For a long time, the National Rifle Association has perpetuated the myth that it plays an unbeatable role in U.S. elections through its endorsement of gun-friendly candidates and financial contributions to their campaigns.

The NRA announced, prior to the election, that 2008 was "arguably the most important year" in its 137 year history.  It predicted that Barack Obama, who was endorsed by the Brady Campaign, would be the most anti-gun president in American history.  It endorsed its own preferred candidates for the House and Senate (rated "A" by the NRA) and it opposed Brady-endorsed candidates.

What Actually Happened?

The NRA myth was debunked this year, as in previous years, by the success of candidates who support sensible gun laws and who were endosed by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Presidency:  Obama/Biden beat McCain/Palin by 52 to 46 percent and won in many states where there are large proportions of gun-owners such as Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada.  In the 13 states where the NRA ran ads related to the presidential election, Obama/Biden won in 11.  The NRA spent $6.9 million on its ads, a healthy loss for its lobbying budget.

Senate: 100 percent of the candidates endorsed by Brady won.  In head-on contests between Brady-endorsed candidates and NRA-endorsed candidates, Brady candidates won 100 percent of the seats.  

House of Representatives: 90 percent of the candidates endorsed by Brady won.  In head-on contests between Brady-endorsed candidates and NRA-endorsed candidates, Brady candidates won 84 percent of the seats.  

State Races: in Senate races, 95 percent of the candidates endorsed by Brady won.  In House/Assembly races, 90 percent of the candidates endorsed by Brady won.

Disappearance of the Single Issue Gun Voter

A large part of the NRA's past claim to fame has been that NRA supporters are single issue voters who vote solely on the basis of candidates' positions on guns.  There was no evidence of single-issue gun voting in 2008, or even in 2006, a non-presidential election year.

What Does This All Mean?

First, it means, based on Brady election victories, that the next couple of years should be good ones for passing sensible gun laws.  A first step would be to close the gun show loophole which allows gun purchasers in some states to buy guns at gun shows without going through a background check.  A second step would be banning the sale of assault weapons.  Such a ban was in effect for ten years but when the law expired, the Bush Administration opposed its renewal.  A third step would be to prohibit people on terrorist watch lists from purchasing guns.  All of these measures have the support of more than 75 percent of the U.S. population.

Second, it means politicians should stop running scared of the NRA.  They can safely join forces for passage pf laws that will prevent gun violence without worrying about negative political consequences.  Let's challenge them to do so.

Please get out there and share the news -- it's time to dispel the NRA myth forever.

P.S.  I am not an unbiased blogger.  I was just selected as the President of the California Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, so you can expect many more blogs on the subject of guns.

I'm still basking in the glory of Election Day.  Although we may feel exhilarated, relieved, optimistic, I bet none of us ever wants to go through another 22 month election campaign.  American campaigns are too long, expensive, repetitive, nasty, and ultimately, boring.

I have a proposal for a new electoral system and would love to hear from readers with their ideas.  I present my thoughts below, fully recognizing that vested interests in the existing system will try to resist anything that smnacks of major reform!

National Primary

Our nominating system is archaic, ridiculously long and expensive, and anticlimactic since presidential candidates are determined before the conventions.  My system would:

Start the primary season on March 1 of election year
Legitimate candidates would have to be nominated by 10 state political parties that could make five choices each (this is to narrow the field to serious contenders)
Hold two debates for legitimate candidates -- one on domestic issues and one on foreign policy -- before the primary vote.
Terminate the nominating process with a nationwide vote on June 1.
Allow only party members to vote in the primary.  -- If Independents want to vote in the national primary, they'll have to register in a party .  (They can return to Independent status after the election but not after the primary.  This would hopefully keep party members from switching to the other party to influence primary results.)

I haven't quite figured out what to do about small parties -- any suggestions?

One-Day Conventions

There is nothing more boring and expensive than our national conventions.  Here's my proposal:

Each party would have a one-day convention on consecutive days -- June 15 and 16 -- in which the Vice Presidential candidate is announced and the Presidential candidate is presented to the country.
Party platforms would be worked out before the convention and voted on at the convention.

