Obama Demands a Vote on Gun Reforms As Republicans Threaten to Filibuster

President Obama speaks out for gun control reforms at the White House in March surrounded by mothers victimized by gun violence.Prensa Internacional/ZUMAPRESS.com

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


On Monday evening, four days after Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy signed some of the nation’s toughest gun control measures into law, and on the day that Democrats began debating discussing their gun control reform package on the Senate floor, President Barack Obama gave an impassioned speech at the University of Hartford urging a vote on measures that would expand background checks, renew the assault weapons ban, and ban magazines holding more than 10 rounds. “All of them are common-sense,” Obama said. “All of them deserve a vote.”

Meanwhile, 11 more Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have threatened to join Sens. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee in a filibuster to “oppose any legislation that would infringe on the American people’s constitutional right to bear arms, or their ability to exercise this right without being subjected to government surveillance” (PDF). Although Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised a vote on the assault-weapon and high-capacity magazine bans, they stand no chance of passage and are off the table entirely in bipartisan compromise talks.

Polling by news organizations and Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns has indicated an overwhelming public support for universal background checks. But for Senate Republicans, the devil’s in the details: Most have balked at a proposal to require record-keeping on sales by private sellers, arguing that it would lead to a national registry of gun owners. In reality, the proposal would not change the existing law that requires government records for commercial sales to be destroyed within 24 hours.

Ladd Everitt, a spokesman for the Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, dismisses concerns about record-keeping as a “conspiracy theory.” Still, he says, gun control groups expect Republican senators to make good on their filibuster threat and says there is an effort underway to rally victims of gun violence and other supporters of gun control* to “filibuster the filibuster” by reading the names of gun violence victims since Newtown if Republicans do.

Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat and member of the National Rifle Association, is continuing to negotiate with Republicans including Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey to support a compromise bill that would require background checks for private sales at gun shows and on the internet but would exempt sales between family members and temporary transfers between gun owners with hunting licenses. Efforts to expand record-keeping to private sales, however, have stalled talks with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), whom Democrats view as another potential cosponsor of bipartisan legislation. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has yet to take sides, but in the past has supported state laws requiring background checks at gun shows and last weekend implored his colleagues to drop their filibuster threat and allow a vote.

At Hartford, Obama called the filibuster threat a “political stunt” and echoed many of the same themes from his White House speech in late March alongside mothers affected by gun violence. He was introduced by the parents of Dylan Hockley, one of 20 first graders killed at Sandy Hook Elementary in December, and said he was as “determined as ever” to honor the victims by passing new gun control legislation.

“If you’re an American who wants to do something to prevent more families from knowing the immeasurable anguish that these families know, now is the time to act,” Obama said.

Correction: This story previously stated that gun control groups were asking Senate Democrats to read names of gun violence victims. There is no plan to do that.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate