This week, more than a week after House Democrats held a 25-hour sit-in and three weeks after 49 people were killed in a shooting in Orlando, the House will finally get a chance to vote on a gun-related proposal. Passing the legislation, however, would mean instructing the government to set up a department to focus on the “ideology” of “radical Islamist terrorism.”
The package up for a vote this week, the Homeland Safety and Security Act, includes a gun-control proposal similar to legislation introduced by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) in the Senate. Both bills — the GOP’s response to Democrats’ calls for gun control after Orlando — would notify the attorney general when a person who has been investigated for terrorism in the last five years tries to buy a firearm. The Justice Department would then have to go to court to prove “probable cause” to block the purchase.
The vote is largely symbolic, as Cornyn’s bill — even with National Rifle Association approval — failed last week in the Senate.
The bill is far from what Democrats were hoping for when they sat on the floor of the chamber overnight last month, singing and chanting and telling personal stories of gun violence. Some lawmakers have expressed their concerns:
.@SpeakerRyan: Americans want us to #DisarmHate with commonsense gun reform, not an @NRA-written bill. pic.twitter.com/dy4RdnXyzp
— Nancy Pelosi (@NancyPelosi) July 5, 2016
Not only is the gun-related part of the legislation problematic, but passing it would also require House Democrats to agree to a wide range of vague and controversial counter-terrorism proposals.
The package, assembled by Sen. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to create the “Office for Partnerships to Prevent Terrorism” to counter “radicalization” of U.S. citizens by ISIL and other terrorist groups. The office would develop a “counter-message” program and would identify risk factors and research necessary to thwart potential attacks.
It also instructs the department to name and recognize the threat of “radical Islamist terrorism,” requiring DHS to give Congress a “comprehensive” plan to counter the threat within 90 days.
The phrase “radical Islam” has become a partisan flashpoint in recent years. President Obama has refused to use the term throughout his presidency, a fact that conservatives frequently attack. George W. Bush also resisted those words, but the debate has grown increasingly partisan in the years since.
Presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said that the term “radical Islam” is a problem because it “sounds like we are declaring war against a religion.” She also noted that it helps bolster a narrative of a “clash of civilizations that is actually a recruiting tool for ISIS and other radical jihadists” who want to force all Muslims to join their crusade.
Experts on terrorism agree that the term has troubling connotations. In a Senate hearing last week, Michael German, a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice and a former undercover FBI agent, said that using terms like “radical Islam” actually “puts us on a path to perpetual war.”
“[This language] only serves to stoke public fear, xenophobia and anti-Muslim bigotry,” he added.
Shadi Hamid, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, told the New York Times that it is being used as a “dog whistle.”
“Why would you feel such a need to use this particular combination of words, when the vast majority of us agree that this is terrorism and that it should be stopped or countered?” he asked.
House Republicans Have Agreed To Hold A Vote On Gun ControlJustice by CREDIT: AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster There will be a vote on gun control in the House of Representatives. On…thinkprogress.orgA recent FBI report found that only a small percentage of terrorist attacks carried out on U.S. soil between 1980 and 2005 were perpetrated by Muslims. Right-wing terrorists, meanwhile, are killing more Americans than Jihadists.
Nevertheless, the House legislation claims that the Obama administration has repeatedly ignored this “preeminent” threat.
“The preeminent terrorist threats to the United States are radical Islamist terrorist networks such as al Qaeda, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and their allies and affiliate networks, as well as lone-wolf supporters and sympathizers in the United States and around the world,” the bill says.
Though the Orlando shooter pledged his allegiance to ISIS immediately before the attack, there is no indication that he was in communication with the it or other extremist groups. Officials had also closely scrutinized him on multiple occasions before dropping the investigations, so it’s unlikely that increased surveillance or other counter-terrorism efforts would have anticipated or stopped the attack.
While Democrats turned to gun control and the prevalence of anti-LGBT hate crimes after the shooting, Republicans largely focused on Islamic terrorism. Republicans have been reluctant to address the fact that he targeted a gay club and likely perpetrated a hate crime against a vulnerable population.
“In the wake of the Orlando attack, we must step up our efforts to combat the radicalization and recruitment of citizens by ISIS,” McCarthy said in a statement on Friday when he announced the legislation. “More must be done to protect our citizens and prevent future attacks on the homeland, and this bill embodies our continued and resolute focus on protecting our nation from terrorism.”