The outpouring of grief and anger and determination we’ve seen in the past two weeks from some of the young survivors of the Parkland massacre is extremely encouraging. And they aren’t the only ones energized by these latest slayings, which we sanitize by calling them mass shootings. As Tiffany Shu at The New York Times writes this Wednesday morning:
Campaign Action
Since the Parkland massacre, a range of people and coalitions have converged on the nationwide battleground over gun control. That includes individuals trying to make a statement, activist organizations sensing a shift in sentiment, informal parents’ clubs, marketing executives, niche media groups, celebrities and shooting survivors.
Through an uncoordinated but simpatico collection of Twitter hashtags, retweeted lists, Facebook groups, online petitions and carefully orchestrated campaigns, the protest has pushed a major bank, several car rental companies, two airlines and other businesses to publicly cut ties with the N.R.A.
Can this new grassroots coalescence overcome the obstacles to gun reform, chief among which is the NRA and its avid fans in Congress, which is the entirety of the Republican caucus, as least in the Senate, as well as some Democrats.
In the aftermath of other shootings—when club-goers or concert-goers or church-goers or first-graders have been gunned down—there has always been a hint of hope in the immediate aftermath that this time, just maybe this time, legislative changes will finally be made. However, this long after such a shooting, that hope has usually begun to fade as this time slowly becomes like all the other times.
News coverage dwindles, far-right conspiracy theorists-cum-propagandists claim the slayings were faked or planned by liberals or lied about by “crisis actors,” lawmakers in thrall to or in fear of the NRA avoid serious or even tepid action, the hardcore activists continue their push for reform but less visibly, and in a few months, somebody else decides to slaughter a bunch of people with one of those ubiquitous weapons originally designed for the military. And the cycle begins again.
Usually by now after one of these massacres, the leaders of the National Rifle Association are smugly and correctly assuming that the latest bloodbath will not cause them to lose ground in their marketing campaign to sell more guns. As part of this effort, for the past 30-plus years, the NRA has been phenomenally successful—except in a few states—at getting gun laws loosened more than they were during the so-called “wild west” era, and at keeping federal laws and programs from doing anything more effective than they already do to tamp down gun violence.
This time does seem different. The force really does seem to be with those seeking tighter gun laws. The poise, presence, emotional depth and articulateness of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School survivors have galvanized the most powerful traction on the matter of gun-law reform since the Sandy Hook school slayings in 2012. As in the past, nonetheless, the odds of making serious, effective changes before next January are very long indeed.
Bless the youth who are calling out lawmakers and challenging the NRA head to head. They’re dealing with bullshit from critics by calling it bullshit. They are, as a colleague notes, like an invading army, armed with righteous ferocity. In addition, a plethora of ad hoc and existing gun reform organizations are seizing the moment. Companies are being pressured to join other companies that have walked away from long-time arrangements with the NRA to provide the organization’s members with discounts and other deals. And polls like this one show that huge majorities favor a universal background check for any gun buyer from any source as well as an assault weapon ban.
As noted, this is an encouraging development. The passion is there. The insistence is there. We’ll see soon enough if the persistence is there. It will be needed. Because in 2013, both a UBC bill and an AWB bill failed to pass the Senate even with children and their teachers dead. The Senate is skewed further to the right than it was then. Today there are 41 Republicans, including most of the ones who were in the Senate in 2013, who have A or A+ grades from the NRA. Enough by themselves to block any legislation the gun lobby doesn’t like.
Just two weeks after Parkland, even a modest bill to improve background checks has a good chance of failing due to GOP intransigence. Which brings us to the elemental questions.
Can all the activist energy that has emerged as a consequence of the latest murders be transformed into stricter gun legislation? Can something get passed this year that couldn’t get passed previously? If so, what specific legislation? If not, can the people who want stricter laws effectively use a failure to pass these laws this year as an issue in November that helps defeat incumbents in the House and Senate who oppose them?
The same questions can be asked regarding state legislatures. That, however, is a subject for a future commentary. Many gun reform proposals have been tossed about social media and advocacy groups. These go from the most modest ideas all the way to registering and licensing every owner and every firearm, as well as the adoption of the rest of the Australian model, which limits who can own semi-auto rifles and shotguns, limits them to a magazine capacity of five rounds, tightly restricts who can possess a handgun, and mandates a 30-day waiting period before an application for a license can be approved.
While even the suggestion of such measures make foes of stricter gun laws apopletic, they are also highly controversial among some progressives.
On the other hand, universal background checks and an assault weapons ban are changes Americans already strongly agree they want to see enacted into law. That Quinnipiac Poll linked above shows 67 percent favor an assault weapons ban. You can be certain 67 percent of Congress doesn’t. The poll also found 97 percent of Americans in favor of a universal background check. There’s not 97 senators behind that either.
Currently, no UBC bill has been introduced in Congress. In the Senate, Dianne Feinstein’s assault weapons ban introduced late last year has 26 co-sponsors. In the House, 156 members of the 193-member Democratic caucus are co-sponsors of the assault weapons ban newly introduced by Reps. David N. Cicilline (D-RI) and Ted Deutch (D-FL). Not a Republican co-sponsor for either, and none on the horizon.
