How will the decision to support new gun restrictions, or the refusal to do so, in the wake of the Uvalde shooting impact the political future of Republicans?
It’s difficult to say for sure. Some have taken steps to hedge against political backlash as they consider action on gun policy. Of the ten Republican senators that worked to forge a deal on a federal gun package, for instance, four are set to retire at the end of their terms while the other six are not up for re-election this cycle. None of them will have to face voters any time soon.
Republicans that will soon face voters have been noticeably tight-lipped about their position on the package.
The state level may offer a more immediate test for how voters might reward or punish a politician based on gun policy. And nowhere is that dynamic starker than in the Lone Star State itself.
Being the state where the horrific attack at Robb Elementary School took place, many eyes have been on Texas and its incumbent Governor Greg Abbott (R.). Since the attack, Abbott has chosen to eschew calls for new gun control and has instead encouraged more robust enforcement of current gun laws in addition to new school safety protocols.
That puts him in stark contrast with the man who hopes to unseat him this November, perennial candidate Beto O’Rourke. The Democrat made a name for himself during the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries as a strident gun control supporter. His public call for the confiscation of AR-15s was among the most aggressive gun-control stances taken by a national political candidate in at least a generation. It also contributed to the demise of his candidacy.
It comes as no surprise then that in the wake of the Uvalde shooting O’Rourke has seized the moment to reestablish his gun control bona fides and differentiate himself from his opponent.
O’Rourke crashed a press conference with Abbott in the immediate aftermath of the shooting and accused him of being culpable in the attack. He has since reiterated his position on confiscating AR-15s as his preferred response to mass shootings.
In a longtime red state known for valuing gun rights, but one that’s been trending blue to an extent over the last decade, it’s difficult to say how those divergent approaches will play with Texas voters come November. Complicating matters, as with their approach to gun policy, two of the most recent polls on the race offer divergent indicators of how voters are feeling.
A new poll released Monday from BluePrint Polling found Abbott’s lead over O’Rourke has grown to a 19-point advantage among Texas voters. That’s despite the poll being conducted by a Democratic pollster in the weeks immediately following the Uvalde massacre.
However, a new Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday tells a different story. That poll finds that the race has actually tightened between the two candidates, with Abbott now only enjoying a 5-point lead over his Democratic challenger, down from 15 points in another Quinnipiac poll conducted last December.
Adding to the complication, the Quinnipiac poll finds that Texas voters now support stricter gun laws 58 to 38 percent, and 51 percent of voters think stricter gun laws would help decrease the number of mass shootings, up from just 42 percent last June.
This would seem to indicate a burgeoning backlash against Abbott and his approach to gun policy as it pertains to mass shootings, one that could advantage O’Rourke this November. But even that much is not so clear.
The same Quinnipiac poll also shows a plurality think Abbott will do a better job handling gun policy, 47 to 43 percent. It also shows a plurality oppose an assault weapons ban, which certainly calls into question O’Rourke’s strategy of running on not only a ban on AR-15s but their confiscation too.
The dynamics may be a bit murky in terms of which candidate enjoys an advantage among voters, but what’s clear is the issue has the potential to make a real difference. Gun policy was found to be the third-most urgent issue facing Texas voters overall in the Quinnipiac poll, and it was similarly situated among Independent’s most urgent issues.
So, when it comes to the potential for gun policy to affect electoral politics, the action taken at the federal level and its fallout might be hard to discern for a while. Instead, look to Texas this November for the clearest possible test case.
5 Responses
As a life long Republican I am a little disheartened by the Senate Republicans’ willingness to “compromise” on all of this with really no concessions from the left. How about making nationwide reciprocity a thing? Or perhaps making airports (NYC Boston, etc.) and other travel hubs off limits for entrapping otherwise law abiding citizens with arrest for possessing handguns in their luggage? Or perhaps allowing law abiding people to buy guns online without having to go through a local FFL? My primary reason for voting for and being a Republican was a direct result of the Brady Bill in 1994. At the time I didn’t care about taxes, or foreign policy, or government welfare systems. I was and still am largely a single issue voter. If the Rs go soft on guns without getting concessions from the Ds then why vote for or contribute to Republicans?
It’s actually worse than “no compromise.” Several of the Republican Senators supporting this deal are also expected to confirm Biden’s latest candidate for permanent ATF director. This new nominee, Steve Dettelbach, is another virulently anti-gun zealot. His confirmation guarantees more arbitrary administrative rule-making that will negatively affects our rights.
The Biden Administration also just announced that Winchester may no longer sell M855 and SS109 ammunition produced in excess of the military’s needs on the civilian market. This decision will substantially exacerbate already tight ammunition supplies and hurt military readiness.
Republican Senators supporting Biden’s gun control agenda must eventually face the voters. The outcome of primary elections can often be affected by relatively small numbers.
In the near term, Texas Sen. John Cronyn apparently thinks this bill will help him succeed Mitch McConnell as Senate Leader. Writing and calling other Republican Senators now can help insure that this doesn’t happen.
It is very odd that there isn’t a single pro-gun provision in the announced framework.
Latest reporting indicates that this “deal” includes a new mandatory three-to-ten day national waiting period for American gun buyers aged 18-21. As National Review’s Charlie Cooke notes, Democrats and their allies in the media will immediately begin calling this the new “waiting period loophole,” demanding that it apply to everyone.
This is a disaster.
I suppose it is odd if you believe that these R politicians are as fervently pro 2nd Amendment as they say they are. Too much Washington DC is the problem here. I know because I live in Illinois and face this at many social gatherings. There is enormous social pressure on these people from the Washington crowd to “seem reasonable.” But it seems to buy them nothing. They are hated no matter what they say or do and only liked when gone from office and represented by a more strident replacement.
Their attempt here is to be admired, considered thoughtful and statesman like. Putting forth provisions that are pro gun would mean they have to defend something they probably don’t really believe in. The only thing they understand is getting voted out of office. Pro 2nd Amendment voters should contact their R senators (I only wish I could!) and tell them they will not be supported if they vote for McConnel or Cornyn for Majority Leader. That way they can get some pressure built up to send a message, especially to Cornyn that this is a mistake that will cost him the Majority Leader job.
John Thune’s prospects are looking better every day.