomey amendment would have required background checks on would-be firearms purchasers at gun shows at which 75 or more firearms were available for sale.

Under current law, although background checks are required to buy a weapon from a federally licensed dealer, no check is needed for those who buy from a private gun owner or at gun shows or similar events.

While most Republican senators opposed the Manchin-Toomey measure, three GOP senators in addition to Toomey himself voted for it. And while most Democratic senators voted for it, five Democrats voted no, including two who are up for re-election next year, Sen. Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Sen. Mark Begich of Alaska.

This story was originally published on Fri May 3, 2013 3:44 PM EDT

The pro-gun control group founded by former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and her husband, Mark Kelly, launched new radio ads Wednesday against two GOP senators who voted last week to block legislation expanding background checks for gun sales.

Americans for Responsible Solutions (ARS), the group founded by Giffords and her husband, unveiled new ads that accuse Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., of opposing "common sense" measures to "keep guns out of the hands of criminals."

The ads are significant because they represent the first real effort by a pro-gun control group to inflict some measure of political damage against its detractors following last week's bipartisan vote to block a bipartisan compromise on background checks from moving forward. ARS said it had received over 24,000 donations since the Senate vote, and would be introducing additional targets of advertising later this week.

McConnell is up for re-election in 2014, but in Republican-leaning Kentucky; he hasn't yet attracted a major Democratic opponent. Ayotte doesn't face re-election until 2016, though her race in swing-state New Hampshire will be much tougher.

Proponents of stricter gun laws are counting on public opinion -- which, right now, largely favors expanded background checks for gun sales -- to persist, and allow them to inflict some political damage on those senators who blocked the legislation.

Other groups, like Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which is backed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, have also vowed political retribution for lawmakers who oppose tighter gun measures.

To that end, a new Pew Research Center/Washington Post poll released Wednesday found that 47 percent of Americans were either "disappointed" or "angry" at last week's Senate vote; 39 percent said they were "relieved" or "very happy" at the largely-GOP push to block the background checks legislation.

That poll was conducted April 18-21, and has a 3.7 percent margin of error.

This story was originally published on Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:04 AM EDT

Although Washington’s battle over gun control ground to a sudden halt earlier this month, proponents of overhaul legislation say the fight is far from over. But while the political ground may have shifted, there is no denying the massive sway of the National Rifle Association and the perception that the window of opportunity to strengthen gun laws in the wake of the Newtown shootings has closed.

Following the Senate's vote to block consideration of legislation to expand background checks to gun sales online and at shows, the NRA and its pro-gun allies seem as powerful as ever, especially among Republicans and Democrats representing conservative-leaning states.

President Barack Obama had embraced gun control as a centerpiece of his second-term agenda following December's massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, but the NRA was still able to beat back a bipartisan proposal on background checks that was watered down considerably from the types of reforms the White House first espoused.

But supporters of new gun laws assert that their failure last week was only temporary, and that they can still prevail in the long term.

"They've [the NRA] been around since 1871, and virtually unopposed for a generation. You don't dislodge that kind of influential force very quickly," said Mark Glaze, the director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the pro-gun control group founded and funded by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

"The gun lobby's been around for a very long time, and it's going to take members of Congress a long time to learn that the ground has shifted under them," Glaze added.

Indeed, public opinion appears to be on the administration's side. Fifty-five percent of Americans said in April's NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll that they support tougher gun laws -- roughly the same number who expressed a similar sentiment in the weeks following Newtown.

But after the NRA's victory last week, in which the Senate fell six votes short of advancing a bipartisan compromise on background checks, political observers ask the inevitable question: If not now, then when?

The administration's gun proposals were far less robust than the package Obama debuted before his State of the Union address. Democrats have all but abandoned efforts to outlaw high-capacity ammunition clips and reinstate a ban on assault weapons, votes on each of which failed last week in the Senate.

Related: Toomey's background check plan shy of 60 votes

Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., had crafted a scaled-back measure to expand background checks, but they struggled to unite even Democrats -- especially those from red states who face re-election next fall -- behind the effort. Before last week's vote, victims of gun violence including former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and the families of the Newtown shooting victims swarmed Capitol Hill in an all-out lobbying blitz. And Bloomberg's group launched considerable advertising efforts in recent weeks to combat the NRA's influence.

But even under these relatively promising (political) conditions, Obama and gun control advocates fell short – though their “failure” was in part due to Republican dissenters’ demand that each proposal clear a filibuster-proof, 60-vote threshold. (Otherwise, Manchin-Toomey would have passed with 54 votes.)

The gun bill’s inability to advance is a testament to the enduring influence of the NRA, even though the gun-rights group has faced some ridicule for the far-from-polished performance of its executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, in opposing any new gun control initiative.

LaPierre has blamed violent video games and rap music -- both cultural cues from the 1990s -- as much as anything for recent incidents of gun violence. And his far from serious counter proposal to the administration has been to place an armed security guard in every school in America.

