Politicians and guns: Follow the votes, not the money

An old rule of thumb holds that when someone says it’s not about the money, it’s really about the money.

But there are exceptions to almost every rule. The National Rifle Association is a case in point.

In the wake of the horror in Las Vegas, countless politicians, journalists and commentators are insisting the NRA has a “stranglehold” on the Republican Party. Hillary Clinton claimed the GOP-controlled Congress simply does “whatever they are told to do” by the NRA and the gun lobby.

The New York Times listed total NRA donations to certain GOP politicians alongside their statements offering condolences and prayers for the victims in Las Vegas. And the op-ed pages have been suffused with claims the NRA has bought Republicans with blood money, stifling the popular will and thwarting democracy in the process.

There’s just one problem: It’s not true.

Oh, it’s certainly the case the NRA and related groups have given a good amount of money to Republican politicians (and quite a few Democrats) over the years. But in the grubby bazaar of politician-buying, the NRA is a bit player.

In terms of lobbying and political contributions, the NRA and the gun industry generally spend next to nothing compared with the big players. According to OpenSecrets, the NRA spent $1.1 million on contributions in 2016 and $3 million on lobbying. The food and beverage industry has spent $14 million on lobbying in 2017 alone. Alphabet, Google’s parent company, spent $9 million on contributions in 2016.

In fairness, NRA-related outside PACs do bundle a good deal more cash, but it’s still a fraction of what big labor and the trial lawyers pony up. All NRA-related outside expenditures in 2016 added up to about $54 million. A single liberal super PAC, Priorities USA, spent $133 million.

Some people, even when they know these numbers, still can’t let go of the idea that opposition to gun control is bought and paid for.

Tim Mullaney, a writer for Marketwatch, wrote a richly detailed essay in which he chronicled just how miniscule the NRA’s financial support is — and how small the entire gun industry is — and yet he still concluded it has to be about the money. He writes “it’s shocking when you realize that it costs only $2,500 per each of the 22,000 or so gun-murder victims of the last election cycle to make Congress cower and refuse to tighten gun rules.”

The simple reality is the NRA doesn’t need to spend a lot of money convincing politicians to protect gun rights.

If you don’t know anyone who has a gun, you live in a bubble. Four out of 10 Americans have a gun in their household, according to a Pew Research Center survey. Seventy-three percent of gun owners say they can’t imagine not owning a gun.

This is why gun control is a great issue for Democratic fundraising but an even better issue for Republican get-out-thevote efforts. Politicians understand that.

Politicians may be craven — it’s often the safest assumption — but their priority is winning elections. Money-grubbing is a means to that end. And so is vote-grubbing. Maybe some politicians secretly favor stricter controls on guns. But what keeps them from pursuing such restrictions isn’t cash from the NRA; it’s votes from passionate constituents.

In other words, don’t follow the money, follow the votes.