Begich Admits What His Voting Record Proves: At Heart He's A Republican

Yesterday on CNBC Mark Begich (D-AK) admitted what people who watch Senate votes closely have already figured out: he's really a Republican calling himself a Democrat. Tied with the wretched Heidi Heitkamp, Begich has been voting more frequently with the GOP this year than any Democrats other than arch-conservatives Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Joe Donnelly (D-IN) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO). Begich is constantly pulling the Democratic Senate caucus away from progressive policies and advocating against working families and for predatory corporations. But yesterday was the first time he publicly admitted that he's really nothing but a Republican.

"Probably a Rockefeller Republican," the Alaska senator told CNBC Monday morning when asked whether he was closer to identifying as that or as a Pelosi Democrat.

The comment signifies Begich's efforts to put some distance between himself and national Democrats in the libertarian-leaning state.

I recall that Rockefeller was governor of New York, then Vice President, for the entire time I was growing up. There's nothing I remember about him that could even vaguely be called "libertarian." Rockefeller was an icon of the corporate elite and represented the interests of the very wealthy against working families... just like Begich does. Most recently, though, Begich was one of the small handful of Democrats who voted with the Republicans against background checks for terrorists and criminals. He's since dug in on the issue and says he's not changing his mind. Big mistake-- unless he plans to run without any campaign contributions from Democratic donors. Will the NRA finance his shaky reelection effort?

Begich, a pathetic political coward, was actually doing well among Alaska voters before he jumped on the NRA bandwagon. A poll in February showed him as a nearly sure bet for reelection.

Voters approve of Begich’s job performance by a wider margin, 49% to 39%, and independents approve of Begich 54% to 32%. Begich also gets approval from 24% of Republican voters. If Parnell ran for Senate against Begich, the two would be tied at 48% each. Otherwise Begich leads Dan Sullivan by 6 points (47/41), Mead Treadwell by 8 points (47/39) and Sarah Palin by 16 points (54/38).

“Despite Alaska’s Republican tilt, Begich remains surprisingly popular going into his reelection campaign,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “Begich and Parnell both have solid independent and crossover appeal with voters.”

Then came his cowardly vote for the NRA and against background checks and now he looks like he will probably lose his seat in the Senate. Just two months after the February poll, voters had soured on Begich because of his vote against background checks.

When we polled Alaska in February Lisa Murkowski was one of the most popular Senators in the country with a 54% approval rating and only 33% of voters disapproving of her. She's seen a precipitous decline in the wake of her background checks vote though. Her approval is down a net 16 points from that +21 standing to +5 with 46% of voters approving and 41% now disapproving of her. Murkowski has lost most of her appeal to Democrats in the wake of her vote, with her numbers with them going from 59/25 to 44/44. And the vote hasn't increased her credibility with Republican either-- she was at 51/38 with them in February and she's at 50/39 now.

Mark Begich is down following his no vote as well. He was at 49/39 in February and now he's at 41/37. His popularity has declined with Democrats (from 76/17 to 59/24) and with independents (from 54/32 to 43/35), and there has been no corresponding improvement with Republicans. He had a 24% approval rating with them two months ago and he has a 24% approval rating with them now.

60% of Alaska voters support background checks to just 35% opposed, including a 62/33 spread with independents. 39% of voters say they're less likely to vote for each of Begich and Murkowski in their next elections based on this vote, while only 22% and 26% say they're more likely to vote for Begich and Murkowski respectively because of this.

At this point almost any mainstream conservative Republican can beat Begich-- like Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell. His only hope for reelection would be if the Republicans nominate someone certifiably insane... like Joe Miller... which is likely. It's just another example of the Republicans moving out towards outright fascism and the Democrats moving right into the conservative space. And then we wind up with crap on two legs like Patrick Murphy and Charlie Crist in Florida, migrating over to the Democratic Party because it's now becoming as conservative as they are.

Read More

Yes, There Are Still NRA Shills Among Congressional Democrats

Few are as blatant and tone deaf as John Barrow (New Dem/Blue Dog-GA), but there are Democrats firmly allied with the NRA in both the House and Senate. In fact, four of them in the Senate-- Mark Pryor (AR), Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Mark Begich (AK), and Max Baucus (MT)-- just got unpleasant wakeup calls on the issue from Michael Bloomberg. He sent the letter below to hundreds of top Democratic donors urging them to stop writing campaign checks to NRA shills-- particularly these NRA shills. Heitkamp doesn't face the voters for another 5 years and Baucus is finally retiring. But Begich and Pryor are in tough reelection races for 2014 and if donors cut them off, they could be in trouble, although a case has been made that in both Alaska and Arkansas, being seen as someone not liked by the mayor of New York City does a candidate more good than bad in a general election. Last week we saw how billionaire Democratic donor Kenneth Lerer announced he would withhold contributions from NRA Democrats-- and possibly help fund primary opponents against them.