And yet, few GOP and red-state senators have been willing to cross the NRA, which has doggedly opposed expanding background checks (despite having backed the exact same proposals over a decade ago). Even if the Senate legislation were to muster enough support for passage, it is more difficult to conceive of how it would manage to survive in the Republican-held House of Representatives.

And while proponents of stricter gun laws privately say they never expected to win a renewed ban on assault weapons or limits on magazine capacity, the defeat of even the background checks bill registered as a disappointment. But those same proponents argue that they’re in gear for a long battle, and won’t give up their fight.

“There's no question it's going to take some time to turn this around, and the electoral part is some of the mix. We'll see how November 2014 goes,” Glaze said. “We will do whatever’s necessary.”

And already, the Democratic donor class has taken note.

Take, for instance, former White House chief of staff Bill Daley’s op-ed on Monday in the Washington Post, in which he excoriated Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., of betraying him on the issue of guns.

“So I’ll have some advice for my friends in Chicago, New York and Los Angeles: Just say no to the Democrats who said no on background checks,” Daley wrote. 

This story was originally published on Tue Apr 23, 2013 3:53 AM EDT

Background-check measure expected to fall short in the Senate… Vote takes place at 4:00 pm ET… Manchin: “We will not get the votes today”… Striking that something polling 90% can’t get 60 votes… Home Alone, Mark Sanford edition… Measuring Bush 43 in the polls… Who has left the greater imprint on today’s GOP -- Bush or Ron Paul?... Two ways to read the new poll on Anthony Weiner… And MA SEN race grinds to a halt.

*** Background-check measure expected to fall short: The news out of Boston continues to overshadow politics in Washington, DC. On Thursday, President Obama travels to Boston to speak at an interfaith service dedicated to those who were killed at wounded at Monday’s marathon. What’s more, observers remain puzzled at how little investigators know about who detonated the bombs near the race’s finish line. And yesterday, there was a new scare when a letter addressed to Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) was found to contain the dangerous substance believed to be ricin. (The Boston bombings and letter incidents don’t appear to be related.) Yet slowly but surely, American politics is returning to the national news -- and it does so later this afternoon with a crucial 4:00 pm ET vote on the Manchin-Toomey compromise amendment on background checks. And right now, it’s expected that the amendment will fail to get the 60 votes needed for passage, which could imperil the rest of the Democratic-backed gun-control legislation in the Senate.

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

Shooting victim and former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., and her husband and retired astronaut Mark Kelly, right, join Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., and Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill April 16, 2013.

*** Manchin: “We will not get the votes today”: Even the amendment’s authors are admitting that the measure won’t get the needed 60 votes. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) tells NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell, "We will not get the votes today" -- despite appeals from Newtown families, former Rep. Gabby Giffords, and public polls showing broad support. Manchin adds that the few votes he hoped to attract are out of reach due in part to political concerns: Manchin says Sens. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Marco Rubio (R-FL) are both so out front on immigration that they cannot risk taking on a second battle with their own conservative base on guns. And Manchin notes that Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) is also already extended politically as the only Republican senator to support gay marriage. Manchin pessimism also comes after NBC’s O’Donnell reported that Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) would be a “no” on the amendment.

*** Manchin’s office walks back the senator’s remarks: But Manchin’s press office just released this statement: “Sen. Manchin remains optimistic and hopeful that if Senators and the American people read the bill, they will support his commonsense approach... So far Sen. Manchin has managed to garner support from an A-rated NRA member and three Republican Senators as well as 90 percent of his own party. With a record like that, I see no reason to bet against Sen. Manchin today. He will continue to explain his bill to his colleagues and anyone with concerns until the minute they vote.”

*** Striking that something polling 90% can’t get 60 votes: As things stand right now, per NBC’s Kasie Hunt, the MOST support the measure could get is 60 votes -- if you count all 55 Democrats and the five Republicans who support it or who haven’t said they oppose it (Collins, Kirk, Toomey, McCain, Ayotte). But here’s the rub: Not all Democrats, especially those from red states, will back it. In fact, sources tell NBC’s O’Donnell that the amendment will likely fall four or five votes short -- and maybe more if others see it going down. Given the public opinion polls supporting background checks, it’s striking the measure won’t get 60 votes. Just read today’s New York Times piece on convicted felons who are able to purchase weapons online. “With no requirements for background checks on most private transactions, a Times examination found, Armslist and similar sites function as unregulated bazaars, where the essential anonymity of the Internet allows unlicensed sellers to advertise scores of weapons and people legally barred from gun ownership to buy them.” But senators are realists, and some of those fence-sitters probably were swayed NOT to take what they believed would be a risky vote because the House was unlikely to pass it. The thinking being: Why cast a vote that will create a potential political problem when the bill’s chances of ACTUALLY becoming law are so remote?

