It's hard to find an issue where public opinion and organized money are more starkly opposed than guns. According to the University of Chicago's non-partisan National Opinion Research Center, nearly 90 percent of the public believes that gun owners should be required to obtain licenses. Overwhelming majorities also favor restricting individual gun purchases to no more than one a month and requiring safety training for gun purchasers. Seventy-two percent of gun owners support criminal background checks on gun buyers, and two-thirds support mandatory registration. Yet none of these overwhelmingly popular proposals are law.
Why not? In the 1997-98 election cycle, political action committees and individuals advocating stricter gun control regulations gave $150,364 to federal candidates and parties, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. On top of that, they spent another $22,078 on TV commercials and other independent expenditures aimed at electing candidates favoring gun control.
During that same period, the big money opposing gun control totaled $2,260,680 to federal candidates and parties, and another $2,319,557 in independent expenditures on behalf of candidates supportive of gun rights. The National Rifle Association and its allies outspent gun control groups by a ratio of almost twenty-seven to one.
Does this imbalance affect votes on current legislation? Absolutely. Last summer, for example, Senator Barbara Boxer offered an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have required child safety locks to be sold with every handgun in the United States. It was defeated 69-31. Senators opposing the Boxer amendment were rewarded, on average, with $33,783 in campaign contributions or independent spending on their behalf by gun rights groups--compared to just $1,238 from gun control groups given or spent on behalf of Senators voting the other way. Again, twenty-seven to one. Money is a mighty fortress.
Similarly, when the House voted in 1996 to repeal the assault weapons ban, 239-173, gun rights PACs gave an average of $4,450 to House members favoring the repeal; opponents received just $280, on average, from gun control PACs. The ban is favored by 71% of the public, according to a recent CBS News poll. And even though 89% percent favor requiring a five-day waiting period for gun purchases, Congress let that portion of the Brady law lapse last fall
Would federal gun policy be different if lawmakers were not dependent on gun money to finance their campaigns? It's hard to believe that legislation would be so at odds with the public's desires if private campaign money were not part of the equation.
