One of the main questions following the Newtown shootings is whether or not there will be legislative action from Washington, following statements from the president and pro-gun Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia that they will make moves on gun safety. That's a marked change from a party that has mostly shrunk from gun control measures – as well as a turnaround for a president who signed legislation allowing guns to be carried in national parks and on Amtrak trains.
Yet Obama was, in many ways, simply following an 18-year tradition among national Democrats of treating gun control as a radioactive vote-loser. That conventional wisdom was established by Bill Clinton, who blamed the Republican sweep in the 1994 midterm elections at least partly on the passage of a federal assault weapons ban in September 1994.
The bill may have played a role, but the Republicans had been in a commanding position throughout the year. More likely causes of the defeat were the retirement of many Democrats and the Clinton budget.
Still, many Democrats went on to blame Al Gore's 2000 losses in states like Arkansas and West Virginia on their nominee's gun control positions. The fact is, as Sean Trende points out, that those areas had been moving toward the Republicans for many years before 2000. The notion that gun control cost Gore is not supported by the facts.
So, despite what the data should have told them, the myth became established common sense: in 2004, Democrats allowed Republicans to run out the clock on the federal assault weapons ban with little opposition. And earlier this year, when Democratic senators introduced a bill proposing a ban on high-capacity gun magazines (in the wake of the shooting by Jared Lee Loughner of Arizona congresswoman Gaby Giffords and others in 2011), the White House refused to back it.
In the wake of the Newtown massacre, though, gun control advocates are hoping that perceptions will change. On Sunday's Meet the Press show, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg told MSNBC that:
"This myth that the NRA can destroy political careers is just not true. The NRA's power is vastly overrated."
That may be easier for the billionaire mayor of New York to say than it is for a nationally-elected politician, particularly from the south and midwest. Further undermining the idea that Obama should fear the power of the gun lobby, though, is the fact that his winning 2012 coalition did not actually contain that many pro-gun Democrats.
But renewed will in the White House to tackle the issue is only the first step in a complex and fraught process. Gun policy is a legislative, as well as an executive, issue. The president can't sign a piece of legislation into law if it hasn't been passed by Congress.
The Republicans have 33 more seats than Democrats in the House of Representatives right now. For Democrats to win back the House in 2014, they would have to win in districts that weren't won by President Obama in 2012. That's right: despite Obama taking the nationwide vote by nearly 4pt, Mitt Romney won 16 more congressional districts than Obama by the current count.
It should also be noted that there are currently an unknown number of districts on top of these 16 that Obama won by less than his nationwide margin. Many of the congressional districts that Obama won by less than 4pt, or that he lost, are filled with white working-class voters who are far more inclined towards weaker gun control than Obama's base.
And even if the Democrats managed to win the House, they'd have to pass gun laws through the Senate. Democrats hold a 55-45 majority after the 2012 elections, but twelve Democratic senators are from states that Romney won. These include two Democrats from Montana and West Virginia and one each from Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, and South Dakota. It's hard to imagine that senators like Heidi Heitkamp from North Dakota and Jon Tester from Montana are going to be all that cooperative on gun control measures, given their previous record and words.
Besides that, simply getting all 55 Democrats on board a gun control bill would not protect it from a potential filibuster by Republican opponents.
Now, even if you can imagine Democrats managing all this legislative wrangling, you should recognize that the Democratic base on which Obama rode to victory doesn't completely line up with stronger gun control. Even after Newtown, support for stricter gun laws barely reaches 50%. Before the events at Newtown, opinion in favor of stricter gun control measures was at an all-time low. In fact, in the majority of surveys, more Americans opposed than supported stronger measures than are currently on the books, including an August CNN/ORC poll in which 50% wanted minor or no regulations, compared to 48% who wanted guns to be illegal or for there to be major restrictions.
You might think this weaker-to-no-gun control majority is because more rural and white people, the Republican base, sided against gun control than voted for Romney. Yet that isn't so: 59% of rural area and small city voters went for Romney, and 59% were for only minor or no restrictions on guns; again, 50% of suburban voters voted for Romney, and 49% were for only minor or no restrictions on guns; and finally, 59% of non-hispanic whites voted for Romney, and 59% were for only minor or no restrictions on guns.
Those in favor of fewer gun restrictions are winning the battle because they are breaking into demographic groups that normally vote Democratic. Romney took only 36% of the vote in urban areas, but 46% of urbanites were for minor or no gun restrictions. More tellingly, Romney took only 18% of the vote among non-whites, but 32% of non-whites were for minor or no gun restrictions. This finding is confirmed in an April Pew poll.
So, Democrats also have to reckon with a base that isn't as anti-gun as you might think. But even if their own base is not fully behind the effort, should Democrats not press for gun control?
I certainly believe that there are gun measures that Democrats in Washington can press on with public support, such as restricting extended ammunition clips. Given Joe Manchin's comments, I think we're heading in that direction. The fact is, though, that Democrats are going to have a difficult time passing major gun legislation with either a Republican-controlled House, or even an eventually Democratic-controlled one, given the tilt of the congressional districts, or a Democratic Senate that holds many seats in Republican states.
Given the institutional hurdles in Congress and the limited public support for comprehensive gun control measures, it is very difficult to see how President Obama is going to get the "meaningful action" he spoke of after the horror of the Newtown shooting.