Journal-Inquirer - 05/04/2006

State rep failed to protect her constituents
By: Doug Hardy

State Rep. Minnie Gonzalez (D-Hartford) should be ashamed of herself.

Not only did she turn her back on her fellow Democrats, but she also did an enormous disservice to her community last week when she abstained from voting on the lost and stolen firearms bill - a bill that would have finally begun to address the plague of gun violence in Hartford and Connecticut's other urban areas.

Her abstention on this bill is only the tip of an iceberg of bad representation for the city.

The bill that died Friday, April 28, in the House of Representatives would have given police a necessary tool to start rounding up illegal gun traffickers. It would have closed an existing loophole that allows illegal gun sellers to fall back on excuses like, "I lost it," or, "It was stolen," once police trace a gun back to them after a crime.

The bill would have given legal gun owners an opportunity to take some responsibility and to report a lost or stolen gun to police within 72 hours of discovering it missing. It's the bare minimum of responsibility for gun owners that they be required to ask for help from police in recovering a gun before someone uses it in a crime or otherwise.

And, since it's no secret that drug dealing and illegal firearms go hand in hand, it's a no-brainer that the bill also would have cut into the drug trade that has been wiping out generations of young men and women, filling our state's cemeteries and prisons. It's also no secret that the vast majority of gun crimes in Connecticut are committed with illegal firearms, so this is the place to focus, if we really care about gun violence.

Illegal guns simply are everywhere in Hartford. Each time someone uses one, waves of pain, anger, and destruction spread outward through the community in a ripple effect. Make no mistake - everyone in Hartford has been touched by gun violence in some way.

But the bill died, and so will many more young people this year in Hartford from illegal firearms. Lawmakers like Gonzalez have ensured that the cycle of violence will continue unabated for the foreseeable future.

Furthermore, Gonzalez's actions for the last two years have helped to keep the illegal gun trade thriving in Hartford.

As a member of the Judiciary Committee during the 2005 legislative session, she voted in favor of a similar bill - HB 6657 - and then flip-flopped, sources tell me, lobbying against the bill before it reached the House floor. She was seen speaking with National Rifle Association lobbyists who were here from Washington, D.C. - to kill the bill.

This year, Gonzalez was back at it. A slightly different version of the bill came to the House as HB 5818. It was approved by the Judiciary Committee, again with Gonzalez's blessing.

The bill then was added to other legislation - Senate Bill 105 - as an amendment. It received a lopsided, favorable vote on the Senate floor, 26-6.

Further, the lost and stolen firearms amendment to SB 105 also had another important ally early in the session in Gov. M. Jodi Rell. The governor said she was ready to sign it.

So, all the smart ducks were in order.

But once again Gonzalez flip-flopped and reportedly worked against the bill when it came back to the House floor. Last year, she didn't have to show her colors because HB 6657 never came to a vote in the Public Safety Committee or on the House floor. But this year, Gonzalez was in the House when the amendment was called. She did what she had to - she covered her tracks and abstained.

The House vote was 79-66 against the amendment. Including Gonzalez, there were six abstentions. Rep. Felipe Reinoso, D-Bridgeport, also abstained.

Even if the amendment had passed, 24 others had been added to the bill as well - including one from Gonzalez at the top of the list (No. 5091) - in a strategy similar to the one that killed the bill in 2005. She was one of only two Democrats to add amendments to the bill. The other was Rep. Brian O'Connor of Clinton. The amendments stacked the deck against the bill's passage by loading it down with baggage that would take time to debate.

But this year's amendments were never called. The lost and stolen firearms amendment itself needed just seven of those 79 dissenters to vote the other way, and they didn't. It's unconscionable.

From his abstention, it's not clear whether Reinoso was opposed to the bill. If he wasn't opposed, he certainly dropped the ball. But Gonzalez wasn't alone in her opposition, even among urban lawmakers.

Three notable opponents of the bill were New Haven Reps. William R. Dyson and Juan R. Candelaria, and Bridgeport Rep. Lydia N. Martinez, each of whom voted against the bill.

All three are Democrats.

Another key Democrat to oppose the bill also sticks out as a problem: Rep. James A. Amann of Milford - the speaker of the House.

He's a card-carrying member of the NRA, and that makes him the wrong person for the speaker's post. It was up to him to call the bill for a vote, and proponents expended a lot of energy just to convince him to do that.

Meanwhile, amendments were piling on. In Amann's case, Connecticut has placed too much power in one person's hands. He's leaning so far to one side on gun issues that, in essence, the NRA is the speaker of the House in one of the bluest states in the nation.

But Gonzalez lives in Hartford and should know better.

According to media reports, she said she thought the 72-hour time period wasn't enough and "would make decent people criminals." Aside from being inaccurate, her latter comment also is an NRA talking point.

But remember, Gonzalez was OK with the bill when she voted for it in the Judiciary Committee. Twice.

She also said that if the bill passed, it would mean legal gun owners who did not know their guns were stolen would be arrested - which law enforcement officials say isn't true - and then would have to post bail and hire a lawyer.

In reality, police would be using their judgment with respect to people's excuses for losing their guns or allowing them to be stolen. Law enforcement officials repeatedly testified that the bill isn't targeting law-abiding gun owners. Police would ask questions to determine whether there was negligence.

A gun is a powerful responsibility. It's appropriate to hold some sort of minimal accountability over those people who leave their guns unsecured, or who resell guns illegally.

Gonzalez reportedly suggested putting the "money where the problem is," saying the state should do a study, or enforce the bill's $500 Class A misdemeanor penalty after the third time gun owners fail to report their firearms lost or stolen.

A study?

Here's a news flash: Gun violence is OUT OF CONTROL in Hartford. If Gonzalez doesn't see the urgency of this problem, then she ought to look for work elsewhere.

Gonzalez seems to have an agenda all her own, and it has nothing to do with what's best for Hartford when it comes to gun violence. She denied it in print, but it's common knowledge in the city and at the Capitol that Gonzalez hates Hartford Mayor Eddie Perez with a passion, and Perez - to his credit - has been way out front on this issue. Whatever you may think of his management style, it's clear that he cares about people's safety.

Couldn't Gonzalez even give this bill a try? New York, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, and California all have similar laws, and no one is complaining that responsible gun owners are being prosecuted.

Hartford's other five House lawmakers - Reps. Kenneth P. Green, Marie Kirkley-Bey, Douglas McCrory, Eveyln Mantilla, and Art Feltman - all voted in favor of the bill, as did Sen. Eric Coleman. Clearly, some folks can see and hear what's happening in their community. They had their priorities straight.

For whatever reason, Minnie Gonzalez did not.

Do yourself a favor, Hartford: Vote her out of office in November. She is doing more harm than good.

©Journal Inquirer 2006.

Return to News List