Sen. Coons, Colleagues Expect Attorney General Sessions to Answer Questions on Conversations with Trump

Washington, DC – When Attorney General Jeff Sessions comes before the Senate Judiciary Committee next week, members expect him to answer the questions he avoided earlier this year regarding his conversations with President Donald Trump.  U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-DE), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Al Franken (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Mazie Hirono (D-HI) wrote to Sessions yesterday regarding his nonresponses in a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in June.  During the hearing, Sessions claimed it would be “inappropriate” for him to discuss the conversations because the President may choose to exert executive privilege over them later.  Sessions and the President should have determined what information is privileged in the months since Sessions testified, the Senators write, and answer fully Judiciary Committee members’ questions. 

“We expect that when you appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on October 18th, you will have determined whether the president will invoke executive privilege as to specific topics and will be prepared to answer completely all questions in those areas on which he has not,” write the Senators.  

Full text of the letter is below.  A PDF copy is available here.

October 11, 2017

The Honorable Jeff Sessions

Attorney General

Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW

Washington, D.C. 20530

Dear Attorney General Sessions:

In light of your upcoming appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, we write to express our expectation that you will answer Members’ questions fully and truthfully.  With respect to potential assertions of executive privilege on behalf of the president, we wish to put you on notice that any reasonable period of abeyance on many of the issues about which you will be asked has long elapsed.

In response to numerous questions (whose responses would not have been classified) at a public hearing before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on June 13, 2017, you cited “longstanding Department of Justice practice” and your “duty to protect confidential communications” with the president, and informed the Committee that you were “protecting the right of the president to assert [executive privilege] if he chooses.” 

Following your testimony, the Department of Justice told the media that “declining to answer questions at a congressional hearing about confidential conversations with the president is a long-standing executive-branch-wide practice,” and that “the basis for this historical practice is laid out” in two 1982 memoranda.  One memorandum focuses on Congress’s broad power of inquiry to expose corruption in the executive branch, emphasizing the extensive limits on executive privilege, and does not provide any support for your assertion of a right not to answer.  The other sets forth a formal procedure through which the Attorney General may temporarily hold off inquiries that raise “substantial questions of executive privilege” while the president decides whether to claim privilege.  In order to invoke the procedure outlined in the memorandum, however, the Attorney General must expressly request that Congress hold its requests “in abeyance” while the president makes his privilege determination. 

We expect that when you appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on October 18th, you will have determined whether the president will invoke executive privilege as to specific topics and will be prepared to answer completely all questions in those areas on which he has not.  As to the former category, we will expect you to provide the Committee with a list of issues over which the privilege has affirmatively been asserted.  

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons: Trump appears “more reality TV star than world leader” as international crises loom

Sen. Coons on Trump threats towards NBC: “It’s not acceptable”

Sen. Coons: “I’m very concerned about the president moving to de-certify that the Iran nuclear deal is in the best interest of the United States”

WILMINGTON, Del. – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined Morning Joe this morning to discuss North Korea, Iran, and the President’s recent attacks on NBC News. 

“There’s a number of I think destabilizing steps that the administration is taking. I’m very concerned about the president moving to de-certify that the Iran nuclear deal is in the best interest of the United States and in both cases, confrontation with North Korea and a path forward on a Iran, we need to be demanding a strategy that we can get behind,” said Senator Coons. “I have said privately to senior leaders of this administration that they would find bipartisan support for a clearly articulated strategy to contain Iran’s destabilizing regional behavior and to press forward on putting the screws to China to be a better partner in containing North Korea. The administration was making great progress at the Security Council and in getting dozens of our allies to expel North Korean diplomats and to shut down North Korea’s opportunities for earning income through foreign workers and through exports. We need to focus on that.”

Full video and transcript available here.

Excerpts from the interview:

Senator Coons on North Korea:  Well, this is a very concerning time. One of the things that I have said consistently since President Trump became president was he needs to put the phone down. He needs to stop conducting foreign policy and national security by tweet. It’s not a well-honed tool for complex international negotiations. And I deeply respect Chairman Bob Corker. He has led the Foreign Relations Committee in a responsible and constructive way and I know many of my colleagues, both Democrat and Republican, share concerns that this is a moment when we need to be letting our diplomats focus on marshaling the world to confront North Korea, engaging China successfully, and these sort of casual throw away lines by the president, which strike me as more reality TV star than world leader, are destabilizing at a time when we need his focused leadership. 

