House Democrats fortified on the chamber’s floor in an attempt to force votes on gun control. But one political science professor says “the odds that gun control could pass the House — after failing in the Senate — are slim to none.”
Matthew Green, an associate professor of politics at Catholic University of America, analyzed the sit-in on the Washington Post’s Monkey Cage blog.
“If history is any guide, yesterday’s ‘sit-in’ is unlikely to produce any legislative victories for Democrats,” Green writes. He analyzed two previous sit-in attempts: Democrats occupying the House floor in 1995 over budget bills, and Republicans occupying the floor in 2008 in an attempt to push expanded oil drilling. “Republicans went ahead with their budget showdown against President Clinton in 1995, and in 2008 Democrats only permitted a vote on a largely symbolic oil drilling bill. Today’s House Republicans have little incentive to yield to Democrats.”
Although it likely won’t lead to gun control measures being passed in this session of Congress, it could still have other short and long-term effects, Green says. For example, after the 2008 Republican occupation, Obama started using the “all of the above” phrase Republicans used on energy. The sit-in could also lead to the GOP majority giving more leeway to Democrats on procedural issues, like allowing liberal amendments.
Although Green doesn’t mention it, the sit-in could potentially help Democrats win more seats in the 2016 election because they’re already fundraising off the stunt.
Still, social media sets the ongoing sit-in apart from past floor occupations, Green says. “Reporters tweeted regular updates Wednesday of the Democrats’ ‘sit-in,’ and several legislators — ignoring the rules of the chamber — sent live video feeds of the protest via Facebook and Periscope (which were also aired by C-SPAN). The event made national news and generated tens of thousands of texts, tweets and posts from U.S. residents.”
Interestingly, Green notes a few things all three House floor occupations have in common. “As in 1995 and 2008, the House minority largely agrees on the need for a particular legislative remedy (gun control), has a majority of the public on its side, and expects that bringing attention to the issue will help it and its presidential candidate in the upcoming elections.”
Jason Russell is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