*** Home Alone, Mark Sanford edition: If you’re a divorced politician, there’s an iron-clad rule to follow as you’re running in a competitive race: Make sure your ex-wife is fully onboard. And there’s another rule to follow, too: Don’t trespass at the ex-wife’s house. (Actually, that’s an iron-clad rule for ANY divorced spouse, politician or not.) Per the AP, “Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford must appear in court two days after running for a vacant congressional seat to answer a complaint that he trespassed at his ex-wife's home, according to court documents acquired by The Associated Press on Tuesday. The complaint says Jenny Sanford confronted Sanford leaving her Sullivans Island home on Feb. 3 by a rear door, using his cell phone for a flashlight. Her attorney filed the complaint the next day and Jenny Sanford confirmed Tuesday the documents are authentic. The couple's 2010 divorce settlement says neither may enter the other's home without permission. Mark Sanford lives about a 20-minute drive away in downtown Charleston.” We’re never ones who want to overstate things, but this news is potentially DISATROUS for Sanford’s political comeback. The special general election pitting Sanford and Elizabeth Colbert Busch takes place on May 7.

*** Measuring Bush 43: George W. Bush has been in the news recently -- he’s a new grandfather, he granted an interview to the Dallas Morning News, and next week he hosts all the living presidents at the dedication of his presidential library in Dallas, TX. With the former president back in the news, it’s worth noting that he has yet to experience a post-presidency honeymoon, according to our most recent NBC/WSJ poll. Just 35% view him favorably, versus 44% who view him negatively. Those numbers are virtually unchanged from the five other NBC/WSJ polls that have measured him since the summer of 2010, although they're an improvement from when he left office (31% fav/58% unfav). Yet buried inside Bush's poll numbers is a striking finding: He fares well among the demographic groups that have favored Republicans, including defeated 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney, and he performs poorly among the demographic groups with whom Republicans have struggled. The subgroups that have a positive view of Bush are Republicans (65%/14%), conservatives (60%/19%), seniors (48%/31%), rural Americans (43%/35%), Southerners (43%/37%), and whites (40%/39%). But he is deeply unpopular among most other subgroups, including the biggest parts of Obama’s coalition -- 18-34 year olds (26%/46%), African Americans (19%/64%), and Latinos (27%/44%). In other words, if you want more evidence of the Republican Party’s demographic strengths -- and demographic weaknesses -- look no further than these poll numbers.

*** Who has left the bigger imprint on today’s GOP -- Bush or Paul? Speaking of dedications for former Texas politicians, former Rep. and presidential candidate Ron Paul (R-TX) holds a press conference with his supporters at 3:00 pm ET in D.C. to inaugurate the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. Given these dueling events -- separated by just one week -- it is worth asking: Which Texas politician has left a greater imprint on today’s GOP: Bush or Paul? By the way, Paul’s son Rand speaks this morning with reporters at the Christian Science Monitor breakfast.

*** Two ways to read that new poll on Anthony Weiner: There are two ways to read the new NBC New York/Marist poll on New York’s mayoral race. The first, as most news outlets have played it, is that former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) would immediately start out in second place if he runs, trailing presumed front-runner Christine Quinn, 26% to 15%. But there’s a second way to read it: Weiner, with nearly perfect name ID, is getting just 15%. More from Marist: “Among Democrats, 46% are open-minded about a Weiner candidacy while 50% would not consider voting for him for mayor.  Five percent are unsure. Among all registered voters, 40% say that they would consider voting for him. But, 52% would not, and 8% are unsure.”

*** MA SEN race grinds to halt: Finally, we have the first contribution from our newest colleague Jessica Taylor, who writes about the MA SEN race in light of Monday’s bombings in Boston. “With just two weeks to go until primaries in the Massachusetts Senate special election, campaigns on both sides have come to a screeching halt after Monday’s tragic Boston Marathon bombing. It’s too soon to say when active politicking from any candidate may resume ahead of the April 30 primary, but ultimately the stop in campaigning may not make a difference in the final outcome of either the primary or the general election contest on June 25.”

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

A gun-rights group on Sunday endorsed a bipartisan compromise in the Senate to expand background checks — splitting from the National Rifle Association.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms had opposed previous iterations of a Democratic proposal for univesal background checks.

This group has far fewer members than the NRA — over 600,000 as compared to the NRA's nearly 5 million. But the  shift still represents a divide in the usually-united gun lobby, and lends further momentum to an expanded background check measure negotiated by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa.

In announcing support, the group pointed to sections of the compromise that lift some restrictions on guns that are already in place.

"You can see all the advances for our cause that it containes like interstate sales of handguns," chairman Alan Gottlieb said.

"It's huge," Manchin told Fox News on Sunday afternoon as he announced the CCRKBA endorsement.

The Senate is set to spend this week debating gun legislation.

Speaking exclusively to NBC News, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, is the first GOP senator to say publicly she will vote for the bipartisan compromise on expanded background checks for the sale of guns online and at gun shows.

Collins said "I do intend to support it" now that she has reviewed the actual text of the Manchin-Toomey bill and calls it a "reasonable" approach. Collins described the Manchin-Toomey effort as "a responsible break through from two people who have far better NRA rankings than I have." Both Sens. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia and Pat Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, hold "A" ratings from the National Rifle Association. Collins added she knows her yes vote and support is "not a popular thing in my state."

Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., worked with Manchin and Toomey privately during negotiations and is expected to vote yes on the background checks bill.

