Bipartisan Safer Communities Act

It’s broadly popular and likely to be at least partly effective, although it mostly funds programs with unproven impacts and its gun regulations may face Constitutional challenges

On June 25, President Biden signed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) into law. The BSCA passed the Senate by a 65-33 vote, which included 15 Republican votes, and the House by a 234-193 vote, which included 14 Republican votes; all Democrats and Independents voted for the act. The law was the most significant federal gun legislation since the 1994 assault weapons ban (which expired in 2004).

What’s in the BSCA?

More than $13 billion for mental health, school safety, and gun regulation

Up to $8.6 billion over 10 years to expand Certified Community Behavioral Health Centers (CCBHCs)

CCBHCs are currently available in eight states under a demonstration program and offer mental health and substance abuse services 24/7 to anyone, regardless of their ability to pay. The BSCA will pay to expand these centers to any state that wants them.

$250 million over 5 years for community violence intervention (CVI) programs

CVI programs attempt to intervene in the lives at people most at risk of engaging in or becoming victims of violence.

$250 million over 4 years for Community Mental Health Services Block Grants

These grants fund community organizations providing care to adults with serious mental illnesses and children with serious emotional disturbances.

$150 million this year for the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline

This program, which was formerly known as the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, provides 24/7 access to trained crisis counselors who can help with suicide, mental health, and substance use-related crises.

$120 million over 4 years for Mental Health Awareness and Training grants

These grants are used to train first responders to handle people with mental disorders.

$80 million over 4 years for Pediatric Mental Health Care Access grants

These grants are used to train pediatric primary care providers to integrate behavioral and mental health services into their practices.

$60 million over 5 years for the Primary Care Training and Enhancement Program

This program trains pediatric primary care physicians in mental healthcare.

$40 million over 4 years for the National Child Traumatic Stress Network

This program helps provide access to services for children who have experienced traumatic events and their families and communities.

$1 billion over 4 years for Title IV-A student support and academic enrichment grants

These grants are provided to high-need school districts for safety programs, crisis intervention programs, and training programs for suicide prevention and human trafficking.

$500 million over 5 years for School-Based Mental Health Services grants

These grants fund school-based mental health service providers.

$500 million over 5 years for School-Based Mental Health Services Professional Demonstration grants

These grants fund training for people to work as school-based mental health service providers.

$300 million over five years for STOP School Violence Act programs

These programs help train teachers and students to prevent and respond to violence in schools.

$240 million over 4 years for Project AWARE

This program trains school personnel to detect mental health issues and connect students with needed services.

$50 million for the 21^st Century Community Learning Centers program

This program provides academic enrichment opportunities during non-school hours for children who attend high-poverty and low-performing schools.

$750 million over 5 years for crisis intervention programs

States can use this money for extreme risk protection orders, also known as “red flag laws,” which allow law enforcement to temporarily remove guns from people who may pose a threat to themselves or others. Most states do not have red flag laws, but states can also use this money for other crisis intervention programs, such as mental health courts, drug courts, and veteran courts.

Closing the boyfriend loophole

Previously, federal law prohibited people from owning guns if they had been convicted of domestic violence crimes against spouses, partners with whom they lived, or partners with whom they had children. The BSCA extends this protection to partners with whom they have a “continuing serious relationship of a romantic or intimate nature.” If the domestic violence crime is a misdemeanor, the BSCA provides a mechanism for people to restore their rights to own guns after five years if they aren’t convicted of other crimes.

Requiring more gun sellers to obtain dealer licenses

People “engaged in the business” of selling guns have to obtain a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Previously, people who sold guns “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” were required to obtain FFLs. The BSCA expands the requirement to anyone who sells guns to “predominantly earn a profit.” So, it covers anyone who sells guns primarily for profit, regardless of whether that profit is important to their livelihood. Requiring more people to obtain dealer FFLs is important mainly because dealers must conduct background checks before all gun sales.

More thorough background checks on 18-20 year olds

The BSCA enhances background checks on 18-20 year olds in two ways. First, it requires NICS to contact the relevant state agencies that keep both juvenile criminal records and juvenile mental health records to search for disqualifying conditions. Second, it allows NICS to extend the previous 3-day period for conducting its background search by 7 days, if NICS discovers something potentially disqualifying during the initial 3-day period. Participating in these NICS background checks is still voluntary for state agencies, but the BSCA includes $200 million in state grants to encourage participation. Under the BSCA, only criminal records from when a prospective purchaser was younger than 16 can be used to disqualify a purchase, not mental health records.

Easier prosecution of straw purchasers and traffickers

The BSCA makes it a federal crime to traffic illegal firearms into the country or to smuggle firearms out of the country. It also makes it a federal crime to purchase a gun on behalf of someone who is not permitted to purchase guns. And it gives law enforcement the authority to use several mechanisms to investigate these crimes, including wire-tapping, forfeiture, racketeering charges, fines, and money laundering authorities.

What will the BSCA accomplish?

