On his Facebook page Friday, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) denied he ever voted against strengthened background checks amid blacklash over his opposition to the bipartisan Manchey-Toomey background checks amendment.

Flake used his vote for a watered-down amendment offered by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to argue that he voted to expand background checks. In reality, the amendment would do little to expand background checks and in fact would weaken gun safety laws. Flake made the comments in response to an ad criticizing his opposition to Manchin-Toomey:

If you are anywhere close to a television set in Arizona in the coming days, you’ll likely see an ad about gun control financed by NYC Mayor Bloomberg.

Contrary to the ad, I did vote to strengthen background checks. I voted for the bipartisan Grassley Amendment, which included language from a bill I helped write which strengthened background checks for those with mental illness. The Grassley amendment also included language to increase prosecution of criminals and fugitives who circumvent the current background check system.

Mayor Bloomberg can spend millions trying to get me to support his view of background checks. That’s his call. But we Arizonans aren’t easily bullied. The legislation that would have done the most to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them was the Grassley Amendment. And that’s the amendment I supported.

Flake has misrepresented his position on gun violence before. He once wrote to the mother of an Aurora shooting victim that “Strengthening background checks is something we agree on.” However, a month later, Flake voted against the Manchin-Toomey amendment to expand background checks.

What Flake voted for was a plan that would weaken gun laws by making it easier to buy and transport across state lines, helping people evade stricter laws. The central solution Flake cites from the Grassley plan — that states would share their mental health records and provides more prosecution of felons who seek guns — is only one step. It still does nothing to prevent people who take advantage of existing holes in the first place, like online sales. The Grassley amendment also would make it easier for some mentally ill people to obtain guns, by exempting patients who are involuntarily committed.

After his vote, Flake saw his approval rating tank. “Nothing like waking up to a poll saying you’re the nation’s least popular senator,” Flake wrote. “Given the public’s dim view of Congress in general, that probably puts me somewhere just below pond scum.” Flake’s colleague Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) is facing similar fire from constituents for her vote with the National Rifle Association.

This week, the national media has focused on the three different scandals surrounding the White House, devoting hours of coverage to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) improperly targeting conservative groups applying for tax exempt status, the talking points Susan Rice used in the aftermath of the attacks in Benghazi, and the Justice Department’s subpoena of phone records from the Associated Press as part of an investigation into a national security leak. The around-the-clock coverage comes even as a new Gallup poll finds that interest in the ongoing controversies is “lower comparable to major news stores in the past.”

And while these stories raise serious concerns about money in politics, embassy security, and freedom of the press, they aren’t the only problems impacting the American people. Here are five big stories the media isn’t obsessing about:

1. Carbon pollution reaches historic highs, threatening human existence. The concentration of climate warming carbon dioxide in the atmosphere “has passed the milestone level of 400 parts per million (ppm),” scientists estimate. “At the beginning of industrialisation the concentration of CO2 was just 280ppm,” said Prof Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. “We must hope that the world crossing this milestone will bring about awareness of the scientific reality of climate change and how human society should deal with the challenge.” The last time the Earth saw carbon dioxide levels that high, humans did not exist. The West Antarctic ice sheet also did not exist, and sea levels were as much as 82 feet higher than they are today. During an earlier period when CO2 levels were this high, temperatures were 5° to 10°F warmer globally.

2. The devastating impact of sequestration on kids, cancer patients and first responders. On Tuesday, the Congressional Budget Office reported that the budget deficit will shrink to its smallest level since before the Great Recession in 2013, and it will continue to decrease through 2015. But despite the smaller deficits, Republicans remain focused on spending reductions — even as the most recent round of cuts has kicked children out of preschool, left cancer patients without needed screenings, undermined public health and fire safety, and gutted programs that help low-income Americans in a variety of ways. Those cuts have also threatened to derail the economic recovery, which has sputtered along despite the headwinds created by a consistent focus on deficit reduction.

