Meet the 45 Senators Who Blocked Background Checks

President Obama said that “there was no coherent argument for why we wouldn’t do this. It came down to politics.”


An amendment proposed by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) to require background checks for commercial gun sales (but not for sales between “friends and neighbors”) was shot down Wednesday afternoon in a 54-46 vote, failing to capture the 60 votes it needed to advance. The bill would have been a modest victory for gun control advocates, while ceding numerous concessions to the gun lobby (the NRA initially called it a “positive development.”) Nevertheless, only four Republicans voted for the proposal, with 41 voting against it. Five Democrats rejected the proposal as well (Reid was a special case; see below). Standing with families of Sandy Hook victims, President Obama said that “there was no coherent argument for why we wouldn’t do this. It came down to politics.”

Here’s a list so you can see how your senator voted:

Republicans Who Voted for the Proposal

  • Susan Collins (R-Maine)
  • Mark Kirk (R-Ill.)
  • John McCain (R-Ariz.)
  • Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)

Democrats Who Voted Against the Proposal

  • Max Baucus (D-Mont.)    
  • Mark Begich (D-Alaska)    
  • Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.)    
  • Mark Pryor (D-Ark.)    
  • Harry Reid (D-Nev.)  (Voted “no” as a procedural move to preserve option to reintroduce the bill.)

Republicans Who Voted Against the Proposal

  • Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)
  • Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.)
  • John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)
  • Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
  • John Boozman (R-Ark.)
  • Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
  • Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)
  • Dan Coats (R-Ind.)
  • Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)
  • Thad Cochran (R-Miss.)
  • Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)
  • John Cornyn (R-Texas)
  • Mike Crapo (R-Idaho)
  • Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
  • Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.)
  • Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
  • Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.)
  • Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
  • Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
  • Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)
  • Dean Heller (R-Nev.)
  • John Hoeven (R-N.D.)
  • Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
  • Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)
  • Mike Johanns (R-Neb.)
  • Ron Johnson (R-Wis.)
  • Mike Lee (R-Utah)
  • Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
  • Jerry Moran (R-Kan.)
  • Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
  • Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
  • Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
  • James Risch (R-Idaho)
  • Pat Roberts (R-Kan.)
  • Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
  • Timothy Scott (R-S.C.)
  • Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)
  • Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
  • John Thune (R-S.D.)
  • David Vitter (R-La.)
  • Roger Wicker (R-Miss.)

Democrats Who Voted for the Proposal

  • Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)
  • Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
  • Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)
  • Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)
  • Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
  • Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.)
  • Ben Cardin (D-Md.)
  • Thomas Carper (D-Del.)
  • Bob Casey (D-Pa.)
  • Christopher Coons (D-Del.)
  • William “Mo” Cowan (D-Mass.)
  • Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.)
  • Richard Durbin (D-Ill.)
  • Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
  • Al Franken (D-Minn.)
  • Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)
  • Kay Hagan (D-N.C.)
  • Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)
  • Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)
  • Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
  • Tim Johnson (D-S.D.)
  • Timothy Kaine (D-Va.)
  • Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
  • Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
  • Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)
  • Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
  • Carl Levin (D-Mich.)
  • Joe Manchin (D-W.V.)
  • Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
  • Robert Menendez (D-N.J.)
  • Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.)
  • Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.)
  • Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.)
  • Patty Murray (D-Wash.)
  • Bill Nelson (D-Fla.)
  • John Reed (D-R.I.)
  • Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.)
  • Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)
  • Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)
  • Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)
  • Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)
  • Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
  • Mark Udall (D-Colo.)
  • Tom Udall (D-N.M.)
  • Mark Warner (D-Va.)
  • Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
  • Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
  • Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Independents

  • Angus King (I-Maine): Yea
  • Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.): Yea

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