Collins, who is running for re-election next year, said she would not have supported a plan that required universal background checks, including individual sales. She cited an example of a father who gives his daughter a gun for protection when she "moves to the big city."

Collins pointed out that her state has among the highest rate of gun ownership in the country at more than 40 percent while also ranking as the safest state with respect to low violent crime.

The three-term Republican says she is "being hit hard" and "being besieged by all sides" referring to ads run against her by both the conservative National Association of Gun Rights and the president's group, Organizing for America.

After a week when Newtown families paid visits to senators urging new, tighter measures on gun sales, Collins said, "I am furious and beside myself" over a depiction of her in a press account concerning Newtown families on Capitol Hill.

Collins told NBC News, "I was willing to make the choice to be late for the president in order to meet with the grieving families," adding, "I truly felt it was more important."

Known for being punctual, Collins described her unusual dilemma.

"I realized I was in a real bind" and told staffers "to call the White House." Collins had never been invited to attend a small dinner with the president before. "How rude is that? Tell the president you're going to be late to dinner," she told NBC News.  

Collins explained the families were expected at her office at 5 p.m. Wednesday but arrived late, at the time she was scheduled to depart for the White House about 5:45 p.m.

"I said, I have to meet with them, my heart goes out to them." Collins said three of the family members gave her photos of their loved ones and "those are on my desk to this moment."

"I was so moved by them," she added.

Collins remembered telling the families about her own reaction after seeing their appearance on "60 Minutes" earlier in the week.

"I wept, I literally wept."

The senator and families also discussed the substance of gun measures being considered by Congress for about 20 minutes. Collins had not told the families her vote would a "yes" on the Manchin- Tommey compromise because she had not received the actual text at that time. She told them she knew it would come up at her meeting with the president. "I listened to them and I treated them with the compassion they deserved."

Collins said when she arrived 45 minutes late to the White House dinner she was "embarrassed." She added: "The salad plates were being cleared."

Collins said she went up to President Barack Obama and explained why she was late. She said the president was gracious, saying: "Good call. I totally understand. It's fine."

Collins recalled saying, "Mr. President, I am never late and I feel really bad, but it would be cruel to not meet with them even for the President of the United States. And cruel is the word I used."

Collins is clearly frustrated by a report that she says left the wrong impression that her office had offered families a meeting with staffers and only a quick visit by the senator herself and that was rejected by the families' handlers. 

Collins said firmly, "I'm not someone who would blow off grieving families." She also insisted she is not blaming the families for making her late for dinner with President Obama.

She also said that unlike other senators who allowed media and cameras into their meetings, she "did not want to put the families on display." But Collins said she almost regretted that decision now because it would have confirmed her effort to spend time when them.

"I can take being attacked by right-wing nutty groups, but to be attacked that I somehow was unkind or cruel to Newtown families I cannot take. It's not true."

Collins is a critical "yes" vote for the families and Democrats who need Republican support to pass expanded background checks.

Collins knows her support is valuable to the Newtown families.

"I am an important vote for them but I truly care about them."

Related:

• Senators announce gun deal, raising hopes of Senate passage
• Newtown passion moves Senate vote on guns
• Giffords to launch in-person push for gun law compromise

A new gun control law cleared a major Senate hurdle Thursday, with 16 Republicans voting with most of the chamber’s Democrats to begin the process of moving one of President Barack Obama’s top domestic initiatives through a long, legislative slog.

Senators voted 68 to 31, with a handful of Republicans joining most Democrats, on a procedural measure to begin consideration of a proposed gun law that would expand background checks for gun sales, and strengthen mental health and school safety programs.

The vote is just the opening step, though, of a debate that could stretch out for weeks and encounter any number of obstacles – namely, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives – before reaching Obama’s desk.

Thursday’s vote comes on the heels of a bipartisan Senate agreement on Wednesday on expanding background checks, the centerpiece of gun control advocates’ effort to strengthen rules on firearms following the December 2012 shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.

Two senators – Democrat Joe Manchin from West Virginia and Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania – struck an agreement that would extend existing background check rules to gun sales made online, and at gun shows. (Manchin and Toomey said their plan would be offered as the first amendment to the underlying gun bill which senators called up today.)

Win Mcnamee / Getty Images

Sen. Joe Manchin speaks on the phone outside the weekly Democratic policy luncheon on April 9 in Washington.

While their accord prompted renewed hope of bipartisan action to advance new gun laws for the first time in years, their proposal (along with several other gun measures slated for consideration by Congress) still face stiff resistance from conservative Republicans and the influential gun rights lobby, the National Rifle Association.

The NRA released a letter late Wednesday saying it was “unequivocally opposed” to the new gun rules, including the Manchin-Toomey proposal. Their declaration may weigh heavily on lawmakers seeking the NRA’s support – or, at the very least, avoid being targeted by the group – in their re-election efforts next fall.

“Given the importance of these issues, votes on all anti-gun amendments or proposals will be considered in NRA’s future candidate evaluations,” wrote their chief lobbyist, Christopher W. Cox, in a letter to members of Congress.