The move could inflame tensions that have simmered for weeks between Mr. Bloomberg, who blames the four Democrats for the defeat of the bill, and Democratic Senate leaders, who have privately told City Hall that the attacks can serve only to empower a Republican majority openly hostile to Mr. Bloomberg’s priorities.

By appealing to the Democrats’ financial base, Mr. Bloomberg is exploiting his relationships and prestige among wealthy New Yorkers to disrupt the flow of campaign money to key Democrats whose re-election next year will help determine whether the party retains control of the Senate. No state is more essential to the party’s fund-raising: Sitting Democratic senators and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised $30.4 million from New York donors in 2012, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, more than in any other state.

...Mr. Bloomberg’s strategy creates a tricky situation for Senate Democrats. They do not wish to alienate the billionaire mayor, who has become increasingly aggressive and outspoken on the issue. But they say he should be more sympathetic, given that their party, with its fragile majority, has tried to take on the difficult subject of increasing restrictions on guns in the face of hostility from Republicans.

“What they are doing,” said one senior Democratic aide who, like many people interviewed for this article, declined to go on the record criticizing the mayor, “is increasing the likelihood of a 100 percent A-rated N.R.A. Republican being elected.”

For Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who was an architect of his party’s takeover of the Senate in 2006 and has aggressively built up the Democratic donor base in New York, and who is a close ally of the mayor, the notion that Mr. Bloomberg’s efforts could cost Democrats their majority is not an abstraction.

He praised the mayor’s effort, but added, “We should be mindful that pro-gun safety laws have a much better chance of passing under a Democratic Senate majority than a Republican one.”

Mr. Bloomberg’s idea to use his formidable resources against Senate Democrats was enough of a threat to the majority leader, Harry Reid, that he raised the issue with the mayor in Washington in February.

According to a person with direct knowledge of their conversation, Mr. Reid told the mayor that he thought any efforts to attack Democrats would be shortsighted, and could ultimately result in a Republican Senate majority.

“Do you think you’d be better served by Majority Leader McConnell?” Mr. Reid said, according to this person, referring to Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Mr. Bloomberg appears undeterred. In May, he financed a $350,000 blitz of tough television ads against Mr. Pryor, featuring the fatal shooting of a friend of the senator. Mr. Bloomberg said voters would reward the senators if they heeded the public-- which broadly favors background checks-- instead of the National Rifle Association and other groups opposed to the legislation.

“If Democrats want to keep control of the Senate, what I would suggest is that they have all of their members vote for things that the public wants,” he said in the interview. “And if they don’t do that, the voters should elect different senators who will listen to them. That’s what democracy is all about.”

If a background-check bill passes the Senate, Mr. Bloomberg said, he will seek to put similar pressure on the Republican-led House, including appeals to Republican donors in New York who favor more gun regulation. Some Senate Republicans have already found themselves targets of the mayor.

This is the counter-ad that Pryor ran in Arkansas. "No one from New York or Washington tells me what to do; I listen to Arkansas." (He mostly listens the Walton family-- and to talking snakes.)



Bloomberg's letter:

I am writing to ask you: the next time these four Senators want you to support them with donations to their campaigns, tell them you cannot. Until they show that they will stand up for the American people and not the gun lobby, tell them you cannot support their candidacy. These “no” votes were a slap in the face to Americans everywhere. Polls consistently show that 90% of Americans-- including 82% of gun owners and 74% of NRA members-- support requiring background checks for all gun sales. But instead of standing up for what’s right, and for a common-sense measure their constituents support, these Senators made a calculated vote designed to pander to the gun lobby in anticipation of their next election.

...Senators Baucus, Begich, Heitkamp, and Pryor sided with the minority, reminding us of why so many people are angry at Congress. Astonishingly, the four Senators did this even as they ask New Yorkers, who contributed a significant share of the funding for their last election bids, to donate to them once again. Their votes were an affront to the nation. Make no mistake: loopholes at the federal level undermine our efforts to keep our streets safe.

