Democrats reacted swiftly and angrily to the mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif. All three Democratic presidential candidates weighed in, as did most of the party’s congressional leadership.
Anger is an understandable reaction to learning that innocents have been gunned down. So is fear. But Democrats from President Obama and Hillary Clinton to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid weren’t afraid of renewing calls for gun control when they renewed those calls on Wednesday.
That wouldn’t always have been the case. No, the debate over guns never ended and liberal Democrats were always more likely to call for stricter laws in safe Democratic districts in blueish areas with relatively few gun owners.
Some Democratic leaders believed that gun control measures like the assault weapons ban, signed into law by President Bill Clinton, helped Republicans gain control of Congress. When the ban expired a decade later, Democrats tried to extend it didn’t fight as hard as one might expect. It lapsed.
Many Democrats also thought the primary campaign against Bill Bradley pushed 2000 presidential nominee Al Gore too far to the left on guns. The stance cost Gore Arkansas, West Virginia and his home state of Tennessee. If he had carried any one of those states, he would have won the presidency even without Florida’s hanging chads. Former Gore national spokesman Doug Hattaway went so far as to say “there’s not a potent pro-gun control constituency in national elections.”
The top progressive candidate for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination was Howard Dean, who had tended to oppose gun control as governor of gun-friendly Vermont. Dean’s campaign for the White House faltered, but he did become chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
When Reid became the Senate Democratic leader, he was still regarded as a sometime ally of gun rights activists. The National Rifle Association reportedly contemplated a Reid endorsement as late as 2010. None of this stopped Reid from becoming the top Democrat in the Senate.
In 2006 and 2008, even gun-control liberals like Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emanuel recruited pro-gun Democrats to run for Congress in districts where gun regulations were a political loser. Jim Webb, a relatively pro-gun Democrat, was the darling of the liberal netroots when he ran for Senate in Virginia.
Democrats still prefer euphemisms like “commonsense gun safety laws” to the phrase “gun control,” and like vague calls to “end gun violence” even better. Nevertheless, with each mass shooting event during the Obama administration, the party’s politicians grow more assertive in their calls for firearms restrictions.
Bernie Sanders hasn’t gotten the same Vermont benefit of the doubt on guns as Dean. His occasional votes against gun control and brief alliance with the NRA during his first successful congressional race are significant barriers to his efforts to consolidate liberal support. Martin O’Malley appears to be running against the NRA more than Clinton. And Clinton has led the charge against guns.
The new Democratic consensus appears to be that Republicans and the gun lobby are the only obstacles to a respite from tragedies like Sandy Hook and San Bernardino. Obama frequently describes theses shootings as a policy choice.
The specific proposals Democrats generally endorse tend to be modest, but the repeated contentions that America’s high rate of private gun ownership is what distinguishes it from other less violent industrialized democracies suggests more radical solutions. Countries like Australia that have passed more sweeping gun bans are often held up as examples the United States could or should follow.
Gun control is the near-universal Democratic response to high-profile shootings. It is also likely to play a big role in the Democrats’ response to an uptick in homicides in some cities.
The debate is only partly about firearms policy. It’s also a culture war issue. Obama was recorded talking about bitter people who cling to guns and religion. Liberals appear to hope that disarming largely law-abiding red-state gun owners (along with Sanders’ progressive gun-toting constituents) will reduce the supply of guns in high-crime blue cities like Chicago, which already have tough gun laws on the books.
For Democrats, the obvious political risk is that gun owners will mobilize and vote heavily Republican in the 2016 elections. This could produce an outcome in the presidential race similar to Gore’s defeat. It could also hurt Democrats in down-ballot races, where they are already struggling.
The risk for Republicans is that the seeming frequency of mass shootings will alter the terms of the gun control debate. Before rightward momentum on the issue in the mid-1990s, guns were part of a cluster of issues that were considered a liability for the GOP in the suburbs. And as was the case with healthcare, even if the reforms being proposed by Democrats are unpopular they could eventually win out if Republicans aren’t seen as having their own San Bernardino solution.
Meanwhile, Republican politicians will continue to offer their thoughts and prayers during these atrocities while Democrats clamor for government action.