In 2013, in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, Sen. Feinstein introduced a similar assault weapons ban. With the two Democratic-caucusing independents, the Democrats held the Senate then, 55-45. But the bill needed 60 votes to pass. Instead it received just 40 votes—38 Democrats, one Independent, and one Republican. Fifteen Democrats from 12 states opposed the ban. In the Senate today, seven of those 15 Democrats have been replaced by Republicans. And five of them are running for re-election this year, four from red states.
Since 2013, two Republicans—Joni Ernst of Nebraska and Shelley Capito of West Virginia—have replaced two Democrats who voted for the assault weapons ban. Two Democrats—Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire and Doug Jones of Alabama—have replaced two Republicans who voted no. So no numerical gain there.
Two senators who voted no in 2013—Mark Warner (D-VA), who is up for re-election in 2020 and has an A rating from the NRA, and Michael Bennet (D-CO), who was re-elected in 2016 and has an NRA rating of C+—have both indicated they might consider switching this time and voting for an assault weapons ban.
Another no voter in 2013, Tom Udall (D-NM) [C-] , who is not running for re-election until 2020 , may also be persuadable. Angus King (I-ME), another no vote who caucuses with the Democrats, is running for re-election in 2018. His 2013 vote wasn’t enough to keep him from getting an F from the NRA. He might also be persuadable.
Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Joe Manchin (D-WV), and Jon Tester (D-MT) are the Democrats running this year who voted against the 2013 ban. Perhaps one or two of them could also be persuaded to vote yes this time.
What’s that add up to? Well, 43-44 Democratic votes for a ban this year.
Even with all 47 Democrats and Independents onboard, a ban would be short 13 votes. And even if Democrats win all 25 Senate seats they have to defend this year and also beat the five Republicans who are running, that would still produce only 52 votes for a ban.
Either a lot of Republican minds are going to have to be changed or a lot of Republicans are going to have to be booted from the Senate. Probably both. Perhaps doing the latter will help with doing some of the former as Republicans see the handwriting on the wall.
Thus, despite how encouraging it is to see those activist high schoolers shaming our lawmakers without pussyfooting around, the chance of meaningful gun reform happening this year at the federal level is vanishingly slim. Which is why gun reform activists, including all those wonderful high schoolers, need to be persistent, relentless and in this struggle for the long haul.
••• ••• •••
Below are some details about senators focused around the 2013 AWB vote. Included is their NRA grade in brackets. Set off by squiggly {} brackets, I’ve included the amount selected Republican senators have received from the NRA during their entire political career, including money NRA spent separately to attack their opponents. You can see how much other incumbents have received in NRA money at OpenSecrets spreadsheet.
DEMOCRATS WHO OPPOSED THE 2013 ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN
Max Baucus (D-MT) [A+]: replaced by Steve Daines (R) in 2015 [A+]
Mark Begich (D-AK) [A-]: replaced by Dan Sullivan (R) in 2015 [B+]
Kay Hagan (D-NC) [D+]: replaced by Thom Tillis (R) in 2015 [A+] {$4,418,012}
Tim Johnson (D-SD) [A]: replaced by Mike Rounds (R) in 2015 [A]
Mary Landrieu (D-LA) [C+]: replaced by Bill Cassidy (R) in 2015 [A] {$2,861,047}
Mark Pryor (D-AR) [C-]: replaced by Tom Cotton (R) in 2015 [A] {$1,968,714}
Mark Udall (D-CO) replaced: by Cory Gardner (R) [A] in 2015 {$3,879,064}
These five Democrats who opposed the 2013 assault weapon ban are all seeking re-election this year: Joe Donnelly (D-IN) 2018 [A]; Martin Heinrich (D-NM) [B]; Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) [A]; Joe Manchin (D-WV) [A]; Jon Tester (D-MT) [A].
Also opposing were Tom Udall of New Mexico, Michael Bennet of Colorado, Mark Warner of Virginia, and Angus King of Maine.
DEMOCRATS WHO SUPPORTED THE AWB IN 2013
Cross-out indicates an incumbent who lost re-election or retired since that vote.
