Wednesday morning House democrats started a sit in
to attempt to force a vote on four gun control measures that Paul Ryan refused
to allow. House Republicans responded by turning off the cameras, to which the
protesters responded by live streaming via Facebook and Periscope. It was
ultimately unsuccessful, as the representatives adjourned still without voting
on the bills, but even before that it attracted a lot of criticism.
I am becoming less patient with those who just dump
on others without bothering to do anything themselves anyway, but there can
still be value in looking at the questions and in examination. That's what I
want to look at today.
Now, for people who actually are trying to
accomplish good things, the most common criticism is that the laws they were
trying to get votes on were the wrong laws. They have some good points, but I
am going to try and explore that side tomorrow.
Gun control itself has been a contentious issue for
a while, but the four bills in question and the protest were fueled by the Orlando nightclub shooting,
which leads to an earlier criticism that's worth addressing.
The Orlando Club Shooting is not the worst mass shooting in history; Wounded Knee was.
An estimated 300 were shot and killed at Wounded Knee. That is deadlier, and so some
have amended their statement about Orlando to call it the worse
mass shooting in modern history. By most definitions of the term, 1890 would be
included in modern history.
My initial problem with the complaint is that it
feels like an attempt to minimize what happened in Orlando. In a time when hate
speech against the queer community and immigrants and people of color is on the
rise, a shooting in a gay nightclub on Latin night needs attention. Distractions
from that seem harmful.
I also understand why the complaint would be made. Too
often we act like atrocities against Native Americans didn't happen, and that
they are non-issues now. If calling Orlando the worst makes them
feel disappeared again, I don't want to contribute to that.
There are still some key differences. I don't know
how many soldiers were at the Wounded Knee massacre, but there were at least 25 dead and 39 wounded. In terms of
havoc wrought by a single individual, there is still a proportion where Orlando stands out.
That may be splitting hairs, but another key
difference is that because it was the army escorting prisoners, the Wounded Knee massacre falls under the umbrella
of state-sanctioned violence, like police shootings. That is not a justification,
and there are important discussions to have about that. There is also an
important discussion to have about how some people feel more acceptable as
targets than others, and there's a lot to correct. The comparisons to Wounded Knee may have been intended as a
teachable moment, but it felt like it was in the space where we still needed to
be focused on binding up wounds. There can be legitimate arguments against that,
but that was how I felt.
Now let's focus on Paul
Ryan.
One thing he did was call it a stunt. The internet
reminded me of two things in response. One was that the Ryan family once spent
fifteen minutes in an empty soup kitchen for a photo opportunity. I had known
that, and not thought about it for years, but the internet never forgets.
The other thing was more to the point: as of
February, the House has voted 63 times to repeal Obamacare. That does kind of
feel like a stunt. I would think that after the first twenty attempts you could
figure out that the votes aren't there and move on to something useful.
That actually leads to another criticism - the
protest was pointless because even if the votes were allowed the bills would
have failed. That might seem like a reason to just let the vote take place,
except what Paul Ryan and House Republicans know is that gun control is
extremely popular with voters. Support for universal background checks
consistently polls from around 85 - 93%. However, Republicans get a lot of
money from the gun lobby. For many representatives there would be a choice
between angering their voters or their bread and butter, which may not feel
that symbolic. Yes, there would be value in them having to publicly make that
choice.
Ryan said that the Democrats were introducing chaos
and possibly threatening democracy. I think the guy who turned the cameras off
we doing more to threaten democracy, and we have been reminded how technology
can help. There are multiple ways to get a message out. There are lots of
people keeping track and researching and bringing things back up. Those are
some good reminders.
Let's also take a moment to remember that stunts and
symbols can be important. Protests were important in the Civil Rights Movement,
but they also happened in conjunction with economic pressure and working with
elected officials on legislation. Those parts might not be remembered as well,
because it was the protest that got the attention, but that attention is
important.
For people who have been waiting for Congress to act
on guns, this is your reminder that House Republicans won't even hear a bill
drafted by someone in their own party, let alone from the other side of the
aisle. How many of those seats are up in November? It is not too early to think
about that.
Protest can energize those who see it, but it can
also energize those who do it. It must be very frustrating to deal with the
gridlock and the obstruction, but these participants have shaken off some dust.
They have joined a sit-in with John Lewis! How do you think that would feel?
And when he says they must look forward to July 5th - the first day back after
the break - they can do that, rested and ready to go forward in unity.
John Lewis is one of my heroes, but I am proud of
Suzanne Bonamici, my representative, for her participation. I was happy to see
Earl Blumenauer there. It's been a long time, but if I recall correctly the
first time I saw criticism of Blumenauer, years ago, was that he was too
by-the-book and boring; well he's a chaotic threat to democracy now, bow tie and
all!
I have great faith in Paul Ryan's ability to
obstruct, but I have faith in the sit in participants too, to keep pushing
back. I hope they can be an inspiration to the Senate that refuses to hold
confirmation hearings.
Capitol Hill needs a jolt sometimes. This could be
one.
No comments:
Post a Comment