And a group of Republican senators have vowed to slow down the legislation by offering a multitude of amendments to the gun legislation, and exhausting the hours of debate to which they are entitled for each amendment. Those conservative lawmakers are backed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who voted Thursday against even beginning formal debate on gun legislation.

First Read: Why immigration reform has a better chance than guns

"The senators who have vowed to filibuster this bill should be ashamed of their attempt to silence efforts to prevent the next American tragedy," said 33 family members of Newtown victims in a joint statement. "Their staunch opposition to sensible gun reform is an affront to the 26 innocent children and educators who were murdered in Newtown."

The Senate bill could also be undone by so-called “poison pill” amendments which Republicans could attach with the help of a few swing-state Democrats, but risk making the whole bill unacceptable to most other Democratic senators.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., highlighted a provision that would require states to recognize concealed carry permits from other states as an example of one such poison pill.

Nonetheless, the coming Senate debate will provide an exercise in posturing – both on the central proposal dealing with background checks, but also additional measures that are all but certain to fail, like a proposed renewal of the ban on assault weapons, and a ban on high-capacity magazine clips.

The debate will play out as new poll data showed that a majority of Americans generally favor stricter gun laws. A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Thursday found that 55 percent of Americans favor gun laws, versus 34 percent who prefer to keep the laws as they are now. Nine percent of Americans prefer less strict gun laws.

The popularity of these proposals has been a key point of emphasis in the administration’s demand that these measures receive a vote in Congress.

“I know that some of these proposals inspire more debate than others, but each of them has the support of the majority of the American people,” Obama said on Monday in Connecticut. “All of them are common sense. All of them deserve a vote.”

But even if these proposals were to successfully emerge from the Senate, gun legislation faces an uncertain future in the House, where Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has not pledged to bring up any Senate-passed bill for a vote.

“I think it's important for the Senate to do its work, and once they do their work we'll be happy to review it,” he said Wednesday on Capitol Hill.

At the same time, though, a bipartisan pair of House members is working on legislation which will mirror the Manchin-Toomey proposal, in hopes of winning organic support for this legislation in the House.

This story was originally published on Thu Apr 11, 2013 11:34 AM EDT

The National Rifle Association said Wednesday the group is unequivocally opposed to the newly-struck compromise plan to expand background checks — and threatened that it may seek to penalize lawmakers who vote for what it deems “anti-gun” measures by giving them poor grades in their rating system.

The warning to members of Congress came just hours after a compromise on expanding background checks for  gun purchasers was announced, a deal that the NRA itself participated closely in.

"Expanding background checks, at gun shows or elsewhere, will not reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in their schools," top NRA lobbyist Chris Cox wrote in a letter sent to senators Wednesday night. "Given the importance of these issues, votes on all anti-gun amendments or proposals will be considered in NRA's future candidate evaluations."

The NRA rates lawmakers based on how they vote on the group's priorities. The letter grades are highly influential and carry particular weight in rural states with a strong gun culture.

Cox was a ubiquitous presence during negotiations between Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W. Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who announced the deal Wednesday morning to expand background checks to sales at gun shows and over the Internet.

Manchin has been careful to court the group's support; both he and Toomey both have "A" ratings from the NRA.

But despite their involvement, the NRA ultimately decided to come out against it.

Earlier Wednesday, a Senate Democratic aide had said that Democratic leaders were operating under the impression that the NRA will not throw its full weight behind opposing the background check bill, something which would have relieved pressure on moderate Democrats and Republicans to vote for the legislation.

Now, they have less cover.

Separately Wednesday, Sens. Patrick Leahy and Susan Collins announced they'd reached an agreement with the NRA on gun trafficking language that will be included in the overall gun bill. Cox did not mention the gun trafficking measure in his letter.

NBC News’ Luke Russert contributed to this report.

A bipartisan pair of senators introduced a compromise proposal to expand background checks on Wednesday, an agreement which could form the basis for major gun control legislation to potentially pass through Congress.

Sens. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., and Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. – who both enjoy top ratings from the National Rifle Association – outlined an agreement that would expand background checks to include most firearms sales, including those at gun shows and online.

Related: Background checks for guns - What you need to know

While the new framework does not go quite as far as the stricter gun controls first advocated by President Barack Obama in the wake of December’s Newtown, Conn., shootings, it paves the path for Senate approval of one of the president’s major second term initiatives.

“Truly, the events of Newtown changed us all,” Manchin said at a press conference announcing the agreement. “This amendment won't ease the pain ... but nobody here – and I mean not one of us in this great Capitol of ours – can sit by and not try to prevent a day like that from happening again.”

Related: NRA a constant presence in background check deal

The agreement won the support of a key proponent of new gun legislation, New York Sen. Charles Schumer, the No. 2 Senate Democrat who said he planned to co-sponsor the new agreement. Schumer called Vice President Joe Biden, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Mark Kelly (the husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz.) and various gun safety groups to urge them to support the compromise, as well.

In a statement issued later Wednesday afternoon, Obama said that he applauded the agreement. 

