The Balancing Act of Marco Rubio
The aftermath of February’s Stoneman Douglas High School Shooting has sparked a new wave of activism calling for stricter gun control laws. This has been spurred in part by the work of the students of Stoneman Douglas themselves who, instead of quietly returning to their regular lives and their grief, have launched a campaign directed at Washington calling for the type of gun laws that they feel are long overdue. The movement that sprouted up around these teens has prompted millions of people across the country to get involved, and though everyone has a different idea as to how far the new legislation should go, few movements in our nation’s history have prompted such a unified call from the American people.
Politicians, naturally, have had wide ranging responses to the matter. Some, mostly those on the left, largely support what the students are pushing for while others, largely on the far right, have either proposed far more moderate steps or outright criticized the students. Marco Rubio, one of two Senators from Florida, has put himself in a particularly interesting position. Seeing as the shooting happened in his own state, he has gone out of his way to claim his support for the movement. He has regularly praised the students, even stating to The Guardian this week that, “They’ve done more in five weeks on gun violence than anyone has in 15 years.”
But it can be argued that Rubio’s intentions are not as pure as he wants them to appear. Rubio proceeded to follow up that quotation by adding “We’re creating unrealistic expectations and, in the process, nothing happens. The attitude of total victory—the idea that somehow some of us are going to come up here and get everything we want and just run over the other side—our system is just not set up for that.” Here we can see a glimpse into Rubio’s true mindset. While he delicately postures himself to appear an ardent supporter of the movement, in reality, he tends to always err on the side of skepticism.
Most have pointed to one clear motivator for Rubio when investigating why he behaves as such: the $3.3 million that the NRA have donated to his work over the course of his career. When confronted by the Parkland survivors at a CNN town hall following the shooting, Rubio repeatedly deflected focus away from the NRA and refused to respond when asked if he would or wouldn’t take money from them in the future. As consequence of this, Rubio’s contributions to the movement have actually been slight. He has halfheartedly supported banning the sale of certain weapons for people under 21 and has stated his openness to restrictions on high capacity magazines, but hasn’t pushed any actual proposal. The fact that he uses the phrase “gun violence” in the second paragraph’s quote and not “gun control” should illustrate that his ideals hardly align with those of the Parkland survivors.
Contrary to what many say, there is a path to proper gun safety in the United States. It requires a multi layered approach, and reforms will need to be made in areas of mental health, public safety policy, and legislation centered around the 2nd Amendment before this dream can be realized. What advocates will also need to do is recognize the secret motives of politicians like Rubio. Gun law advocates are currently standing on a stronger platform than they have in years, but the momentum already seems to be waning. Unless they can clear the fog between what a lawmaker says and what he truly pushes, it is likely little progress will be made and American citizens will continue to be at risk.