After every horrific mass shooting, Americans collectively express their grief and outrage. The news media methodically examine the background of the killers, their psychological profiles, why a place or group of people became their targets, whether the shooters had connections to terrorist organizations or hate groups or had deep-seated prejudices, and, of course, how easily they obtained their weapons.

Most Americans (85 percent) believe in universal background checks, yet legislation in Congress and in the Minnesota Legislature never progresses. Most Americans (57 percent) believe that assault weapons and sport weapons like the AR-15 or similar types should be regulated. These are weapons of war. They are also weapons of choice by many mass-murderers and are easily obtained at gun shops, sporting goods stores and over the internet.

Sadly, within days after a mass shooting or a night of gun violence in our cities, the news stories disappear. The will to pass meaningful gun violence prevention legislation (with few exceptions) on the federal and state level loses momentum.

Caucus leaders of both political parties in legislatures throughout the country try to ensure that their members don't take "bad votes" that may affect their re-election hopes. A "bad vote" results in a low grade by special-interest groups like the NRA that scores how members vote. Caucus leaders fear that a low grade of one of its members will be used against them by their opponents in an election, especially in districts where the legislator is considered "vulnerable."

The leadership of both legislative caucuses believes its primary role is to win control or maintain control of its legislative body — principles or good public policy be damned. Let me provide a personal example.

In 2012, 20 children between the ages of 6 and 7 and six staff members were fatally shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. Like the outrage we're experiencing now over the Orlando killings, the national call for action was palpable. Minnesota has not been immune from mass killings. Not long before Newtown, six people were killed by a disgruntled employee at Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis. Students and staff were shot and killed at the Red Lake and Rocori high schools. Domestic-violence homicides and gang-related shootings have become commonplace.

After Sandy Hook, as chair of the House Public Safety Committee, I had rural DFLers and metro Republicans ask me what and when the Legislature would do something about gun violence. After several difficult but fair hearings, we put one bill forward — the expansion of background checks to include private sales and internet sales and ending the gun show loophole. The bill also gave law enforcement more authority to deny a permit to carry if an individual posed a threat to others or themselves.

As time elapsed during the 2013 legislative session, Sandy Hook was no longer a top story. The NRA and its affiliate organization the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance put intense pressure on members of the Legislature. Those rural DFLers and metro Republicans who months earlier wanted something done about gun violence changed their positions. The bill never made it to the House floor because the leadership of the DFL caucus stated it didn't have the votes to pass. Consequently, there was no opportunity for debate, no opportunity to influence other members' positions or provide new information. Because we didn't vote on that bill, we weren't answerable to our constituents.

This legislative session in Minnesota, Senate legislators held informational hearings, but no votes were taken. In the House, amendments on background checks were offered but were ruled out of order by the Republican speaker. In the Congress, Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut led a valiant filibuster on gun control after the Orlando killings, and we may actually see a vote in the Senate on one issue related to gun control.

The Pew Research Center claims that 88 percent of Democrats, 79 percent of Republicans and 84 percent of gun owners support background checks regardless of the geography of a state. But voting on guns in an election year doesn't make political sense to caucus leaders of both parties because of their misguided fear of the NRA and its affiliates.

Would background checks have stopped the Orlando shooter? We don't know. But doesn't it seem reasonable to pass legislation that would deny a permit to purchase firearms for people who are on the Terror Watchlist or who are being actively investigated by the FBI because of links to terrorist organizations? Would universal background checks be that much of an inconvenience for people wanting to buy or sell firearms? Is unfettered access to assault weapons necessary for sport shooting and hunting? In the case of District of Columbia vs. Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court said explicitly: Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not limited. In other words, no right is without limitations or regulations.

We should expect more from our elected officials. Legislators elect their caucus leadership. One question voters might ask candidates of both political parties is, "Will you elect caucus leaders that will allow a debate and a vote on meaningful gun violence prevention?" Nothing will change if politicians are not held accountable for their votes. Gun violence and the tragic loss of innocent life will continue unabated.

Michael Paymar served in the Minnesota House of Representatives for nine terms as a DFLer from St. Paul and was chair of the House Public Safety Committee.