Election Campaign

The election campaign would run from June 2 to the first SUNDAY in November.
Three debates would be held -- one on domestic issues, one on foreign policy, and one town hall-type meeting.
Early voting would be allowed for two weeks prior to the election by mail or ballots completed at designated  election offices.

Eliminate the Electoral College

The President will be elected by popular vote.

Paying for the Election

All federal candidates -- presidential and congressional -- would be offered government funding or the option of raising their own funds, but not spending more than twice the government allocation.
Individuals would have a total contribution limit which would include contributions to candidates and parties.
All federal candidates would be given a specified amount of time for commercials.  They would not be allowed more time.

Again, I can't figure out what to do about small parties -- ideas?

Opposition to My Proposal

Who won't like it?

The states with early primaries that love being first.  The parties will like some of the proposal since they still play a role in the election, but they'll hate the limit on contributions to parties.  The small states will hate losing the Electoral College.  The small parties are left dangling until we figure out what to do.

While my proposal is good for the voters and candidates and pretty good for the major parties, the other "small" interests in the U.S. will be incensed.  As someone from the biggest state, I'm not that sympathetic!

I have had a hard time in the last few weeks deciding whether I am voting Democratic based on positive feelings for Obama/Biden or negative feelings for McCain/Palin. I've also wondered how the rest of the electorate feels.  Fortunately, I have just seen a poll by Hart/Newhouse, done on October 17, 2008, for NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, that helps me figure out where others are.

Rethinking Bush

Before getting to the 2008 choice, the electorate is truly negative (at last) about the Bush Administration.  Of course, we knew that, but look at the numbers -- a comparison of today versus Bush's high after September 11, 2001.

    -- On the question of whether Bush is headed in the right direction or off on the wrong track, 78 percent said he was off on the wrong track (compared to 11 percent in Sept., 2001)
    -- On the job Bush is doing, 66 percent disapproval today (versus 7 percent in Sept., 2001)
    -- On Bush's handling of the economy, it was even worse -- 75 percent disapproval today (versus 25 percent in Sept., 2001)

Oddly, the Congress comes in for an even worse rating, with a 79 percent disapproval rating today.

Feelings Toward Candidates and Parties

Respondents were asked to rate their feelings today toward Bush, McCain, Obama, Biden, Palin, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.  I'm providing only the extremes -- very positive or very negative.

                                          Very Positive  Very Negative

Bush                                          11                 45
McCain                                       19                 21
Obama                                       37                23
Biden                                         28                 14
Palin                                          23                 34
Democratic Party                         16                 21
Republican Party                         11                 25

What do these results tell us?  Twice as many people are very positive about Obama versus McCain; about equal numbers are very negative about the two.  Biden is slightly ahead of Palin in positives; Palin is way ahead of Biden in negatives.  Finally.  Neither party is well-loved, but the Democrats are doing slightly better than the Republicans.

Or, to put it simply, Obama has been a strong positive, Palin a strong negative.

How People Will Vote -- The Impact of Negative Campaigning

As of October 17, 2008, 51 percent of respondents respond that they will vote for Obama, 41 percent, for McCain (about 1 percent are leaning toward either Obama or McCain, 4 percent still undecided, and the rest will vote for other candidates).

Given that Obama elicits much stronger positive feelings than McCain, why isn't his vote lead any higher than 51 percent?  Are voters, who have already decided, voting more FOR one candidate or AGAINST another?
    Among McCain voters,  FOR McCain     46       AGAINST  Obama  27
    Among Obama voters,  FOR Obama    67       AGAINST McCain     8

The FOR Obama and AGAINST Obama are both higher than for McCain.  The FOR Obama is clearly a response to his charisma, youth, message of change.  The AGAINST Obama reveals either racism or the impact of negative campaigning by McCain's campaign.  (I suspect negative campaigning is having more of an effect than racism.  A scary number of voters I canvassed in Nevada told me Obama was a Muslim or terrorist.)