34 of the 39 Democratic senators who voted for the AWB got F grades from the NRA
Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) re-elected in 2016 [F]
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) [F] replaced by Kamila Harris (D) in 2017 [F]
Sherrod Brown (D-OH) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Maria Cantwell (D-WA) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Ben Cardin (D-MD) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Tom Carper (D-DE) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Bob Casey Jr. (D-PA) running for re-election in 2018 [B+]
Chris Coons (D-DE) re-elected for first full term in 2014 [F]
William Cowan (D-MA) stand-in replaced by Edward Markey in 2013, elected 2014. [F]
David Durbin (D-IL) re-elected in 2014 [F]
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Al Franken (D-MN) [F] (resigned under duress) replaced by Tina Smith (D) who is running for election in 2018 [F]
Kristen Gillibrand (D-NY) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Tom Harkin (D-IA) [F] retired and was replaced by *Joni Ernst (R) in 2015 [A] {$3,124,273}
Mazie Hirono (D-HI) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Tim Kaine (D-VA) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) [F] replaced after death by *Cory Booker (D) in 2013 [F]
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) re-elected in 2016 [C]
Carl Levin (D-MI) [F] replaced by Gary Peters (D) in 2014 [F]
Claire McCaskill (D-MO) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Bob Menendez (D-NJ) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Jeff Merkley (D-OR) re-elected in 2014 [F]
Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) [F] replaced by Chris van Hollen (D) in 2017 [F]
Chris Murphy (D-CT) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Patty Murray (D-WA) re-elected in 2016 [F]
Bill Nelson (D-FL) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Jack Reed (D-RI) re-elected in 2014 [F]
Harry Reid (D-NV) [B] replaced by Catherine Cortez Masto (D) in 2017 [C]
John D. “Jay” Rockefeller (D-WV) [D] replaced by *Shelley Capito (R) in 2015 [A]
Bernie Sanders (I-VT) running for re-election in 2018 [D-]
Brian Schatz (D-HI) re-elected in 2016 [F]
Chuck Schumer (D-NY) re-elected in 2016 [F]
Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) re-elected in 2014 [F]
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) running for re-election in 2018 [F]
Ron Wyden (D-OR) re-elected in 2016 [F]
Plus:
Republican Mark Kirk (IL) [D-] replaced by Democrat Tammy Duckworth [F]
GOP NO ON AWB VOTES IN 2013.
Lamar Alexander (R-TN) re-elected in 2014 [B]
Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) [A] replaced by *Maggie Hassan (D) in 2017 [D]
John Barrasso (R-WY) running for re-election in 2018 [A]
Roy Blunt (R-MO) re-elected in 2014 [A] {$4,551,146}
John Boozman (R-AR) re-elected in 2016 [A]
Richard Burr (R-NC) re-elected in 2016 [A] {$6,986,620}
Bill Cassidy (R) in 2015 [A] {$2,861,047}
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) [A] replaced by David Perdue in 2015 [A] {1,985,773}
Dan Coats (R-IN) replaced in 2018 by *Todd Young (R) [C+] {$2,896,732}
Tom Coburn (R-OK) [A] replaced in 2015 by James Lankford, who won a full term in 2016 [A]
Thad Cochran (R-MS) re-elected in 2014 [A]
Susan Collins (R-ME) re-elected in 2014 [C+]
Bob Corker (R-TN) retiring in January 2019 [A]
John Cornyn (R-TX) re-elected in 2014 [A]
Tom Cotton (R) in 2015 [A] {$1,968,714}
Mike Crapo (R-ID) re-elected in 2014 [A+]
Ted Cruz (R-TX) running for re-election in 2018 [A]
Steve Daines (R) in 2015 [A+]
Mike Enzi (R-WY) re-elected in 2014 [A]
Deb Fischer (R-NE) running for re-election in 2018 [A+]
Jeff Flake (R-AZ) retiring in January 2019 [A]
Cory Gardner (R) [A] in 2015 {$3,879,064}
Lindsey Graham (R-SC) re-elected in 2014 [A]
Charles Grassley (R-IA) re-elected in 2014 [A]
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) retiring in January 2018 [A+]
Dean Heller (R-NV) running for re-election in 2018 [A]
John Hoeven (R-ND) re-elected in 2016 [A+]
Jim Inhofe (R-OK) re-elected in 2016 [A+]
Johnny Isakson (R-GA) re-elected in 2016 [A]
Mike Johanns (R-NE) replaced by Ben Sasse (R) in 2015 [AQ]
Ron Johnson (R-WI) re-elected in 2016 [A] {$1,269,846}
Mike Lee (R-UT) re-elected in 2016 [A]
John McCain (R-AZ) will soon not be a factor [C+] {$7,755,701}
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) re-elected in 2014 [A] {1,261,874}
Jerry Moran (R-KS) [A] re-elected in 2016 [A]
Linda Murkowski (R-AK) re-elected in 2016 [A]
Rand Paul (R-KY) re-elected in 2016 [A]
Rob Portman (R-OH) re-elected in 2016 [A] {$3,061,941}
Jim Risch (R-ID) re-elected in 2014 [A+]
Pat Roberts (R-KS) re-elected in 2014 [A] {$1,584,153}
Mike Rounds (R) in 2015 [A]
Marco Rubio (R-FL) re-elected in 2016 [B+] {$3,303,355}
Tim Scott (R-SC) elected to a full term in 2016 [A]
Dan Sullivan (R) in 2015 [B+]
Jeff Sessions (R-AL) [A+] replaced by *Doug Jones (D) in 2017 (No rating, but NRA spent $55,000 to defeat him.)
Richard Shelby (R-AL) re-elected in 2016 [A+]
John Thune (R-SD) re-elected in 2016 [A+]
Thom Tillis (R) in 2015 [A+] {$4,418,012}
Pat Toomey (R-PA) re-elected in 2016 [C] {$1,467,821}
David Vitter (R-LA) replaced by John N. Kennedy (R) in 2017 [A]