Obama Opens 2016 With Another Big Push on Guns

Could an emboldened president really shake up the chronic gun debate in his final year in office?

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-90441p1.html">STILLFX</a>/Shutterstock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


On the first day of 2016, President Barack Obama began his final year in the White House with brief comments highlighting his accomplishments on the economy, health care, marriage equality, and climate change. Then he focused once again on what he has described as his biggest frustration in office. “What if Congress did something—anything—to protect our kids from gun violence?” he asked in his weekly radio address. He noted that since the moment nearly three years ago when the Senate failed to tighten firearm regulations, “tens of thousands of our fellow Americans have been mowed down.”

Obama is expected to announce new executive orders this week on gun policy, aiming foremost to expand background checks for buyers by broadening the definition of a gun dealer. It’s not just about redoubling his efforts on an issue that marked “the worst day of his presidency” and undoubtedly occupies his thoughts about his legacy. He is continuing a push to circumvent pro-gun lawmakers using executive power, a strategy that has also been gaining momentum in some states.

Obama’s renewed push will also bring another bonanza for gun sellers.

Yet the reality is that Obama’s latest moves will do relatively little to change how easily Americans can get guns. Expanding background checks through a broader interpretation of current federal law still won’t close the so-called gun show loophole; hundreds of thousands of firearms will continue to be bought and sold with minimal regulation, both online and in person. Only an act of Congress could change that comprehensively.

Moreover, Obama’s renewed push will bring another bonanza for gun sellers. It’s been a surefire formula: The National Rifle Association declares that the White House is poised to strip Americans of their constitutional freedoms, and gun sales soar. Various Republican presidential candidates are now in on the act.

But those concerns may ultimately be secondary if Obama can shake up the fight over firearms by effectively tweaking a deeply entrenched and damaging national narrative. He also plans to hold a town hall meeting on guns on Thursday night at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia (not coincidentally the city that is home to NRA headquarters). As gun policy expert and long-time reform advocate Mark Glaze has put it, “Changes to the culture are more important in some ways than legal changes.”

The last few weeks have also brought notable moves on guns by Democratic leaders at the state level. Gov. Dannel Malloy of Connecticut announced he would ban people on the US government’s terrorism watch lists from purchasing guns in his state. The attorney general of Virginia, Mark Herring, gutted a reciprocity agreement and prohibited permit-holding residents from 25 other states from carrying concealed weapons in Virginia. Meanwhile, political observers on both sides of the issue suggest that the major new gun reform groups created in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook massacre are gaining ground.

Still, few would dispute that the deep-pocketed NRA and other gun lobbyists continue to have the upper hand in the nation’s legislatures. The freshest reminder of their advantage came on New Year’s Day in Texas, where a new law went into effect allowing nearly 1 million residents to openly carry handguns in public.

Obama may feel particularly emboldened now that it’s late in the fourth quarter. And America’s chronically polarized, mostly predictable gun politics may fundamentally be starting to change. Any honest appraisal would acknowledge that’s better than the grievous status quo.

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate