ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
School shootings and the strategic contributions of gun policy PACs in US House elections.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The American public consistently supports stricter gun laws. We show that the gun lobby is most concerned that this support will translate into federal legislative action when fatal school shootings occur. Leveraging a dataset of political action committee (PAC) contributions and school shootings, we implement a staggered difference-in-differences design to estimate the causal effect of fatal school shootings on contributions to House candidates. We find progun Political Action Committees increase contributions by 31% to candidates in districts with fatal school shootings, and 20% for gun safety PACs. Neither show any significant response to nonfatal school shootings or mass shootings. The temporal pattern also reveals strategic behavior: For both progun and gun safety PACs, contribution spikes emerge in the wake of fatal school shootings, with effects dramatically amplified as Election Day approaches; when a shooting occurs within two months of Election Day, contributions from progun PACs increase by 2,820% while gun safety PAC contributions increase by 917%. These effects are concentrated in competitive districts ([Formula: see text]5% margins) where the two-sided surge in contributions offsets any measurable electoral impact. These results provide robust evidence that PACs strategically deploy contributions after school shootings, with the magnitude and timing suggesting a deliberate mobilization to advance its agenda. Our findings underscore a gap in democratic accountability: While public opinion should drive policy change, campaign contributions are wielded to blunt electoral responsiveness, providing insight into the inability of Congress to adopt broadly supported gun safety measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.