3. Massive cuts to food stamps for the most vulnerable Americans. The House Agriculture Committee approved a farm bill late Wednesday night that would cut federal food stamps by $20.5 billion — more steeply than any legislation since the welfare reforms of the 1990s. Earlier this week, the Senate Agriculture Committee also agreed to a $4.1 billion reduction. The program keeps hundreds of thousands of vulnerable Americans out of the deepest pits of poverty, and even as the Great Recession swelled SNAP rolls, the program continued to push its erroneous payments rates to record lows.

4. 1100 workers die in garment factory collapse in Bangladesh and most American retailers plan business as usual. Since a factory collapsed in Bangladesh, killing 1,100 clothing industry workers, American retailers have been hesitant to adopt safety plans that could prevent similar tragedies. Abercrombie & Fitch announced it would sign a safety upgrade plan that has been approved by six major European retailers and one other American company, but many other manufacturers — including Walmart and Gap — are holding out. Although some retailers fear the costs of upgrades, they could pass them on entirely to consumers and only raise prices by 10 cents per garment.

5. 4,000 gun deaths due to gun violence since Newtown. A crowdsourced effort to count every person killed by a gun in the United States since the Newtown tragedy is currently being hosted by Slate. As of this writing, the count is 4,150. The Senate rejected gun safety legislation in April and has not yet set a date for reconsidering the measure.

Daily deals site LivingSocial is under pressure from advocacy groups to stop promoting deals that package guns and alcohol. Credo Action and the Gun Truth Project released a report on Monday highlighting the many outings to shooting ranges and bars offered by LivingSocial all over the country.

Though the packages usually begin at the shooting range and end with alcohol, these groups protest the deal site’s glorification of the combination of guns and drinking. Many of the ads invoke American gun mythology, telling customers they can be like “cowboys,” “Annie Oakley,” or “James Bond” if they buy the deal.

LivingSocial told the Hill that participants are turned away if they seem like they have consumed alcohol or drugs before the event. Nevertheless, CREDO blasted the company’s hyping of firearms for profit:

“In the wake of Newtown, I’d like to know how the people who own or work for LivingSocial can justify profiting from the packaging of AK-47 shooting sprees with an evening of bourbon shots,” Becky Bond, CREDO’s political director, said in a statement.

The company, she added, “is endangering the public health by suggesting pairing assault weapons with alcohol binges is just good clean fun.”

LivingSocial’s competitor, Groupon, cancelled all gun-related deals in North America after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

Mixing guns and alcohol is unfortunately common among those attracted to risky behaviors. As the report notes, 86 percent of homicide offenders were drinking at the time of the homicide. Gun owners also have far higher binge-drinking and chronic alcohol abuse rates than people who don’t own guns. People who carry concealed weapons or have confronted someone with a gun are more than twice as likely to drink heavily than non-owners. Ignoring this connection, many states — most recently North Carolina, South Carolina, and Louisiana — have recently pushed for legislation allowing guns in bars.

Four Newtown mothers whose children were killed during the December 14th shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School have a message for the country this Mother’s Day: “We are not going away.”

In a heartbreaking essay, Jackie Barden, Nicole Hockley, Nelba Marquez-Greene and Francine Wheeler reflect upon their childrens’ lives, thank those who have stood behind them and ask others to make the Sandy Hook Promise. They write that while they’re disappointed by the Senate’s recent failure to pass additional gun regulations, they aren’t giving up on their efforts to prevent tragedies like Sandy Hook from happening in the future:

There have been nearly four thousand gun related deaths since Newtown. Too many mothers are spending too much time talking to their children in heaven instead of across the kitchen table….It is time, as six-year-old Ana Marquez-Greene once said, to “let love win.” There are 150 million parents in this country and it’s our goal to unite them in a place of common ground. This is the Sandy Hook Promise.

This Mother’s Day, we encourage you to make the Sandy Hook Promise with us. Today is not about guns, laws or politics; it is about mothers and love. As “Sandy Hook Moms,” we often hear the phrase “I can’t imagine what you are going through.” Well, please imagine it. Imagine what it’s like to lose a son or daughter to gun violence and encourage your elected officials to do the same. We never thought our school, our community or these innocent children would ever face the unspeakable. The more we as parents expand the boundaries of our love beyond our family and to all children, the more likely a tragedy like the one that broke our hearts will never happen again.