By voting against background checks, these Senators told us they would rather bow down to a special interest group than support a common-sense measure to help law enforcement fight gun crime. Now you can tell these Senators: by voting against background checks, they voted against your values and your family’s safety. And until they show they will stop bowing to pressure from the gun lobby, you should not support them.

Last year Bloomberg money defeated NRA shill Joe Baca in California. Baca is trying to get back into Congress next year. Bloomberg is likely to make sure that doesn't happen. He should also help end John Barrow's miserable, craven career in politics.

Read More

DSCC Getting Its Dream Candidate, Joe Miller, Against Begich In Alaska?

DSCC & Tea Party agree Joe Miller should be the GOP nominee. The GOP... not so much

In the Quinnipiac poll released yesterday, voters across the country were clear that after weeks of intense right-wing propaganda and Establishment media drummed up poutrage, the GOP Scandalpalooza isn't as important to anyone as it is to deranged Republicans. By enormous margins-- 73-22%-- voters said dealing with the economy is a higher priority than the IRS, Benghazi, and Associated Press controversies the congressional Republicans are putting virtually all their energy into.

American voters say 43- 32 percent that congressional criticism of the Obama Administration's handling of the terrorist attack in Libya is 'just politics.' Voters say 44- 33 percent, however, that members of Congress who criticize the way the Obama Administration handled the IRS are raising 'legitimate concerns.' Criticism of the Justice Department's seizure of journalists' phone records also raises 'legitimate concerns,' voters say 37- 24 percent.

...But voters say 73- 22 percent that dealing with the economy and unemployment is a higher priority than investigating these three issues.

And the highest priority for Democrats is working to improve the economy-- especially Senate Democrats. As Greg Sargent pointed out in his Washington Post column yesterday, after reading the same Quinnipiac poll, "a variety of indicators, from rising home prices to buoyed consumer confidence to falling gas prices, suggest that the economy is improving at a stronger clip than previously anticipated."

If the recovery is strong next year, it could help Dems hold the Senate. That’s because, with Democrats fighting on defense across the board, Dem control of the Senate hinges on whether a half dozen incumbents can hang on. And an improving economy can help incumbents. As Amy Walter of the nonpartisan [actually it's extremely skewed towards Republicans but Greg writes in DC so...] Cook Political Report explains:

Good economic times are good for incumbents. After all, voters are more apt to look for change in tough times than they are in good ones. Significant economic anxiety contributed to the “wave” elections of 2008 and 2010. In 2012, the economy improved just enough to help President Obama win re-election.

This year, Americans’ confidence in the economy is as strong as it’s been in years. If that continues, it would probably mean a status quo cycle; which is the best that Democrats could hope for.

Democrats are the underdogs in 2014. They are defending seven Senate seats in deep red states, while Republicans have no vulnerable seats to protect…The best case scenario for Democrats is 2014 to limit their losses. An improving economic outlook could help them do that. The economic environment is much improved from where it was right before Election Day 2010. And, it’s even a bit better than it was in the fall of 2012.

And one of those deep red states with a Democratic senator is Alaska-- and Mark Begich, who has upset his own base with a series of wrong-headed right-wing votes, like backing the NRA demand to kill background checks (which is very popular in Alaska). Alaska is a tough environment for Democrats in statewide races. Obama only drew 41% of the vote there last year, worse than he did in Georgia, South Carolina, or Mississippi. And when Begich first won, in 2008-- with the incumbent Republican embroiled in a series of outrageous corruption scandals on the front pages of every newspaper-- it was a very slim lead: 151,767 (48%) to 147,814 (47%). Two years later, Scott McAdams, the Democratic challenger to GOP incumbent Lisa Murkowski, came in third. Murkowski, who had narrowly lost the primary to a neo-fascist teabagger named Joe Miller, ran in the general as an independent write-in candidate and won with 101,091 (40%), while Miller, the official Republican candidate took 90,839 votes (36%) and McAdams trailed with a mere 60,045 (23%).

Many Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents abandoned McAdams when polls showed he had no chance and voted for Murkowski to prevent the crazed teabagger from winning the seat. Well... the crazed teabagger is back. He wants to Republican nomination again, this time to run against Begich. A recent PPP survey found that Alaska voters are angry at Begich for voting against background checks. But will they vote for a certifiably insane militant gun loon instead?