"This is not my bill, and there are aspects of the agreement that I might prefer to be stronger," the president said. "But the agreement does represent welcome and significant bipartisan progress. It recognizes that there are good people on both sides of this issue, and we don’t have to agree on everything to know that we’ve got to do something to stem the tide of gun violence."

The background check deal made several tweaks to the prior Democratic proposal, namely by striking a provision requiring states to recognize concealed carry permits from other states, and eliminating another measure exempting sellers who sell five guns per year or fewer from the background check requirement.

J. Scott Applewhite / AP

Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, D-W.Va., left, and Sen. Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., arrive at a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, April 10, 2013, to announce that they have reached a bipartisan deal on expanding background checks to more gun buyers.

The proposal also includes other provisions meant to allay gun-rights advocates' concerns about background checks. Namely, the legislation would not require background checks for intra-family transfers of firearms, and would apply existing record-keeping rules used for gun stores to those weapons sold online or at gun shows.

But the NRA quickly criticized the new proposal as inadequate, a pronouncement which could influence the decision-making of wavering lawmakers.

“Expanding background checks at gun shows will not prevent the next shooting, will not solve violent crime and will not keep our kids safe in schools,” said the gun rights group. “The sad truth is that no background check would have prevented the tragedies in Newtown, Aurora or Tucson.”

(Democratic aides still think the NRA might not necessarily throw its full weight behind opposing the proposal, though, especially because the gun rights group's representatives were a near-constant presence during the Manchin-Toomey talks.)

Still, the bipartisan nature of the agreement could improve prospects for its approval by the entire Senate, especially if the Obama administration should throw its weight behind the proposal. Support from Toomey (as well as Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk, another swing-state Republican) could entice other GOP senators to support the compromise.

“I’m a gun owner, and the rights that are enshrined in the Second Amendment are very, very important to me personally,” Toomey said alongside Manchin on Capitol Hill. “But I’ve got to tell you, candidly, that I don’t consider criminal background checks to be gun control. I think it’s just common sense.”

The first test of that support will come on Thursday, when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he planned to hold a key vote to move forward with the gun debate. A group of conservative senators – including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. – had vowed to filibuster any gun legislation, though their ability to wage one successfully was undercut by several other Republicans, who said they would not support such a maneuver.

Already, groups on opposite sides of the gun debate have aligned for or against the Manchin-Toomey proposal.

Americans for Responsible Solutions, the group founded by Kelly to support gun control, said it was “pleased” by the new agreement.

“We will do everything in our power to ensure that Americans know about the determined leadership of Sen. Manchin, a conservative Democrat, and Senator Toomey ... to keep this common sense legislation moving,” said Pia Carusone, the group’s executive director.

But the conservative Heritage Action also issued a statement on opposition to the gun deal, a declaration that could weigh heavily on Republicans in the House, where any Senate legislation awaits an uncertain future.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, talking on Wednesday about the forthcoming Senate accord, was noncommittal about bringing up a prospective gun bill for a vote.

"As I've made clear, any bill that passes the Senate, we're going to review it. In the meantime, we're going to continue to have hearings looking at the source of violence in our country," Boehner said at a press conference. "It's one thing for two members to come to some agreement; it doesn't substitute the will of the other 98 members."

Raising hope, though, for House support was another bipartisan pairing, Reps. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., and Peter King, R-N.Y., who hailed the Manchin-Toomey agreement, and said they planned to work to introduce similar legislation in the lower chamber. 

"This legislation is enforceable, it will save lives, and it respects the Second Amendment rights of law abiding Americans," the lawmakers said in a joint statement.

This story was originally published on Wed Apr 10, 2013 11:17 AM EDT

Deal on background checks tops an eventful day in politics… Breaking down the details of the Manchin-Toomey compromise… Remember: Gun legislation passing the Senate is one thing; passing the House is another… Obama issues statement on his budget at 11:00 am ET… Look Who’s Coming to Dinner, Part 2… Gang of Eight immigration bill to be unveiled as soon as Thursday?... NBC/WSJ poll comes out first thing tomorrow morning… Sanford/Weiner/Woods -- the comeback kids?... A few more thoughts on that taped McConnell camp discussion… And Kelly wins IL-2.

Win Mcnamee / Getty Images

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., speaks on the phone outside the weekly Democratic policy luncheon April 9, 2013 in Washington, DC.

*** Gun deal tops an eventful day: What a day this is shaping up to be here in Washington… President Obama unveils his budget before dining with 12 GOP senators; Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) have reached a deal on universal background checks for firearms sales; and thousands of immigration reform advocates are rallying in DC as the Gang of Eight’s proposal appears ever close to becoming a reality. What’s more, we’re releasing our brand-new NBC/WSJ poll first thing tomorrow morning. Oh, and Anthony Weiner appears to be eyeing a political comeback. But we start with the biggest news of the day -- so far at least: the Manchin-Toomey agreement on guns. One way or another, we always knew that Obama’s budget rollout would get overshadowed by something else. In this case, it’s the new development in the gun debate. So we’re not going to be talking about Chained CPI today; instead, we’re talking about the background-check deal.

