In light of the tragic shooting that occured at a community college in Oregon yesterday, President Obama gave the American public an emotional address, calling for stronger gun control. That video you can watch here: http://www.wgrz.com/video/4525617618001/1/Obama-urges-gun-control-after-Oregon-shooting
In the statement, Obama urges that the response to gun violence related tragedies has become routine and that the government has become numb to it. He then states that in order to do something more about gun control it would require a change of politics. This might have been a shot at the legislative branch, and that they aren't doing enough about gun control. An analyst in a CNN article believes the lack of gun control legislation could be due to organizations like the NRA and their lobbying efforts. An article on The Guardian claimed that back in 2013, there was 45 Senators who voted against legislative efforts for gun control, and all but 3 of them had received funds from firearm lobbyist organizations. That data can be viewed here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mZ99zBcpsqWsoDGiKxiSXlhHZBPWbyFVluLMuq-Y2pQ/pub?output=html
It is extremely interesting to analyze how much power lobbyists have in directing politics in the legislative branch. Just a few blog posts ago I had discussed the DARK act and how many house members (despite the fact that 9/10 Americans opposed the act) voted for the passing of it, and it was argued in many articles that house members did this because they were receiving funds from corporations that would be directly affected by the act if it had not passed, and benefitted if it did.
Could Obama's call for "a change in politics" gain any ground? It is certainly not unheard of that Senators and Congressman vote in favor of things that will garner them popularity, and therefore votes, but will those who oppose gun control start to falter because of the fact that Americans are becoming more and more impassioned by gun violence and it's determent? I believe that many Americans, regardless of what political party they affiliate with, have become disgusted with gun violence in this country, and I think it is very possible that these legislative politicians could start hurting their chances of reelection if they vote to please their lobby supporters instead of their constituents.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/01/opinions/opinion-roundup-gun-control-2015/index.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/18/pro-gun-groups-donated-senators
2 comments:
Based on Congress's actions regarding the DARK Act and the lack of legislative action after the Sandy Hook tragedy took place, I wouldn't be too surprised if no legislation regarding gun restrictions is passed in the near future. I doubt that Republicans will roll over and listen to Obama just because the tragic shooting at Oregon occurred. If legislation keeps being brought forward with the main focus being gun restrictions, it will most likely be shot down based on the Republican majority in the house. I would imagine history will keep on repeating itself until a different approach is taken with this legislation. That's why I'm particularly interested in Congress's interest in making mental health the main focus in regards to gun restrictions. While a bit more of a problematic view on the matter of gun violence, I do wonder if this focus on will lead to some form of gun control legislation actually passing.
This leads to the question of how influential is money? It is well known that politicians need a lot of money- especially in order to campaign. It is also well known that much of this money comes from those who have a particular cause in which they want discussed on the House floor and voted on in a certain manner. The politicians must ask themselves a question- is it more important to have a lot of money, or more important that one stays true to their beliefs rather than the beliefs of those who pay them? Where lies the difference between a contribution and a bribe? I think that as soon as one changes their beliefs- even slightly- there has been a bribe. Our country should not be run on the need for money and on the beliefs of those who have it.
Post a Comment