Zoe Lofgren has been the congresswoman for the nineteenth district of California– which encompasses Santa Clara county and the city of San Jose–since 2013. Previously, she served in the House of Representatives as the representative for the ninth, tenth, and sixteenth districts at different time points from 1995-2013. She is a lifelong Bay Area resident and the daughter of a truck driver. Zoe is the Chair of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation and currently serves as a member of the House Judiciary Committee, Committee of House Administration, and the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee (About).
The nineteenth district in California is one of the most economically-booming districts in the United States. Encompassing San Jose, the proclaimed “Capital of Silicon Valley”, this district is home to a lot of innovation and wealth as San Jose is considered the strongest metropolitan economy in the United States (Garfield) due to the immense growth of the tech industry. The average yearly income is over $71,000 dollars, significantly above the national mean. Diversity-wise, this district is 52.4% white, 25.8% Asian, 3.1% African American with 41.3% of the district of Latin or Hispanic origin.
From 1994-2012, this district historically voted Republican until Lofgren’s election to the nineteenth district in 2013. This district leans Democratic in a 3:1 ratio since the November 2012 election. This dramatic shift is cited to have occurred due to the influx of young entrepreneurs, who primarily vote Democrat, moving into the district due to San Jose’s rise as a tech center. California’s nineteenth district also possesses a long history of re-electing incumbents. Lofgren as the incumbent and as the Democratic candidate is not seen as vulnerable in the upcoming election (Ballotpedia).
As the location of California’s nineteenth district is in the heart of Silicon Valley, the major industry in this area is technology. Ebay, Flextronics, Cisco, Apple, and Stanford University are some of the largest employers in the district (Labormarketinfo). With the largest Hispanic population in Northern California, immigration is an extremely important issue with the vast majority of constituents desiring complete immigration reform prioritizing family unification and bringing the brightest minds to Santa Clara county. Income inequality is a very real problem in this area as the wages of the “tech elite” have risen dramatically while the wages of the middle class have remained stagnant. People are also really interested in sustainability and are looking for ways to gain energy independence through renewable means (Johnson).
The state of California as a whole, and specifically California’s nineteenth district truly prioritize gun reform. Therefore, Congresswoman Lofgren is firmly against the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. She believes that this bill would allow those who should not be permitted to handle handguns the opportunity to tote them around California without others knowing. She would like to defeat the bill and leave conceal and carry regulations to the decision of the individual states, in order to maintain the validity of California’s strict concealed carry permit process. To receive a concealed carry permit in California, it takes four to six weeks and requires the applicant to give character witnesses, apply to the California Court of Justice, take a firearm safety course, and take a psychological examine. Afterwards, one must convince local sheriff’s office that it is a necessity for the individual to pack and carry such as the applicant being in personal and imminent danger. The statement of necessity is followed by a morality test, which law enforcement makes extremely difficult to pass, as possessing “good moral character” is an extremely loose and fluid term. Especially in a highly populated area like District Nineteen, being granted a permit is extremely rare (Peoplevine). This piece of legislation would override the strict concealed carry regulations in California and give access to gun owners from states with more relaxed permit laws who would not necessarily be granted a California permit the ability to conceal and carry in California, which Lofgren thoroughly opposes.
Congresswoman Lofgren believes that the best way to find success in blocking this piece of legislation is through pointing out the numerous ways this bill is unconstitutional and goes against the American political system. She feels this piece of legislation goes against the primary ideals of United States federalism. She would make the point that the cultures and norms in each state are different surrounding guns, which is why each state makes their own gun laws (Skaggs). A question she would ask is whether this bill goes against the idea of popular sovereignty because the people of the state are granted no say in the lawmaking process in determining who is allowed to conceal and carry in their state. She would also ask: since the 10th amendment gives the states the power of policing, and maintaining the welfare and safety of its citizens, isn’t this law unconstitutional as it takes this privilege away from the individual states? Regulation from individual states are rendered useless when others are able to negate such specifications and receive conceal and carry licenses from other states with little to no monitoring. Does this law just give the legislative power to the state that has the fewest regulations on conceal and carry?
While many Republicans might cite the Second Amendment as the justification on why states should permit conceal and carry licenses to be valid in every state since it gives the “right to bear arms,” nowhere in the Second Amendment does it prevent states from setting standards on who can conceal a handgun, nor does it prevent the state from executing these regulations on residents and non-residents alike. If one must retake medical certification exams as well as legal certification tests to begin working in another state shouldn’t the same logic roll over to guns? If a gun is a weapon with the capacity to kill, shouldn’t the safety training course be mandated across state lines if one needs to take another test if they want to be an orthodontist? It seems that the priorities of the American legislative branch are more about regulating those who save lives and better lives instead of preventing the lives from being lost in the first place.
In Murphy v. NCAA, the Supreme Court ruled that since there was no national standard for sports betting, the federal government lacked the power to to force mandate states to follow such restrictions. This ruling carries over to the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act (Tirschwell). Since there is no federal standard for conceal and carry, the states cannot be forced to adhere to this bill. The federal government cannot override states authority in matters that it is not within the government’s power to do so. Thus, until there is a bottom-line standard for conceal and carry regulations, this bill is deemed null.
Works Cited
- “About.” Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, United States House of Representatives , 4 May 2018, lofgren.house.gov/about.
- “California’s 19th Congressional District.” Ballotpedia, ballotpedia.org/California%27s_19th_Congressional_District.
- Garfield, Leanna. “The San Francisco Bay Area’s Economy Is ‘Defying Gravity’ – and It Reveals How Powerful the Tech Industry Has Become.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 25 Apr. 2018,
www.businessinsider.com/san-francisco-area-best-us-economy-2018-4. - Johnson, Steven. “Ro Khanna on the Politics of Silicon Valley.” Wired, Conde Nast, 25 July 2018, www.wired.com/story/ro-khanna-says-silicon-valley-libertarianism-is-dead/.
- “Major Employers in Santa Clara County.” Employment Development Department, www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/majorer/countymajorer.asp?CountyCode=000085.
- PeopleVine, CCW Safe via. “Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act – CCW Safe National | CCW Safe Weapon Liability | CCW Safe Defense Attorneys.” CCW Safe, ccwsafe.com/news/concealed-carry-reciprocity-act.
- Skaggs, Adam. “The GOP’s New Concealed Carry Bill Is As Unconstitutional As It Is Unprecedented.” Slate Magazine, Slate, 15 Dec. 2017, www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/12/the_gop_s_new_concealed_carry_law_is_as_unconstitutional_as_it_is_unprecedented.html
- Tirschwell, Eric. “The NRA Versus the Constitution.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 20 May 2018, www.wsj.com/articles/the-nra-versus-the-constitution-1526841395.