More on North Korea: That’s what makes it possible for me to sleep at night is that I don’t see us taking military steps to prepare for a major confrontation with North Korea. We have not pulled out the tens of thousands of American dependents of the U.S. Troops that are on the peninsula, we haven’t pre-positioned large stores of munitions and fuel and mobilized significant numbers of jet fighters and bombers and ships, which our military would if we were beginning serious planning stages for an imminent confrontation. So most of what I see so far is there is a fair amount of bluster and threatening war talk between the leaders of North Korea and the United States, what concerns me about that is it does increase the odds that there will be a miscalculation, a misunderstanding. We don’t have robust communication channels with North Korea, the way we have had with other adversaries in the past. We had much better communication channels between our military and the Soviet military during the Cold War. So if there is an incident where a spy plane or a spy ship is shot down or intercepted as has happened before with North Korea, with China, I think the risk of a misunderstanding and a rapid escalation is getting greater with the bellicose rhetoric we are hearing out of the leaders of both countries. 

Senator Coons on Congress’ role re: North Korea: Well, it’s a great question, we have been pressing for, more recently, demanding a strategy out of the administration. There’s a number of I think destabilizing steps that the administration is taking. I’m very concerned about the president moving to de-certify that the Iran nuclear deal is in the best interest of the United States and in both cases, confrontation with North Korea and a path forward on a Iran, we need to be demanding a strategy that we can get behind. I have said privately to senior leaders of this administration that they would find bipartisan support for a clearly articulated strategy to contain Iran’s destabilizing regional behavior and to press forward on putting the screws to China to be a better partner in containing North Korea. The administration was making great progress at the Security Council and in getting dozens of our allies to expel North Korean diplomats and to shut down North Korea’s opportunities for earning income through foreign workers and through exports. We need to focus on that. The president is distracting our top diplomats and Congress from focusing on that strategy. 

Senator Coons on President Trump and Twitter: Well, it’s both. The president is popping off on Twitter in a way that is normalizing unconstitutional statements. First, just to be clear, as you said the president can’t pull a license for NBC, the Federal Communications Commission, which is an independent agency licenses individual stations, not whole networks so there is no risk that the president is about to pull the license of a network with which he disagrees. But the idea that the president would repeatedly engage in public statements that are just obviously undermining the first amendment is an alarming development. I agree with Senator Ben Sasse, that we all have to stand up in common, those of us who are elected, those of us in the media, those of us who care about our constitutional values in civil society, and push back on this, this is not normal behavior. It’s not acceptable.  

###

ICYMI: Sen. Coons calls for repealing the debt ceiling in an op-ed in The News Journal

WILMINGTON, Del. – In case you missed it, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) authored an op-ed in The News Journal calling on Congress to repeal the debt ceiling. 

“Imagine going to a restaurant, eating a meal, getting the check, and then simply refusing to pay the bill. You wouldn’t do that, because it’s not only wrong, it’s irresponsible, and the restaurant would never have you back again,” Senator Coons writes.  “Unfortunately, though, that’s essentially what Congress threatens to do every few years now, but instead of a dinner check, it’s our national debt – the bills we already owe as a country – that Congress threatens to just walk away from.”

Read the full op-ed below:

The News Journal: Get rid of the debt ceiling

By Chris Coons

Imagine going to a restaurant, eating a meal, getting the check, and then simply refusing to pay the bill. You wouldn’t do that, because it’s not only wrong, it’s irresponsible, and the restaurant would never have you back again.

Unfortunately, though, that’s essentially what Congress threatens to do every few years now, but instead of a dinner check, it’s our national debt – the bills we already owe as a country – that Congress threatens to just walk away from.

Refusing to pay our national bills beyond the arbitrary ‘ceiling’ set by Congress could create a catastrophe for our economy, cause havoc in our financial markets, and likely result in the loss of trillions of dollars in the household wealth of Americans, according to a 2013 report by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

But, for some reason, Congress seems to seriously consider ditching the bill every few years.

Later this year, the United States will once again reach our arbitrary debt limit, and Congress will have to act to pay our bills and keep our economy on track. I’m very concerned, though, that we could once again flirt with disaster through partisan brinksmanship and threaten to default on our nation’s obligations.