Recommended: Background checks for guns - What you need to know

*** The details (so far) of the Manchin-Toomey compromise: NBC’s Kasie Hunt reports that Sens. Manchin and Toomey are expected to announce their deal at 11:00 am ET. The details: The compromise expands background checks to cover all gun-show and online sales of firearms. It also contains significant exceptions for family transfers and in other circumstances. Hunt adds that sources close to the negotiations say the senators have circulated their proposal to the National Rifle Association, but the NRA has not yet commented on the compromise. Last night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid filed a cloture motion on a gun bill that does NOT include the compromise (although it will be added as an amendment), setting up a Thursday vote to start a Senate debate on guns. That said, Senate Republicans -- led by Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee -- are still planning to filibuster and try to keep debate from starting. As of Tuesday night, they hadn't ruled out standing on the floor and talking for hours, a la Paul’s filibuster against the administration’s drone policy.

*** Gun legislation passing the Senate is one thing; passing the House is another: Yes, it increasingly appears that there are enough votes to break the first filibuster. Per the New York Times, “Several Senate Republicans said Tuesday that they would not participate in a filibuster of the first major gun control bill since 1993, as Democrats appeared on the verge of overcoming a blockade threatened by a group of conservatives before a word of debate on the measure was uttered.” Yet even if the gun legislation -- with the Manchin-Toomey compromise on background checks -- passes the Senate, don’t forget it still has to get through the GOP-controlled House of Representatives. And as we’ve seen in the past (with the fiscal-cliff deal and Hurricane Sandy relief), the only way House GOP leaders will most likely bring it to the floor is if it gets a large number of Senate votes in final passage, and by large number we mean more than 70 votes. It’s one thing for the president and the Newtown families to pull off a “shame the Senate” campaign into a vote; pulling it off in the House will be a trickier and harder task..

*** Obama rolls out his budget: Also today, Obama delivers a Rose Garden statement on the budget at 11:00 am ET -- so at the same time as the Manchin-Toomey presser. (Curious, does the White House wait for Manchin-Toomey? The plan right now is for the president to focus SOLELY on budget at this event). Per NBC’s Ali Weinberg, senior administration officials held a conference call yesterday in which they maintained that the budget -- containing $1.8 trillion in deficit reduction (it counts sequester replacement to get there) -- is not a starting point but a “sticking point.” These officials added  that the budget would "turn off the sequester"; lower spending on entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare; and include some new spending proposals (which they stressed would not add to the budget deficit.) all of which, the SAOs said, would not add to the budget deficit. Of course, as we’ve pointed out before, neither the right nor the left is happy with this budget: House Republicans hold a stakeout at 10:00 am ET to comment on Obama’s budget, and the GOP chairs of the Senate and House Budget committees (Sen. Jeff Sessions and Rep. Paul Ryan) hold a conference call with reporters at 2:00 pm ET. That said, it’s still April and therefore still plenty of time to cut some type of budget deal.

*** Look Who’s Coming to Dinner, Part 2: After he unveils his budget, the president holds a White House dinner with 12 Republican senators beginning at 6:30 pm ET. NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell has the backstory on the dinner: Obama phoned Georgia Republican Johnny Isakson a few weeks ago to ask his help in arranging a second dinner with GOP senators. Isakson handled the guest list and told O’Donnell he wanted a cross-section of his party (by region, interests, etc.). The guest list is not being released, but so far we know that attendees will include: Isakson, John Thune, Mike Enzi, Susan Collins, and Marco Rubio (but he may not be able to attend).

*** Gang of Eight bill to be unveiled as soon as Thursday? Speaking of Rubio, there’s a development in the immigration debate -- as thousands of immigration-reform advocates come to Washington to demand a path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country. As NBC reported yesterday, the Gang of Eight's draft Senate bill for immigration reform could be released as early as Thursday, but Senate aides indicate that the process of debating the details in the bill in the committee process will stretch an additional few weeks more than anticipated. The extra time is designed to assuage the concerns of Gang of Eight member Republican Sen. Marco Rubio, who has called for hearings and a lengthier process of debate on the measure. Rubio's support could help woo wary Republicans who have entreatied Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy not to "ram" the legislation through the panel and onto the Senate floor.

*** NBC/WSJ poll coming out tomorrow morning: With all of these moving parts on immigration, guns, and the budget, we will be releasing a brand-new NBC/WSJ poll first thing tomorrow morning. So stay tuned for numbers on all of these issues -- and more.