When we polled Alaska in February Lisa Murkowski was one of the most popular Senators in the country with a 54% approval rating and only 33% of voters disapproving of her. She's seen a precipitous decline in the wake of her background checks vote though. Her approval is down a net 16 points from that +21 standing to +5 with 46% of voters approving and 41% now disapproving of her. Murkowski has lost most of her appeal to Democrats in the wake of her vote, with her numbers with them going from 59/25 to 44/44. And the vote hasn't increased her credibility with Republican either-- she was at 51/38 with them in February and she's at 50/39 now.

Mark Begich is down following his no vote as well. He was at 49/39 in February and now he's at 41/37. His popularity has declined with Democrats (from 76/17 to 59/24) and with independents (from 54/32 to 43/35), and there has been no corresponding improvement with Republicans. He had a 24% approval rating with them two months ago and he has a 24% approval rating with them now.

60% of Alaska voters support background checks to just 35% opposed, including a 62/33 spread with independents. 39% of voters say they're less likely to vote for each of Begich and Murkowski in their next elections based on this vote, while only 22% and 26% say they're more likely to vote for Begich and Murkowski respectively because of this.

Alaska will definitely be a high-profile, high-priority Senate battleground state this year. There's probably no one Begich would rather see as his opponent than Miller.

Apparently, the 2010 loss still smarts. Miller seems almost to be running as much against Murkowski as Begich.

“Though I was labeled an ‘extremist’ by the likes of Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich for telling the truth, both of our sitting senators now routinely engage in such ‘extremist’ rhetoric with respect to federal overreach, government spending, and entitlement reform,” Miller writes on his Restoring Liberty website.

Miller’s political manifesto is straight out of the tea party wing of the Republican Party.

“With the re-election of Barack Obama, our very way of self-government is in peril,” he says. “The Constitution is under attack, the value of human life degraded, religious liberties are threatened, the Second Amendment is increasingly in jeopardy, and the right to protection from unlawful search and seizure is giving way to a virtual surveillance State.”

He warns of a “looming debt crisis” and “the coming downgrade of America’s credit rating.” The US senators he says he most admires: Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ted Cruz of Texas, and Mike Lee of Utah-- those who will “confront President Obama, not one who will cut a deal to negotiate the terms of our surrender to his radical socialist agenda.”

...Earlier this month, a state judge ordered Miller to pay $85,000 in attorney’s fees to the Alaska Dispatch online news organization in Anchorage tied to a 2010 lawsuit to make public Miller’s employment records during his time as a part-time government lawyer. At one point in the dust-up, Miller’s security men at a town hall meeting handcuffed the editor of the Alaska Dispatch.

“Miller’s conduct, which included taking inconsistent positions, failing to disclose information during discovery, and his procedural filing, which the record did not support, all caused unnecessary delay and costs for both Alaska Dispatch” and the Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska Superior Court Judge Stephanie Joannides wrote in her ruling.

Is there any chance that Ms. Palin could jump into Alaska’s 2014 US Senate race? It may be unlikely, but recent polls could tempt the GOP’s 2008 vice presidential nominee.

She enjoys a 62 percent favorable rating among Republican voters in the state, according to a Harper Polling survey earlier this month, and she leads Miller 52 percent to 19 percent in a hypothetical head-to-head match.

Miller, meanwhile, has a 49 percent to 34 percent unfavorable-favorable rating in that poll.

So, will the Democratic base forgive Begich his dalliance with the NRA and his generally conservative Republican voting record? Blue America certainly will not be adding him to our Senate page of endorsed candidates but I suspect that Alaska Democrats will hold their noses and vote for him... IF Miller is the nominee (or Palin). Miller is now publicly embracing the term "extremist" to describe him and his agenda:

Read More

NRA Shills In The Senate In Trouble-- At Least On Paper

Mark Begich will probably only win reelection if Alaska Republicans nominate Joe Miller

The Republican case for why the unpopular vote against background checks-- basically no one agrees with their position except hard-core Republican primary voters-- won't hurt them in 2014 is twofold: the House didn't vote on it at all, and in the Senate the GOP has only two vulnerable incumbents (the two closet cases, Lindsey Graham in South Carolina and Miss McConnell in Kentucky) and taking the NRA position won't hurt either of them in those states. So, yes, senators who voted no on Manchin-Toomey are taking a beating in polling, but most of them aren't up for reelection in 2014. Ironically, the most damage from the fallout over the Senate vote is likely to be among conservative Democrats who shamelessly shill for the NRA!