We cannot let that happen. 

Instead, we should work together to spend taxpayer dollars responsibly and address our national debt without coming anywhere close to threatening default. 

That’s why I’ve introduced the End the Threat of Default Act, a bill that would get rid of the debt ceiling, eliminate the risk of a potentially disastrous default, and encourage Republicans and Democrats to work together to spend taxpayer dollars more responsibly.

We’ve seen that debt ceiling showdowns in Congress are significantly destructive to our economy. In 2011, the brinksmanship over the debt limit led Standard & Poor’s to downgrade the U.S. credit rating for the first time in history, increased the U.S. Treasury’s borrowing costs by as much as $1.7 billion, and brought along “sequestration,” one of the worst fiscal policies of the last 30 years. 

It’s important to remember that raising or eliminating the debt limit has nothing to do with new federal spending. Our national debt – the money we all collectively owe – is the product of the spending decisions Congress has already made each year to fund our military, operate our schools, maintain roads and bridges, and much more. 

We can and should be more responsible and strategic when it comes to new spending, and the impact of each year’s budget on the debt, but that doesn’t change the fact that we have to pay the money we already owe. 

If you care, like I do, about our annual deficit and growing national debt, eliminating the debt ceiling just makes sense. By eliminating needless, partisan fights over money we’ve already spent, we could focus our attention on the annual spending process, when Congress decides how much to spend each year and on what to spend it.

This idea isn’t mine alone, either. Economists and policymakers agree that we should repeal the debt ceiling.

In 2013, the University of Chicago’s survey of economists found that 84% agreed that “a separate debt ceiling that has to be increased periodically creates unneeded uncertainty and can potentially lead to worse fiscal outcomes.” Even President Trump has reportedly indicated that he agrees we should get rid of the debt ceiling.

Finally, repealing the debt ceiling isn’t just good for our country; it would also specifically help Delaware. 

We are a state that employs thousands of men and women in the financial services sector, which relies heavily on stable, predictable financial markets. Throwing our national and global financial systems into chaos would impact all 50 states, but especially Delaware’s important financial services sector.  

The Delawareans I talk with every day are frustrated by much of what’s happening in Washington, and they’re concerned that too often, Congress is doing more harm than good. Dangerous political showdowns over the debt ceiling are a perfect example of politicians doing exactly that.

We need to address our national debt in a sensible, bipartisan way, but gambling with an economic disaster in the name of deficit reduction is not leadership, it’s playing politics with the full faith and credit of the United States.

We can do better than that.

Chris Coons is a U.S. Senator from Delaware.

###

Sen. Coons’ statement on the Senate’s ‘blue slip’ tradition

WILMINGTON, Del. – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued the following statement on the Senate’s blue slip process for the nomination of federal judges.

“I’m disappointed in the Majority Leader’s apparent willingness to end the Senate’s blue slip tradition, which empowers Senators to help to determine which judges are nominated for their local federal judgeships. The blue slip process ensures consensus in that no matter who is in the White House or which party controls the Senate, the President will consult with Senators about nominees for federal judgeships from their states. As judges are appointed with lifetime tenure, it is critical that qualified judges are secured for each state, and eliminating this check would decrease the ability of the Judiciary Committee to confirm qualified judges in a bipartisan manner.   

“The blue slip is not a partisan issue. Republicans repeatedly used blue slips to prevent President Obama’s nominees from being confirmed when they decided they weren’t the right candidates for the job, and Democrats permitted them to do it. Americans want us to work together to solve our nation’s problems, and tearing down the traditions that force us to work together will only make this more difficult.  I hope that Chairman Grassley will not take Leader McConnell’s position and instead will lead the Judiciary Committee in a way that respects all members and the Senate’s important traditions.”

###

Sen. Coons’ statement on Iran nuclear agreement, reports that Trump admin will ‘de-certify’

WILMINGTON, Del. – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, released the following statement in response to news reports that President Trump is planning to avoid certifying Iran’s compliance with the nuclear agreement it signed with the United States and the P5+1 countries last year, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).  Under current U.S. law, the President is required to update Congress every 90 days on Iran’s compliance with the agreement and state whether the agreement remains in the United States’ national interest.

