Homestead mailing list

[bob ford <bobford79 AT yahoo.com>]

I read people talking about this on a couple of sites earlier, but saw no 
news source, until now.  BO is (for the first time, ever) including a 
questionarre about gun ownership for themselves and their family members, for 
anyone inclined to work for his administration

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Would-be appointees quizzed on guns
 
AP

 President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team is asking potential 
appointees detailed questions about gun ownership, and firearms advocates 
aren’t happy about it. 

The National Rifle Association has denounced the move, which has already led 
one Republican senator to consider legislation aimed at ensuring a president 
can’t use an applicant’s gun ownership status to deny employment. 

It’s just one question on a lengthy personnel form — No. 59 on a 63-question 
list — but the furor over the query is a vivid reminder of the intensity of 
support for Second Amendment rights and signals the scrutiny Obama is likely 
to receive from the ever-vigilant gun lobby. 

Obama’s transition team declined to go into detail on why they included the 
question, suggesting only that it was done to ensure potential appointees 
were in line with gun laws. 

“The intent of the gun question is to determine legal permitting,” said one 
transition aide. 

But even some Democrats and transition experts are baffled by the inclusion 
of the question. 

Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” 
it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, 
provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration 
ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it 
has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.” 

Paul Light, professor of public service at New York University, said there 
was no such question for potential appointees when President George W. Bush 
took office in 2000. 

“It kind of sticks out there like a sore thumb,” Light said. 

He expressed uncertainty over why it was included but surmised it was out of 
an abundance of caution, a desire to avoid the spectacle of a Cabinet-level 
or other high-ranking appointee who is discovered to have an unregistered 
handgun at home. 

“It’s the kind of thing that, if dug out, could be an embarrassment to the 
president-elect,” Light said. 

Clay Johnson, deputy director of management at the Office of Management and 
Budget and the head of Bush’s 2000 transition, also didn’t quite understand 
the purpose of the question. 

“It could be their way to say to prospects that they will have to answer all 
these questions sooner or later, so be prepared,” Johnson observed. 

Matt Bennett, a veteran campaign operative who did a stint at Americans for 
Gun Safety and who now works for the moderate Democratic think tank Third 
Way, was equally befuddled. 

“It strikes me as overly lawyerly,” he said, noting that only a small 
percentage of guns owned by adults are ever used improperly. 

Only half-joking, Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) alluded to the shooting accident 
involving Vice President Dick Cheney, suggesting the query could be a 
better-safe-than-sorry measure. 

“Given the behavior of the vice president under the last administration, you 
may want to know these things,” Ryan said. 

On a more serious note, Ryan suggested that the new president was being 
“very, very thorough” in his approach. 

An Obama ally and pro-gun Democrat from a blue-collar region of Ohio, Ryan 
dismissed the notion that the inclusion of such a question would do any 
political harm to the incoming president. 

But other gun rights supporters want Obama to know the question has raised 
their antennae. 

“It’s very odd and very concerning to put out a question like that,” said 
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), adding that it may also be “unprecedented.” 

The freshman senator, who is up for reelection in 2010, had his campaign 
organization send an e-mail to supporters this week, pledging to enact 
legislation to bar federal hiring discrimination on the basis of gun 
ownership. 

“Barack Obama promised change, and this is proof positive that we are going 
to see some of the most liberal change in our nation’s history,” wrote 
DeMint’s campaign in the e-mail. 

DeMint conceded it was unrealistic to try to get a bill on the matter through 
during the lame duck session this week. 

Still, it’s the sort of symbolic issue that may provide a political opening 
for Republican members of Congress from conservative-leaning states to 
contrast themselves with the new Democratic administration. 

“I want him to know that we’re looking for areas we can work with him but 
also looking for areas of concern that we want to let him know we’re going to 
fight on,” DeMint said. 

The NRA, the gun-rights group that spent millions to defeat Obama, only to 
see him easily carry sportsmen-heavy states such as Michigan and 
Pennsylvania, is signaling that it intends to keep up the fight. 

“Barack Obama and his administration are showing their true colors and true 
philosophy with regard to the Second Amendment,” said Chris Cox, the NRA’s 
top political official. “It shows what we’ve been saying all along — this guy 
doesn’t view the Second Amendment as a fundamental constitutional right.” 

Cox said the group had put the word out to their members on the question. 

Bennett, though, argued that approach would have little resonance. 

“The real question is whether he’s doing harm to the broader image of 
Democrats on guns, and the answer is probably no,” he said. “It may gin up 
350,000 hard-core NRA types, but it won’t really bother 65 million other gun 
owners.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081120/pl_politico/15835