Jeff Flake (R-AZ) would get killed if he had to run in 2014... but he doesn't have to face the voters again 'til 2018. None of the Republicans who are losing ground with voters according to the PPP survey have to face voters while the vote is fresh in anyone's mind. Mark Begich (D-AK), on the other hand, may be in trouble.

New PPP polls in Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, and Ohio find serious backlash against the 5 Senators who voted against background checks in those states. Each of them has seen their approval numbers decline, and voters say they're less likely to support them the next time they're up for reelection. That's no surprise given that we continue to find overwhelming, bipartisan support for background checks in these states.

Here's the state by state rundown:

• After just 3 months in office Jeff Flake has already become one of the most unpopular Senators in the country. Just 32% of voters approve of him to 51% who disapprove and that -19 net approval rating makes him the most unpopular sitting Senator we've polled on, taking that label from Mitch McConnell.

70% of Arizona voters support background checks to only 26% who are opposed to them. That includes 92/6 favor from Democrats, 71/24 from independents, and 50/44 from Republicans. 52% of voters say they're less likely to support Flake in a future election because of this vote, compared to only 19% who say they're more likely to. Additionally voters say by a 21 point margin, 45/24, that they trust senior colleague John McCain more than Flake when it comes to gun issues.

• When we polled Alaska in February Lisa Murkowski was one of the most popular Senators in the country with a 54% approval rating and only 33% of voters disapproving of her. She's seen a precipitous decline in the wake of her background checks vote though. Her approval is down a net 16 points from that +21 standing to +5 with 46% of voters approving and 41% now disapproving of her. Murkowski has lost most of her appeal to Democrats in the wake of her vote, with her numbers with them going from 59/25 to 44/44. And the vote hasn't increased her credibility with Republican either- she was at 51/38 with them in February and she's at 50/39 now.

Mark Begich is down following his no vote as well. He was at 49/39 in February and now he's at 41/37. His popularity has declined with Democrats (from 76/17 to 59/24) and with independents (from 54/32 to 43/35), and there has been no corresponding improvement with Republicans. He had a 24% approval rating with them two months ago and he has a 24% approval rating with them now.

60% of Alaska voters support background checks to just 35% opposed, including a 62/33 spread with independents. 39% of voters say they're less likely to vote for each of Begich and Murkowski in their next elections based on this vote, while only 22% and 26% say they're more likely to vote for Begich and Murkowski respectively because of this.

• We saw serious improvement in Rob Portman's poll numbers in the second half of 2012 following his consideration as the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, but he's taken a nose dive in 2013. Portman's approval has dropped a net 18 points over the last 6 months from +10 (35/25) in October to now -8 (26/34) in April. Portman's popularity decline has come across the board with Democrats (from 15/39 to 8/50), Republicans (62/11 to 46/19), and independents (28/23 to 24/32) alike.

72% of Ohio voters support background checks, including 87% of Democrats, 73% of independents, and 56% of Republicans. 36% of voters in the state say they're less likely to support Portman in a future election because of this vote to only 19% who consider it to be a reason to support him.

• And in Nevada Dean Heller has seen a more modest decline in his approval numbers, from 47/42 right before the election to 44/41 now. However with the independent voters who were critical to his narrow victory in November, his approval has dropped from 52/37 then to now 42/42.

70% of voters in the state support background checks compared to just 24% who are opposed to them. That includes 87% of Democrats, 65% of independents, and 54% of Republicans. 46% say they're less likely to support Heller the next time he's up for reelection compared to only 25% who are more likely to because of this vote, and as we saw last fall Heller has very little margin for error.

Taken together these results make it pretty clear that this issue could be a serious liability for the Senators who opposed overwhelmingly popular background checks in the Senate vote earlier this month.

Begich could lose his seat-- especially if a remotely mainstream Republican (i.e., not Joe Miller)-- runs against him. It's a classic example of a Democrat abandoning his own base's values to curry favor with his enemies... only to have his enemies laugh in his face. Democrats and independents are looking at Begich as a spineless coward and Republicans may like that one vote he took out of fear but they'll vote against him anyway. He deserves to lose his seat and, unless Miller gets the nomination, he probably will. Mark Pryor (D-AR)-- the talking snake guy with the IQ problem-- probably faces the same problem, although I haven't seen any polling yet to back that up.