“I am deeply concerned by news reports indicating that President Trump will not certify to Congress that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or the so-called Iran Nuclear Deal is in America’s national security interest. I think that strict enforcement of JCPOA remains in our national interest, and I think it’s striking that both Secretary of Defense James Mattis and General Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have recently testified that there is no evidence of a material breach by Iran of commitments under the deal. 

“I think that the President’s de-certification that it is in our national security interest will be misunderstood and may lead to an unconstructive and ultimately destructive 60 day debate in the Senate. If the United States Congress were to re-impose sanctions on Iran, that would lead to significant damage to the Iran Deal. I don’t think this is the time for us to abandon the JCPOA and, while the Trump administration is making a very fine distinction between a de-certification that is a report to Congress rather than leaving the deal, I’m concerned that that distinction will be lost on our allies and adversaries, and that it will be incorrectly reported that he’s de-certifying the JCPOA or trying to leave the JCPOA.

“I ultimately supported the Iran Deal because it represented an opportunity to partner with some of our vital allies in Europe and some of our adversaries globally to impose enforceable limits on Iran’s nuclear program. I never believed it was a perfect deal. I never believed that Iran would abandon its aggressive actions in the region, but it struck me as the least bad option on the table at the time it was presented to Congress for us to review. The JCPOA within its limited terms has succeeded so far in restraining Iran’s nuclear program. At a time when we face significant national security threats, not least of which is confronting North Korea’s aggressive nuclear program, it is unclear to me why President Trump would abandon the leverage he gets by this 90-day re-certification and why he would risk causing our allies and our partners in the P5+1 questioning our credibility. I think it is unlikely that North Korea and our key partners would negotiate with us if we were to renege on the JCPOA and so I see this as a moment of great risk because the President’s step, assuming he does go ahead, as has been reported, and de-certify tomorrow, will be misunderstood as leaving the JCPOA. 

“I have said to some of the most senior members of the Administration that President Trump should instead lead in a bipartisan way. President Trump would find broad bipartisan support in the Senate for urging new negotiations for an addendum agreement that would extend the JCPOA sunset clauses, address Iran’s aggressive ballistic missile program, and its other malign activity in the Middle East, and I am concerned that, instead of taking that promising, positive opportunity, the Administration is on the verge of de-certifying that this agreement is in our national security interest.”

###

Sen. Coons’ statement on death of U.S. Special Forces soldiers in Niger

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued the following statement in response to reports that three U.S. Special Forces soliders were killed in Niger. 

“I am deeply saddened to hear the news of three U.S. Special Forces soldiers killed in Niger. Their sacrifice should serve as a reminder to us all that we face significant, urgent challenges on the African continent and that American men and women are risking their lives there to protect our country every day. Now is the time for the Trump Administration and members of Congress from both parties to work together on a comprehensive strategy for U.S. engagement on this increasingly important continent.” 

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons: “I’m less concerned about what private disagreement Secretary Tillerson and President Trump had than with their public disagreements”

Sen. Coons: “It’s vital to our national security that our secretary of state be able to speak with our allies and adversaries and have them know that he speaks for the president and the United States”

Sen. Coons: “It’s less about the private disagreement than about whether our secretary of state can advance our national security interests through diplomacy”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, joined MSNBC’s Morning Joe this morning to discuss Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

“There’s lots of places around the world where some of the most senior positions in the State Department, we don’t have anyone in front of the Foreign Relations Committee nominated. That may sound like I’m getting in the weeds, but that’s who does the diplomacy,” said Senator Coons. “I think there are structural challenges here that are making it hard for the State Department to do its job, and I think that Secretary Tillerson needs to look closely at whether or not he’s able to make a difference and able to move forward in what is his important role in this administration.” 

Full video and audio available here.

Excerpts from the interview

Senator Coons on Secretary Tillerson: I’m less concerned about what private disagreement Secretary Tillerson and President Trump had than with their public disagreements. It’s vital to our national security that our secretary of state be able to speak with our allies and adversaries and have them know that he speaks for the president and the United States. So when Secretary Tillerson goes out to undertake a difficult and delicate diplomacy about North Korea, for example, and the president undercuts him with a tweet saying he’s wasting his time, or when Secretary Tillerson tries to advance a very tough budget that cuts more than is wise and the Senate rejects it on a bipartisan basis, these are both difficulties that Secretary Tillerson has faced. It’s not surprising to me that he and President Trump aren’t very close and warm, because they’re both big men, big personalities, they’ve been successful CEOs in business and so the chemistry hasn’t exactly gelled between them. To me it’s less about the private disagreement than about whether our secretary of state can advance our national security interests through diplomacy. 