The tragedy in Newtown has exposed the threats guns pose to children — not just in mass shootings but, for many children, in their everyday lives at home. In 2010, 15,576 children and teenagers were injured by firearms — three times the number of U.S. soldiers injured in the war in Afghanistan, according to a study by the Children’s Defense Fund. At least 71 children aged 12 and under have been killed by guns in the five months since the Newtown shooting. Several of these have been tragic accidental shootings by other children: on April 29, five-year-old Kristian Sparks shot and killed his two-year-old sister with a rifle marketed for kids. In the past two weeks alone, there have been at least eight accidents involving children shooting themselves or other children.

Proper firearm storage could prevent many of these accidental shootings: if children don’t have access to guns, they won’t be tempted to handle and shoot them. But about 29 percent of households with children under 12 don’t lock up their guns, and nearly half of U.S. states don’t have laws that punish individuals who provide children unsupervised access to firearms. And although the National Rifle Association — which fought hard against expanding background checks and other gun safety measures earlier this year — teaches a gun safety course for children, one of its convention speakers recently suggested parents store guns in a safe in their kids’ rooms.

As Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) battles public outcry over her vote to kill a bipartisan amendment expanding background checks for gun purchases, a national conservative group based in Iowa is running television ads featuring seemingly ordinary New Hampshire moms and law enforcement officials defending the one-term senator from out-of-state “partisan” attacks.

But the American Future Fund appeared unable to find voters who agree with Ayotte’s position, as a cursory search of individuals in the advertisement reveals that the supposedly typical New Hampshirites are actually long-time Republican party activists and officials. Polls show that 91 percent of New Hampshire adults support expanded screenings. Watch the ad:

Jayne Millerick is billed in the ad as a “New Hampshire mom” and says “Those attack commercials are partisan and deliberately misleading.” But Millerick is actually a Republican strategist who served as Chairman of the New Hampshire Republican State Committee, a New Hampshire Republican Delegate in 2008, and was a member of New Hampshire Women for Mitt coalition in 2012. She is now a professional political consultant.

Judy Brown, another “New Hampshire mom” from the ad, served alongside Millerick in the Romney campaign and volunteered for Ayotte’s campaign in 2010. In 2013, she was named as the Nashua City Republican of the Year.

Barbara Dutile, a “Law Enforcement official,” is the wife of a Republican Sheriff in Grafton County who was Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) New Hampshire delegate in 2008, campaigned for Romney, and served as an alternate delegate. In 2012 she received an award from the Republican Party of New Hampshire.

The other individuals featured in the ad Richard Crate, Russ Larry, and Christopher Connelly, are all part of a group of law enforcement officials who have backed Ayotte and are featured on her Facebook page.

Since joining 45 other Republicans in opposing background checks, Ayotte has seen her approval ratings plumet and has come under withering criticism from constituents and families of gun violence victims at town halls across New Hampshire.

Likely 2016 presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is asking supporters of his Reclaim America PAC to support beleaguered Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) for voting down a bipartisan amendment extending background checks for gun purchases. Since joining 45 other Republicans in opposing the measure — which would have expanded screenings to guns purchased at gun shows and online — Ayotte has seen her approval ratings plumet and has come under withering criticism from constituents and families of gun violence victims at town halls across New Hampshire. Rubio also opposed the measure.

“Senator Ayotte stood tall in her defense of American gun owners, now it’s time for us to stand tall in defense of her,” Rubio wrote on his Facebook, linking readers to a “Stand With Kelly” petition on the Reclaim America PAC.

The petition claims that “Liberals just can’t get over the fact that their most recent attempt to restrict our SecondAmendment rights was defeated soundly by the American people” and portrays background checks as “big government.” Public opinion polls show that Americans overwhelmingly support additional gun screenings, including 91 percent of New Hampshire adults.

