Small nods to gun control might pass Senate
WASHINGTON — Accompanying the $1.3 trillion spending bill that the House passed Thursday afternoon is language that may open the door slightly to restoring federal funding for gun research.
The item, which is still pending passage in the Senate, clarifies that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention can indeed conduct research into gun violence. For more than two decades, a 1997 rule — known as the Dickey Amendment — that Congress passed under pressure from gun lobbyists has essentially killed federal funding for such research.
In the wake of recent mass shootings in schools, churches and concerts, however, lawmakers have come under renewed pressure to act on gun-related legislation.
The Dickey Amendment says no CDC funds “may be used to advocate or promote gun control,” banning the public health agency from lobbying for gun control though not explicitly prohibiting gun research. But the rule has had a dramatic chilling effect at CDC as well as other federal agencies, resulting in a near blackout of funding and new data about gun violence.
Gun researchers, gunrights advocates and public health experts were largely dismissive Thursday of how significant the clarification might be. The item is included in a report, attached to the spending bill, that is intended as guidance to federal agencies. The new wording makes lawmakers’ intent clear that the text of the Dickey Amendment does not prevent research into gun violence. Even so, the report does not mean Congress will divert funds to gun research after refusing to give for years.
The omnibus bill also includes a provision to improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System for gun buyers, action that has broad bipartisan support. It marks the only substantive change to gun laws that congressional Republican leaders have brought to vote since the Feb. 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, when 17 students and staff were killed.
Together, some Democrats said, the two efforts mark a move in the right direction — but a modest one.
“I welcome them, but I think they were baby steps,” said Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Va. “How many more massacres of children do we need in the country before we kind of bite into the apple in a serious way?”
Connolly said he doesn’t expect the Republicancontrolled Congress to pass any more gun-control laws before the election. “I believe if we want serious action by Congress, it’s going to be in the 116th Congress, not this one,” he said.
Some researchers also believe the wording change on funding signals a small shift, especially among Republican lawmakers who have opposed any funding for gun research.