The BSCA addresses gun safety mainly through mental health. Because only 3-5% of violent acts are committed by people with serious mental illnesses, the BSCA is unlikely to significantly reduce gun violence. Even the impact on mental health is uncertain, because most of the programs receiving funding have not yet been rigorously evaluated. In particular, a recent GAO report found that it will be challenging for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to assess the effectiveness of the CCBHC program because of data limitations and variations in the program across states.

There have, however, been many evaluations of different CVI programs and most studies have supported the effectiveness of those programs. Community violence interruption programs reduced gun violence in Chicago, New York City, and Philadelphia; and many types of community improvement programs have reduced gun violence, including converting vacant lots to green spaces, repairing or demolishing abandoned buildings, and improving street lighting. Therefore, it seems likely that the $250 million in the BSCA for CVI programs will help to reduce gun violence.

Also, RAND conducts meta-analyses of studies of the effects of various gun regulations on numerous outcomes. It has not found evidence that red-flag laws affect any of its outcomes. It has, however, found moderate evidence that prohibitions associated with domestic violence reduce violent crime, that background checks reduce violent crime, and that waiting periods reduce violent crime and suicides. It has also found limited evidence that minimum age requirements reduce suicides and that prohibitions associated with mental illness reduce violent crime. Therefore, it seems likely that the provisions of the BSCA closing the boyfriend loophole, requiring more gun sellers to obtain dealer licenses, and requiring more thorough background checks for 18-20 year olds will help to reduce violent crime and suicides. The provisions that make it easier to prosecute gun traffickers and straw purchasers have not been evaluated, but they include some recommendations that law enforcement agencies have proposed for many years. And a thorough study of gun trafficking to New York by the New York Attorney General’s office recommended expanded (actually, universal) background checks and making trafficking a federal crime, so those provisions of the BSCA may help to reduce gun trafficking.

Overall, it is difficult to estimate the likely impact of the BSCA. As more of the programs that it funds are evaluated, we will have a better idea. It seems reasonable to expect some reductions in gun violence, violent crime, and suicides. But we will still need to assess the magnitude of those reductions for the $13 billion investment.

What does the public think of the BSCA?

In a July Pew survey, 64% of all adults approved of the BSCA as compared with 21% who disapproved. Among people who are or lean Democratic, the split was 80% to 9% and among people who are or lean Republican, the split was 47% to 35%. However, this poll should be interpreted with caution, because many respondents probably didn’t fully understand the BSCA; indeed, 15% of people responded that they were unsure if they approved or disapproved. However, polls on specific issues related to the BSCA can shed some light on public opinion. Following are recent polling data on some of those issues. The first table includes data from an April 2021 Pew Research survey, the second table includes data from a July 2018 Economist/YouGov survey, and the third table includes data from an April 2018 Pew Research survey.

We see that all of these ideas have majority support across party identification. Because these ideas cover most of the main provisions of the BSCA, it seems likely that the BSCA would also have majority support across parties, if the respondents understood its main provisions. As noted above, 15 Republican Senators and 14 Republican Representatives voted for the BSCA. In a vacuum, those tallies would seem to reflect a lack of Republican support. However, considering how difficult it has become for Republicans to vote for any gun regulation legislation, those numbers are actually surprisingly large.

Of the 15 Republican Senators who voted for the BSCA, four are retiring, nine are not up for reelection in 2022, Todd Young won his 2022 primary prior to his BSCA vote, and Lisa Murkowski is awaiting her primary election. Of the 14 Republican Representatives who voted for the BSCA, five are retiring, five won their 2022 primaries prior to their BSCA votes, Tom Rice lost his 2022 primary prior to his BSCA vote, Peter Meijer lost his 2022 primary after his BSCA vote, and Liz Cheney and Maria Elvira Salazar are awaiting their primary elections. However, Cheney, Meijer, and Murkowski also voted to impeach or convict President Trump and made other votes unpopular with some Republicans, so it would be difficult to interpret their primary results as a referendum on their BSCA votes. There is no indication so far that Salazar is losing support in her primary contest due to her BSCA vote.

Is the BSCA Constitutional?

Just two days before President Biden signed the BSCA into law, the Supreme Court struck down a New York law requiring concealed carry permit applicants to show “proper cause” for needing the permit, because there was no historical analog for such a requirement. Under that newly announced historical analog test, it is possible that some of the gun regulations in the BSCA may also be found to be unconstitutional, such as red flag laws, the prohibition on gun ownership by domestic abusers, or the expanded background checks for youth. However, the mental health and school safety provisions should not be subject to challenge, nor should the gun trafficking provisions.

Conclusion

The BSCA is socially acceptable, as most of its main provisions have majority support across parties. Its effectiveness is uncertain, because most of the programs that it funds have not been formally evaluated; however, the few programs that have been evaluated have shown positive impacts. The legal feasibility of many of its gun regulation provisions is also questionable in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision; however, its mental health, school safety and gun trafficking provisions should be legally feasible.

Our grades for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act:

Effectiveness: C

Legal Feasibility: B

Social Acceptability: A-

Overall Grade: B