*** The Comeback Kids? So you have Mark Sanford one step away from winning back his old House seat; Tiger Woods is ranked #1 in the world as the Masters begins tomorrow; and the New York Times Magazine reports that Anthony Weiner is thinking about jumping into this year’s New York mayoral race. What’s going on here? Last week, Bloomberg’s Josh Green declared that the political sex scandal -- especially after Bill Clinton’s survival -- is officially dead. We agree to an extent. Sex scandals are no longer career-enders. But they are still career-haunters. After all, the only reason why Sanford’s race next month against Elizabeth Colbert Busch is competitive is due to his scandal. New York voters seem to be begging for another candidate to enter the mayoral race, but is Weiner the one they really want? And even Bill Clinton, whose polling numbers couldn’t be higher right now, has never been able to completely escape his sex scandal. A career-ender is what John Edwards did. As for Sanford and Weiner, their comebacks aren’t yet complete. Here’s what Tiger Woods teaches us about comebacks: Winning matters most, so if Weiner and Sanford win, well, then…

*** A few thoughts on that taped McConnell camp discussion: We have a few thoughts on yesterday’s Mother Jones/Mitch McConnell/Ashley Judd story. For starters, top campaign aides discussing opposition research with their boss happens ALL THE TIME, in both Democratic and Republican campaigns. But what is potentially problematic for the McConnell camp is that you had a room full of men talking tough about two possible female opponents (one of whom was Judd), bringing up sensitive issues like depression and religion. That’s probably why Team McConnell wanted yesterday’s emphasis to be on the process instead of the substance -- thus accusing liberals of illegally taping the conversation (though they have provided no evidence to substantiate that allegation). Yesterday was a fascinating study in crisis management, as Republicans worked very hard on McConnell’s behalf to push the storyline about the process of the recording.

*** Kelly wins IL-2 race: Lastly, Democrat Robin Kelly – as expected – won last night’s special congressional general election in Illinois to fill Jesse Jackson Jr.’s vacated House seat. Roll Call: “Her victory came as no surprise. The 2nd District is heavily Democratic and Kelly had minimal opposition in the general election. McKinley is a convicted felon, according to numerous news outlets.”

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

Two key senators have reached a deal to expand background checks to firearms sales at gun shows and on the Internet, sources close to the negotiations said early Wednesday.  

Sen. Pat Toomey, a conservative Pennsylvania Republican, plan to announce the deal Wednesday with West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, who holds an A rating from the National Rifle Association. 

The two have been working on a compromise proposal that could draw Republican support for expanding background checks. On Tuesday evening, the two had an agreement in principle, and spent the night hammering out the final details. 

The compromise doesn't go as far as the universal background checks that President Barack Obama first envisioned in the wake of the Newtown shootings. The Manchin-Toomey compromise will include exemptions for some transactions, such as those between family members. 

Michael Patrick / AP file

People crowd the RK Gun Show in the Smokies Friday, Dec. 28, 2012 in Knoxville, Tenn.

Outlines of the compromise have been circulated to the National Rifle Association, and sources close to the negotiations said it's unclear where the group stands although the powerful lobby is unlikely to support it. 

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, set up a possible Thursday vote on gun legislation.

The deal between Toomey and Manchin represents a major breakthrough for a package of new gun laws that Obama proposed in the wake of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14.  

Support from the conservative Toomey, who also carries an A rating from the NRA, could give other, more moderate Republicans cover to vote in favor of a bill to expand background checks for gun sales beyond just those conducted through licensed dealers.

In recent days, Obama's gun control agenda has been imperiled on Capitol Hill. While Democratic leaders have promised votes on an assault weapons ban and new limits on high capacity magazines, neither can realistically pass the Senate. And a deal on background checks has eluded Democrats for months -- threatening to leave the president with only stricter gun trafficking laws to show for a prolonged, emotional national plea for tighter restrictions on firearms after 20 young children and 6 educators were gunned down in Connecticut.

But there was new momentum for gun legislation Tuesday as Republican senator after Republican senator announced they wouldn't support a filibuster that would prevent gun legislation from even coming up for debate. A trio of conservatives -- Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah -- are leading the filibuster effort, with support from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. But as Tuesday wore on, as many as 10 Republican senators said they could not support it or left the door open to allowing Democrats to bring the measure up on the floor. 

"The purpose of the United States Senate is to debate and to vote and to let the people know where we stand," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said on CBS' Face the Nation on Sunday. "What are we afraid of?"

On Tuesday night, Reid officially filed gun legislation that's been written by Democrats. It sets up a possible Thursday vote to open debate on guns. Senate aides said debate on gun legislation could continue through next week and even into the following week. The Manchin-Toomey compromise would likely be the first amendment offered to the package. 

The vote to open debate is tricky for some Democrats who hail from conservative states like Arkansas, where the NRA and other pro-gun groups hold significant sway. But Republican movement in favor of it could help protect them and increases the chances that the vote will succeed.

Now, a key question is how conservatives who've signed on to filibuster the gun bill decide to proceed. They haven't ruled out taking a stand on the Senate floor, similar to Paul's 14-plus-hour talkathon opposing drone strikes on American citizens.

That has some Republicans on edge. One member of Senate leadership, speaking on condition of anonymity so as not to violate personal confidences, said there's a sense among the top GOP lawmakers that such a public display could further damage the already-battered Republican brand.

But McConnell, who's up for re-election in 2014, vowed Tuesday to stay the course and filibuster the bill.

"It clearly had no bipartisan support in committee," he said. 

NBC News' Frank Thorp and Mike O'Brien contributed to this report

This story was originally published on Tue Apr 9, 2013 7:19 PM EDT