For that reason -- McCain's negative campaigning -- more than any other, I, unlike most other voters, am voting more AGAINST McCain than FOR Obama (although I remain incredibly positive about Obama).

Washoe County

Reno, in Washoe County, Nevada, is in the high desert.  The city is surrounded by appealing tan, beige, and brown mountains dotted with yellow sagebrush that rise to a wide, open sky of clouds and blue.  Unfortunately, downtown Reno is rather ugly with a dearth of green, charmless buildings, and huge casinos.  Unfortunately, for Nevada, gambling in the state is struggling from competition with casinos on Indian reservations in California.  

The exciting news for Democrats about Washoe County is that, after many years of being a Red area, it has just turned Blue with 1300 more registered Democrats than Republicans, thanks to a vigorous voter registration drive conducted by the Obama organization.

Grand Sierra Hotel

The Grand Sierra is huge, something like 2000 rooms.  I found the lobby/casino floor garish and depressing -- full of slot machines and gaming tables with neon lights, gaudy chandeliers, and recessed lighting.  Apparently casino owners keep their hotels in unnatural light so gamblers never know if it's day or night and never leave the hotel.

There were two good things about the Grand Sierra.  It had a spiffy health club with a hot jacuzzi, sauna, and steam room all in the ladies' locker room. I used the jacuzzi around 7 a.m. every morning and blissfully had it to myself.

Then, the Wine Bar is quite wonderful, especially because there are no slot machines inside it.  What it does have are two stands holding a wide variety of wine bottles attached to a mechanical spout.  You buy a credit card, insert it in the machine, choose your wine, price, and amount (1, 2 or 3 ounces), put your glass under a spigot and get your taste.  The system is a cross between an Automat and a coffee machine.  I loved the bar because I was able to taste 4 different wines, all in small amounts, for only 10 dollars.

Obama Campaign

Of course, the reason for being in Reno and staying at the Grand Sierra (where we got a discount from a friend) was to canvass voters for Obama.  The Obama organization was incredibly well organized and dealt efficiently with out-of-state volunteers in enormous numbers (I was asked not to say how many in order not to tip off the Republicans).  Volunteers from California came with babies in strollers, dogs on leashes, and tons of enthusiasm.  I would guess each volunteer got to 30-40 homes in a day, which was a lot of person power.

My two friends and I depended on others for transportation which enabled us to meet some terrific California volunteers. On Friday we were chauffered around by Lilla, the owner of Readers' Books in Sonoma, who took 3 weeks off from her business (which she left in the hands of her husband and staff) in order to help manage activities in one of the Obama centers around town.  I greatly admire someone willing to leave her small business to work on Obama's campaign.  Lilla was even willing to risk losing a customer or two by declaring herself for Obama.  She reported she had one offended customer to whom she wrote an explanation of her activities in "rather Obamaesque" terms.

Our chauffeurs the second day were two younger women (in the middle of the photo) from the South Bay, Desiree and Katja, who were mothers and business owners, who came to Reno for the weekend.  They were delightful company and extremely well organized with a GPS and bottled water in the car.

The other great Obama supporters I met were waiters and waitresses in the hotel restaurant, including a self-identified lesbian waitress who proudly showed us her diversity campaign button and a Latino waiter, Alex, who took great pride in his work on the election and spent a lot of time building enthusiasm for Obama in the Latino community.

My only problem during my visit was learning how to pronounce the name of the state.  It's Neva(as in apple)da, not Nevahda.  John Kerry maded the mistake of calling the state Nevahda in 2004 and paid for it.  I worked hard to correct my pronunciation so as not to seem too East Coast.  I think it worked, but I was glad to get home and revert to Nevahda.

I have a feeling we just might win Nevada for Obama.  The polls have the two candidates neck and neck, but we are definitely better organized.  On Election Night, I'll be keeping my eye on Washoe County.