More on Tillerson: I think that’s a decision that the secretary and the president need to reach. I am gravely concerned about morale in the State Department, about unfilled senior positions as I mentioned, the conflict that we have emerging with North Korea is probably top of his list, and yet, we don’t have an assistant secretary of state for East Asia, we don’t have an ambassador to South Korea – there’s not even a nominee for those positions. There’s lots of places around the world where some of the most senior positions in the State Department, we don’t have anyone in front of the Foreign Relations Committee nominated. That may sound like I’m getting in the weeds, but that’s who does the diplomacy. I think there are structural challenges here that are making it hard for the State Department to do its job, and I think that Secretary Tillerson needs to look closely at whether or not he’s able to make a difference and able to move forward in what is his important role in this administration.  

###

Coons, Corker introduce bill to improve accountability and effectiveness of US role in international organizations

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.), both members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today introduced bipartisan legislation to review and improve the accountability and effectiveness of U.S. participation in international organizations. The Multilateral Aid Review Act of 2017 would establish an interagency task force with peer review to conduct regular evaluations of how well multilateral institutions carry out their missions and how they serve American interests and taxpayers. Cosponsors of the legislation include Senators Todd Young (R-Ind.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), and Bob Casey (D-Pa.).

“I’m pleased to introduce this bipartisan bill to strengthen U.S. foreign assistance efforts around the world. It is in our nation’s best interest to provide transparency and to maximize the impact of what we spend overseas,” said Coons. “I’ve seen real humanitarian need first-hand in places like South Sudan and northern Nigeria, and the great response from partners like the World Food Programme and the International Committee for the Red Cross. At a time when some question the value of foreign assistance, I am proud to lead this bill which will provide data to analyze the effectiveness of our investments with these agencies and others. I hope to see this bill pass into law, and I’m looking forward to the results of the review.”

“American taxpayers deserve to know how our involvement in these organizations benefits this country,” said Corker. “Establishing an interagency review process will give us a more thorough and objective way to evaluate the performance of these institutions. From there, we can make more informed decisions about how to prioritize scarce resources and demand better outcomes. I thank my colleagues for joining us in support of this good governance initiative that we believe can be a useful tool for advancing U.S. interests abroad more effectively.”

Full text of the bill can be found here, and a one page summary is available here.

###

[VIDEO] Sen. Coons on CNBC re: tax reform: “We’re only going to get there if we have a bipartisan and open process”

Sen. Coons: “There are Democrats like me who would like to work across the aisle to find ways to reduce the tax rate and to broaden the base and to find a way to do that that increases tax relief for the middle class, that’s what president has said is his goal, but we’re only going to get there if we have a bipartisan and open process.”

Sen. Coons: “I’m principally concerned about not having baked into this a massive cut to Medicare, not paying for tax cuts by taking away access to health care benefits for millions of Americans.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, joined CNBC’s “Squawk Box” this morning to discuss tax reform.

“There are some concerns already being expressed in the Senate by both Republicans and Democrats that the amount that it would raise the deficit and potentially add to the debt is too large, that the details are not yet clear, and that the process that has gotten us thus far was too much of a secret behind closed doors one party only deal,” said Senator Coons. “There are Democrats like me who would like to work across the aisle to find ways to reduce the tax rate and to broaden the base and to find a way to do that that increases tax relief for the middle class, that’s what president has said is his goal, but we’re only going to get there if we have a bipartisan and open process.” 

Full audio and video are available here.

Excerpts from the interview: 

Senator Coons on tax reform: So far, as you said, we don’t have a bill we have a broad gauzy outline. There are some concerns already being expressed in the Senate by both Republicans and Democrats that the amount that it would raise the deficit and potentially add to the debt is too large, that the details are not yet clear, and that the process that has gotten us thus far was too much of a secret behind closed doors one party only deal. There are Democrats like me who would like to work across the aisle to find ways to reduce the tax rate and to broaden the base and to find a way to do that that increases tax relief for the middle class, that’s what president has said is his goal, but we’re only going to get there if we have a bipartisan and open process. 

