Boehner Stymies Gun Reform

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


Gun control advocates, stand down.

That’s the message being sent by newly engaveled House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who, The Hill reports, plans to reject the gun-control legislation offered by Rep. Pete King (R-NY) in the wake of the Tucson massacre. King’s bill would prevent people from carrying guns within 1,000 feet of members of Congress. A long-time proponent for stricter gun laws, King says his bill is meant to protect government officials and the public alike: by protecting elected officials, the thinking goes, constituents will feel safer meeting them in public.

But it doesn’t look like the GOP leadership is united with Boehner in his stance against the bill. Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) plans to “reserve judgment” until King’s bill is ready, according to The Hill. The story doesn’t explain why Boehner plans to reject King’s bill. 

But Boehner’s apparent objection to the bill shows, yet again, how tough it is to tighten gun laws in the face of the formidable gun lobby. And reform advocates on the Hill have little faith in the fate of any meaningful reform legislation. “Anything you can get through the gun lobby is going to have little consequence,” Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), told The Hill. “I don’t see the likelihood of much progress—I don’t see much hope.” Neither Boehner’s position nor Moran’s dour predictions bode well for Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), who on Monday promised to introduce new gun control legislation that addresses the high-capacity ammunition clips used by alleged Tucson gunman Jared Lee Loughner.

Despite showing a strong, sensible, supportive face—by suspending debate on health care repeal, for example—the split between Boehner and Cantor suggests that the GOP senior brass hasn’t quite found its legislative footing in the wake of the Tucson tragedy. Cantor could just be waiting to see how public opinion settles over the next several days before yanking the rug out from under King. His patience, in other words, could prove savvy if turns out that tighter laws—say, for instance, like restoring the ban on assault weapons that expired in 2004—are what the people want. Still, odds are that any substantive gun control bill won’t see the light of day. 

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