Democratic congressional candidates in suburban swing seats are embracing restrictions on firearms as election-related spending from pro-gun groups, including the powerhouse National Rifle Association, has plummeted.
The willingness to campaign on gun-control policies, including universal background checks and restrictions on assault weapons, runs counter to past elections, when candidates feared the topic could isolate moderate voters or prompt reprisal from the National Rifle Association, whose spending is down about 68 percent since the 2014 midterm elections. Groups calling for gun-control measures have injected nearly $12 million into the election, the most they have spent in an election cycle since at least 2010.
The candidates’ emboldened approach, combined with the changes in spending trends, reflect a shift in the politics of gun policy over the past two years. Polls show Americans are becoming more supportive of stricter firearm laws amid a spate of mass shootings.
“The convention in swing districts like this is don’t take it on, not in a purple or light blue district. It’s a wedge issue,” said Jason Crow, a Democrat running against Republican Rep. Mike Coffman in Colorado’s 6th Congressional District in the Denver suburbs. “But I believe the danger is in not taking this on anymore.”
Crow, a U.S. Army Ranger veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, often talks about hearing the news that a gunman with an assault rifle killed 12 people at a movie theater in Aurora, which is in the district.
“I’d used military-style assault weapons at work,” he said in an interview. “And had them used against me.”
Crow has called for a ban on assault weapons. Coffman’s campaign brushed off Crow’s stance as a fundraising strategy. Coffman, who was a co-sponsor on a bill on school safety and has
