Wealthy elitists think they can buy elections to erode gun rights. (Dave Workman photo)
Senior Editor
A Portland, Oregon broadcast station’s revealing look at the disparity in political spending by pro-rights and anti-gun groups shows that elitist anti-gunners hold a clear advantage in the money department.
The report, by KATU, shows how the gun prohibition lobby and wealthy individuals including billionaire anti-gunner Michael Bloomberg have turned their bankrolls into political weapons in their efforts to pass stricter gun laws. The revelation has raised alarms among Second Amendment activists, while putting the lie to claims that spending by the so-called “gun lobby” has left gun control advocates at a financial disadvantage.
Looking back at the 2016 election cycle, KATU reported that “discovered pro-gun control candidates received more than six times more money than pro-gun rights candidates on the issue.”
That may actually be a conservative estimate, since the published totals in their story reflect closer to a 10-to-1 sending level, with anti-gunners spending a total of $538,288.36 while pro-rights expenditures – including money from the National Rifle Association, came to $52,312.73.
According to a 2016 Reuters report, Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety lobbying group spent millions of dollars pushing so-called “universal background check” initiatives, and the former New York mayor personally contributed millions more. In Nevada, anti-gunners collected some $14.3 million for their initiative campaign, eclipsing the $4.8 million raised by the pro-rights Nevadans for Freedom.
Likewise, in Maine, anti-gunners spent more than five times as much as pro-rights activists in an unsuccessful attempt to pass a background check initiative there. It narrowly failed.
Washington state gun owners recall the 2014 campaign to pass Initiative 594, in which the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms was involved as part of the Protect Our Gun Rights coalition. Two major law enforcement groups were also opposed to that measure. I-594 proponents raised and spent more than $10.4 million to pass a measure that they initially claimed was supported by 80 percent of the voters. Opponents, including those who ran an alternative measure, spent about $2 million. When the ballots were counted, the gun control initiative passed by slightly under 60 percent in a year when only about half of the state’s registered voters returned ballots. Many activists still believe that if gun owners had actually all voted, they might have defeated the measure.
As 2018 looms large on the horizon, anti-gun lobbying groups continue to raise money with almost weekly email blasts declaring one problem or another, invariably with the NRA as the bogeyman.
The problem, as expressed by many gun rights activists, is that they don’t have wealthy supporters like Bloomberg on their side of the fight.
But others suggest that belief may be self-defeating, because the fact remains that while elitists have millions of dollars, grassroots rights activists have millions of votes. The challenge is to get their troops activated enough to fill out a ballot.