Rubio’s PAC says that advocates of gun safety will run “attack ads that distort the truth” and “are now pouring special interest money into New Hampshire to attack Senator Ayotte for supporting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

On Wednesday, the National Rifle Association (NRA) announced that it will spend $250,000 to run television commercials supporting Ayotte’s vote. Americans for Responsible Solutions, a group founded by Gabby Giffords, is also airing an ad critical of the first-term senator.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) seized the opportunity presented by the Senate’s water development bill to revive a soundly debunked conspiracy theory that the government is plotting to seize guns and wage war on the populace. In two amendments to the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), Coburn wants to require all government agencies to report the number and types of firearms owned, purchased or lost each year, while repealing the gun ban on roughly 12 million acres managed by the Army Corps of Engineers. The Senate will vote at 2 pm on Wednesday to pass the measures.

Judging by these amendments, Coburn has not yet let go of his months-long crusade against the Department of Homeland Security, which he believed was stockpiling ammunition in a deliberate attempt to restrict access to the public. Conspiracy sites like Alex Jones’ InfoWars and WND warned that the purchases meant the DHS was “gearing up for huge wars” in an “arms race against the American people.” The agency responded to Coburn’s letter laying out exactly how unexceptional the purchase was, forcing the senator to admit that the amount of ammo was actually lower than in previous years. Even Breitbart.com dismissed the theory as “based more on panic than fact.”

Coburn’s amendment also seems to target the botched “Operation Fast and Furious” gun stings, which conservatives have tried to tie to Attorney General Eric Holder even though an independent investigation cleared him.

Since the background checks deal failed in the Senate, Coburn’s amendments, if passed, would represent the Senate’s second successful gun-related legislation after the Newtown elementary school shooting. Though the background checks proposal, with nearly 90 percent of public support, was considered politically impossible, Coburn’s plan to put more guns on federal lands and legislate based on conspiracy theories may well pass.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) — the chief sponsor of a measure to expand background checks for gun purchases at gun shows and online — told CBS on Tuesday morning that he was optimistic that the amendment could pass the Senate with small “adjustments.” His comments come as at least two Republican senators who helped vote down the proposal in April signal they may be open changing their votes.

“I truly believe the background check bill is possible to get,” Manchin said on CBS’s This Morning, noting that some lawmakers “are afraid it will infringe on family transfers.” “We’ll clarify that language,” he promised. “When you transfer to family directly or online, it would be basically not subjected to the background check because that’s a personal transaction with a family member.”

Indeed, senators who saw their poll numbers plummet following the April vote and are facing a barrage of advertising from gun safety groups and pressure from the families of gun violence victims, may be reconsidering their opposition — if the amendment is slightly changed.

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) indicated to CNN that he is concerned about a current provision that would require family members or friends who swap guns online to undergo background checks and hinted that he may reverse his position if that language were altered. Aides to Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) has also signaled that the senator may be open to compromise, leading Manchin to assure Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) “there were now more votes in support of the plan.”

Senate aides say the background check proposal may come back to the Senate floor “this month after consideration of an Internet taxation bill, or this summer after wavering senators have had enough time to reconsider their position.”

Advocates hope that a strong bipartisan vote for the amendment in the Senate will force House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) to break the so-called Hastert rule and allow a vote on the measure in the more conservative House of Representatives. There, the amendment may not win the support of most Republicans, but could pass with overwhelming Democratic support. The House version of the Manchin compromise currently more than 120 co-sponsors, including three Republicans.

Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) blasted Republican efforts to renew questions into the Benghazi embassy attacks this week. As a member of the committee that will once again be hearing testimony on the attacks, Lynch categorically dismissed the persistent claim that the White House failed to provide adequate security at the Benghazi embassy.

In a heated exchange on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, Lynch pointed out that Republicans voted against additional funding for embassy security when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton requested it:

LYNCH: When Secretary Clinton and the State Department asked for additional funding for embassy security, [Republicans] all voted no. They all voted no.

WALLACE: We’re getting a little bit off track now. I understand there’s an issue about security. It’s a little bit off the track. I want to stay on course here –

LYNCH: No, this is the point. They’re complaining about a lack of security at the embassies after they voted against funding for security at the embassies. Is that not related?

