Partisan gun politics Partisan gun politics Both sides say they want to keep guns out of the hands of potential terrorists, but scoring political points seems to take priority. The Day It would be great to see Democrats and Republicans in Washington set aside the political gamesmanship to achieve some small progress on sensible gun control. Unfortunately, the odds of that happening remain long.

On Monday, the Senate voted on four bills, all of them drafted with partisan intentions. So it was not surprising that all failed to meet the 60-vote procedural hurdle for approval, that being the one thing the two sides could agree on.

We know there will be no federal ban on assault weapons while Republicans control Congress, but finding a way to keep these weapons out of the hands of suspected terrorists is something on which everyone should be able to agree.

Apparently not.

Actually having a vote was progress, thanks in large measure to the attention attracted to the issue by Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy’s 15-hour filibuster. The Democrat made his plea for action following the mass murder of 49 people on June 12 at an Orlando nightclub by a man who had legally purchased a semi-automatic assault rifle shortly before the killings, despite having been investigated by the FBI for terrorist ties.

But both sides seemed more intent on pressing their respective political advantages than getting laws passed.

Democrats pushed a measure that would have given the Justice Department the authority, in doing its background checks, to prevent gun purchases by buyers on terrorist watch lists or under investigation. Democrats, however, were unwilling to consider an appeals process that would satisfy Republicans that Second Amendment rights were adequately protected.

Democrats, cognizant of polls showing the majority of voters align with them, plan to make the vote a campaign issue in key Senate races, including those in New Hampshire, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Meanwhile Republicans, bowing to the National Rifle Association, swung in the other direction. Their proposal would give the Justice Department only 72 hours to show a judge there is probable cause to believe the gun would be used in connection with terrorism. That sets the bar too high.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, is among a small group of senators seeking a compromise bill that would prevent individuals on terror watch lists from buying guns, but with a reasonable appeal procedure for the rejected gun buyer to challenge the denial.

Collins’ ability to attract broad, bipartisan support will show whether senators are truly interested in moving policy forward or only in partisan politics as usual.

Even if a bill were to emerge from the Senate, prospects are dimmer in the House. And so it goes.