Read More

Ted Cruz's NRA Filibuster Crushed

The failed filibusterers

With only two conservative Democrats caving to NRA pressure-- Mark Pryor (AR) and Mark Begich (AK)-- but with 16 Republicans agreeing that there should at least be a debate on gun safety, the Senate ended the filibuster led by Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Miss McConnell. The filibuster was shut down 68-31.

When Mark Begich first ran for the Senate in 2008, Blue America endorsed him and helped him raise some money. He's been a disappointment ever since, the polar opposite of courageous, seemingly only interested in extending his own career. His overall ProgressivePunch crucial vote score, 78.96, is putrid enough, but, with his reelection campaign gearing up, he's made a conscious effort to move further to the right. His score for the 113th Congress is a shocking 57.14. The only Democratic senators voting more frequently with Miss McConnell are Mark Pryor (his fellow filibuster), Joe Manchin (WV), Claire McCaskill (MO) and Kay Hagan (NC). Needless to say, if there was any chance Blue America would have re-endorsed Begich-- and, realistically, there wasn't-- he blew it today by attempting to deny the right of the Senate to even debate gun safety regulations. Good luck getting those Republicans in Alaska to vote for you, Mark.

These are the Republicans-- several willing to court primaries for the neo-fascist right and the deep-pocketed gun manufacturers lobby-- who voted against the filibuster yesterday:

• Lamar Alexander (TN)
• Kelly Ayotte (NH)
• Richard Burr (NC)
• Saxby Chambliss (GA)
• Tom Coburn (OK)
• Susan Collins (ME)
• Bob Corker (TN)
• Jeff Flake (AZ)
• Lindsey Graham (SC)
• Dean Heller (NV)
• John Hoeven (ND)
• Johnny Isakson (GA)
• Mark Kirk (IL)
• John McCain (AZ)
• Pat Toomey (PA)
• Roger Wicker (MS)

Now the debate begins. It's expected to last a couple weeks before the Senate finally votes on the weak and watered down gun safety proposals.

“With the vote we take today, we are turning the page. Against the NRA’s dominance, we are turning the page to do what is right by these families and by the American people,”  Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said at a news conference with the family members.

Turning to the families, Schumer said Newtown was the reason the Senate acted. “The only reason we are turning the page is because of you. You spoke to Congress. You spoke to the American people. We looked in your eyes, we saw your loss. We saw the hole where your child, your sibling, your parent used to be.”

Despite the vote to proceed, several Republicans said they would continue to oppose the legislation.

“The government should not punish or harass law-abiding citizens in the exercise of their Second Amendment rights,” Senate Minority Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said.

Miss McConnell can lisp all the misleading NRA talking points he wants, but he very well aware that nothing in the legislation punishes or harasses any law-abiding citizens and is completely unrelated to the Second Amendment.

But Reid said Thursday that the first amendment to be debated is a bipartisan agreement to expand the gun background-check program that was announced Wednesday by Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Schumer. The agreement would extend the current background-check requirement from covering only sales at licensed dealerships to any sale that takes place at a gun show or that is advertised in print or online. However, checks would not be required for many sales between private individuals-- a key concession by Democrats that gun-control advocates eagerly sought.

The proposal also would permit gun dealers to sell firearms across state lines, and gun owners with state-issued permits to carry concealed weapons would be allowed to take their firearms through states that don’t allow concealed weapons. The bipartisan agreement also calls for establishing a national commission to evaluate causes of mass violence.

Other proposed changes to the bill will come from members of both parties.

Sens. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) plan to introduce changes to the gun-trafficking provisions that would bolster legal protections for lawful gun owners who purchase weapons to give as gifts or raffle and contest prizes and are later used in a crime.

In a nod to groups seeking tighter gun restrictions, several Democratic senators plan to support amendments to ban military-style assault weapons and to limit the size of ammunition clips, but those measures are expected to fail. Another bipartisan group of senators plans to propose expanding programs that provide mental health assistance to military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

By yesterday afternoon, Boehner was pushing back against NRA operatives inside his House caucus who are demanding he kill the legislation-- if it passes the Senate-- when it comes to the House. He said the Hastert Rule was "never a rule anyway," opening up the possibility of him working with Obama to put together GOP-Democratic majorities to pass gun legislation, immigration and, of course, a budget, all of which are opposed by most Republican House members. It would be hilarious to see him thrown out by his own caucus and watch Cantor become the first Jewish Speaker before the loathsome Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who inherited that dream from her mentor, Rahm Emanuel.

Read More