Senator Coons on whether Republicans’ concerns will be met and they’ll be able to do this on their own: The outline we’ve seen so far includes cutting $470 billion from Medicare in the ten years ahead. It included eliminating the deduction for state and local property taxes, both of those I think will prove to be unpopular. Senator Bob Corker, Senator Rand Paul, both of whom have a willingness to buck their caucus for matters of principle, have already said they’re likely opposed to it, so Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have great difficulty rounding up 50 votes if he’s going into this with two already expressing very real concerns. This is the same thing that happened with the health care reform package, something that was done really one party, without hearings, without an open process and ultimately failed. They only have a few months to get this done, actually a few weeks of legislative time, so my hope is they’ll get the details clarified soon and start working in an open and bipartisan process.

More on tax reform: The core question is whether these have to be paid for in some way and whether the pay for is simply going to be aspirational economics, believing there’s going to be more than 3% growth as a result of tax cuts, or having to identify an offset, a pay for. 

More on tax reform: That’s right. Senator Corker has expressed real concern about whether there will be anything like the growth required to cover a multi-trillion dollar tax cut, and I think he has a reasonable concern there. 

Senator Coons on what issues would make him come to the table: President Trump has said that what he wants is a tax cut that primarily benefits America’s middle class and there’s things that we can and should do that I think would make American companies more competitive internationally, that would make them more likely to invest in infrastructure and capital expenditures and that would expand some successful tax breaks that benefit middle class families. Some of those are in the broad brush document, but some of those issues are not addressed in a plan that right now is skewed too heavily towards the wealthiest.

Senator Coons on the estate tax: Yes, that’s one. I look at that up front and it suggests to me that this will overly benefit the wealthy given what the president said his objective is, but we also don’t have a JCT score, Joint Committee on Tax, we don’t know how it will play out because we don’t have a bill and there aren’t details yet. 

Senator Coons on whether maintaining the highest income tax level for the wealthiest Americans would satisfy his concerns: That might satisfy others in my caucus. I’m principally concerned about not having baked into this a massive cut to Medicare, not paying for tax cuts by taking away access to health care benefits for millions of Americans. And I’d like to see us do more for capital investment for manufacturing, for renewables by making permanent provisions of the code that help to accelerate growth.

###

Senators Carper, Coons join bill to close automatic weapon loophole

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Tom Carper and Chris Coons (both D-Del.), co-sponsored the Automatic Gun Fire Prevention Act, a bill to close a loophole that allows semi-automatic weapons to be easily modified to fire at the rate of automatic weapons, which have been illegal for more than 30 years.

“Like many Americans, I was horrified that one individual could inflict so much carnage in such a short period of time,” Senator Carper said. “Deadly devices like ‘bump stocks’ effectively turn already dangerous weapons into fully automatic weapons, which have been banned since the 1930s. Congress agreed decades ago that these weapons were too dangerous for civilian use, but a loophole in the law allows individuals to fire hundreds of rounds per minute. The American people want us to use common sense and close dangerous loopholes in our nation’s gun laws like this one. Congress should listen.”

“While automatic weapons have been illegal for 30 years in America, some weapons can be modified by adding something called a ‘bump stock’ to make them, effectively, automatic weapons that can fire hundreds of rounds per minute,” said Senator Coons. “This bill would ban the sale and transfer of ‘bump stocks’ that needlessly make weapons more dangerous and make our communities less safe.”

Under the National Firearms Act, the sale, manufacture and transfer of automatic weapons are illegal. However, bump stocks, slide fire devices and other similar accessories are able to be attached to semi-automatic weapons, allowing them to reach fully-automatic rates of fire.

Semi-automatic rifles typically have a rate of fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute. A bump stock, or other similar devise increases the semi-automatic rifles rate of fire between 400 and 800 rounds per minute.

This bill would ban the sale, transfer, importation, manufacture or possession of bump stocks, trigger cranks and similar accessories that accelerate a semi-automatic rifle’s rate of fire.

The bill also makes clear that its intent is to target only those accessories that increase a semi-automatic rifle’s rate of fire. Legitimate accessories used by hunters would be exempt. The bill also contains exceptions for lawful possession of these devices by law enforcement and the government.

The bill was introduced by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif) and included cosponsors Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.).

Full text of the bill can be found HERE.

###