Watch it:

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), a primary driver of these new hearings, was one of the lawmakers who voted to cut nearly $300 million from the embassy security budget. Chaffetz shot back that funding had “nothing to do” with security. In the past, Chaffetz has defended his vote to cut funding by saying it wasn’t a priority.

Republicans who voted against funding have tried to claim that the Department of Defense was responsible for security, not the State Department. However, a State Department review of the attacks emphasized the need for more funding to prevent new security threats.

Clinton repeated her call for more funding during Benghazi hearings in January. Belatedly, House Republicans announced support for restored embassy security funding in order to off-set sequestration budget cuts.

Senators who voted against a bipartisan amendment expanding background checks for firearm purchased at gun shows and online refused this week to meet with families impacted by gun violence, citing scheduling conflicts or ignoring requests altogether.

The push, part of an effort organized by the group Mayors Against Illegal Guns, comes as lawmakers who opposed the popular measure are facing pointed questions from angry constituents at town halls and seeing their approval ratings plummet. As a result, some are simply dodging the tough questions, particularly from families who have been most affected by gun violence:

– SEN. KELLY AYOTTE (R-NH): Anne Lyczak — who lost her husband Richard in January 1994, when he was killed in a drive-by shooting in Portsmouth, N.H — “wrote a letter to Ayotte, inviting her to dinner at her house to talk about ways to prevent gun violence…. Ayotte’s office, however, turned down Lyczak’s request, saying the senator would keep it under consideration for the future. Ayotte’s office cited scheduling constraints” [Huffington Post, 5/3/2013]

– SEN. JEFF FLAKE (R-AZ): “Caren Teves, whose son was killed last summer in a mass shooting in Aurora, Colo., said she invited Flake to dinner to sit in her son’s empty chair. He replied with a hand-written note affirming his support for expanded gun control measures. “I am confused and would like an answer,” Teves said. “I would like Sen. Flake to look me in the eye and tell me why he ignored me.” Teves said Flake has ignored many emails and phone calls from her and her husband, but she remains determined. [KTAR, 5/2/2013]

– SEN. MARK PRYOR (D-AR): Neil Heslin — whose son was murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School — “said he invited Senator Pryor to a private dinner to speak about how legislation he wants to eliminate gun loopholes. However, Heslin told us he never heard back from Pryor, but plans to speak with him at a public event in Lonoke County Thursday.” [KATV, 5/2/2013]

– SEN. RICHARD BURR (R-NC): “Fran Lynch of North Carolina’s Religious Coalition for a Non-Violent Durham sent a letter to Burr, asking that he join her and her friends for a discussion on gun control… Burr’s scheduler replied that the senator was unavailable “due to previously scheduled events already on his schedule.” [Huffington Post, 5/2/2013]

– SEN. ROB PORTMAN (R-OH): “[A] Springfield, Ohio woman whose 27-year-old son was killed in last year’s Colorado movie theater rampage tried to arrange a dinner with Portman so she could express her frustration with his vote….A Portman aide told The Plain Dealer the senator’s schedule did not permit him to meet with Jackson this week, but he would consider it in the future.” [Plain Dealer, 5/2/2013]

– SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): Parents of a woman who was killed in the Colorado theatre shooting “said they initially invited both Cruz and Senator John Cornyn to their home for dinner…. Though Cornyn has not accepted their invitation, Cruz, who was in town on Wednesday for a North Side Chamber of Commerce event, met briefly with the couple at a local restaurant.” [KSAT, 5/1/2013]

The National Rifle Association has begun running radio ads thanking Ayotte for voting down background checks and the senator continues to justify her opposition to the amendment by falsely claiming that additional screenings would lead to the creation of a gun registry. The claim, widely debunked, has been advanced by the NRA.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), the sponsor of the bipartisan measure, has pledged to slightly modify his amendment and bring it back for a vote in the Senate. Gun advocates remain hopeful that the growing public pressure could convince more than 60 senators to support the bill, forcing House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) to put it up for a vote in House of Representatives. The House version of the Manchin compromise has more than 120 co-sponsors, including three Republicans.