In the heath care debate, the NRA successfully lobbied to ban insurance companies from charging higher premiums to people who keep guns in their homes, despite the obvious, um, health risks. In the campaign finance debate, the NRA successfully bore a loophole so wide in the DISCLOSE Act (a measure passed by the House intended to force groups active in political spending to disclose their financial donors) that it exempted many large nonprofit organizations, including the NRA. And in the financial reform debate, the NRA successfully tacked on some language to a bill restricting credit card lenders that allowed people to carry loaded guns in national parks.

The list goes on. The reason for the group’s bullishness, according to the Times, has to do with the courts:

The N.R.A.’s expanding portfolio is an outgrowth of its success in the courts, Congressional officials and political analysts said. With the Supreme Court ruling last month for the second time since 2008 that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to have a gun, the N.R.A. now finds that its defining battle is a matter of settled law, and it has the resources to expand into other areas.

When the N.R.A. had a narrower range of targets, it relied on a core group of political figures and met with stiffer resistance from vocal gun control advocates in Congress and outside groups. It now has freer rein to leave its mark politically on issues that once seemed out of its reach.

Politico also had a story yesterday that argues that right-wing groups are almost as angry at the NRA as left-wing gun control advocates. It claims conservatives are fuming over the NRA’s consideration of an endorsement of the gun-friendly Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, and for agreeing “to play ball” with Democrats on campaign finance legislation. On the whole, however, I’d say gun control advocates are still winning in the “reasons to be angry” competition.

Here, for example, is a video of Alabama militiaman Mike Vanderboegh telling reporters that there will be “consequences” if policymakers try to restrict gun rights.

Vanderboegh: I’m calling on the government to understand that there are going to be consequences to pushing people like us any farther back.

Questioner: More Ruby Ridges? More Wacos?

Vanderboegh: Precisely.

From comments like that, you’d think that the House was about to tighten D.C.’s gun laws, rather than gutting them.

In preview, the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees has released examples of some of the activities soon to be permitted under the new statute.

In Wyoming’s Yellowstone Park, for example, backcountry hikers will be free to openly carry firearms. At Virginia’s Wolf Trap Foundation for the Performing Arts, concertgoers — including those picnicking on the lawn —  will have the same opportunity. In Alaska’s Denali and Colorado’s Mesa Verde parks, handguns in holsters might soon be in fashion. Visitors to Pennsylvania’s Gettysburg National Park — a popular field-trip destination for the area’s public schools — will be able to carry rifles across those battlefields. The list goes on.

For it’s part, CNPSR opposes the changes, citing the heightened risk for rangers and the increased likelihood that wildlife — as well as natural and historical monuments — will become irresistible targets.

“A feeling of safety and security will be replaced by wariness and suspicion,” Bill Wade, chair of CNPSR’s executive council and former head of Virginia’s Shenandoah National Park, said in a statement. “This diminishes some of the ‘specialness and reverence’ our citizens have long accorded to their national parks.”

Too bad for Wade that his voice doesn’t carry quite so far on Capitol Hill as that of the National Rifle Association.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar today issued a notice of withdrawal of nearly 1 million acres of BLM and U.S. Forest Service land around the Grand Canyon from new mining claims for the next two years to allow for more study and analysis.

The move drew the praise of conservation groups such as the Pew Environment Group, which has been hammering on the antiquated 1872 mining law and the pressing need for reform in light of thousands of new mining claims for minerals such as uranium, copper and gold in and around some of the nation’s most treasured national parks.

The first installs sweeping consumer protections for credit card users, including a prohibition on rate hikes for existing balances (unless payments are more than 60 days late) and a minimum 45-day warning when rate hikes are coming. The proposal, sponsored by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), passed the House Wednesday by an overwhelming 361 to 64. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, representing the banking hub of South Dakota, was the only Democrat to vote against the bill, which the Senate approved Tuesday by a vote of 90 to five.

The changes will go into effect nine months after President Obama signs the bill into law.

The second vote, arriving moments later, empowers gun owners to bring loaded weapons — either concealed or open — into national parks unless state law specifically prohibits the practice (most state laws don’t). The count was 279 to 147, with 105 Democrats joining all but two Republicans in support.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Wednesday that the president will sign the bill, despite his opposition to the gun provision.

That’s right. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) is pushing a provision to overturn the Obama administration’s dismissal of a controversial Bush administration rule allowing concealed weapons in national parks and refuges.

The vote will take place before 6 p.m. this evening, with Coburn and other supporters requiring 60 votes for passage.

What this has to do with credit cards, it’s tough to say.

The news is a major victory for gun control advocates, environmental groups and some former park service employees, but the issue isn’t dead just yet. The National Rifle Association is still fighting to install the rule change, and a group of bipartisan senators introduced legislation earlier in the month to do just that. Stay tuned …

A statement from the Brady campaign puts it well:

“The Bush Administration’s parting gift for the gun lobby to allow hidden weapons in our parks threatens the safety of these national treasures and those who visit them,” said Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke. “We should not be making it easier for dangerous people to carry firearms in our parks. We urge the proper authorities to use common sense, and stop this senseless rule.”

‘Nuff said.