Abstract:Importance: Many physician professional organizations have endorsed public policies, such as expanded background checks, to reduce firearm-related injury. It is not known whether physician organizations' political giving aligns with these policy endorsements.Objectives: To compare physician organization-affiliated political action committee (PAC) campaign contributions with US House of Representatives and Senate candidates' stances on firearm safety policies and analyze whether physician organization endorsement of firearm safety policies is associated with contribution patterns.Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study compared contributions from the 25 largest physician organization-affiliated PACs during the 2016 election cycle (January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016) with US House of Representatives and Senate candidate support for firearm regulation. Physician organization endorsement of firearm safety policies was defined by endorsement of the 2015 Firearm-Related Injury and Death in the United States: A Call to Action From 8 Health Professional Organizations and the American Bar Association.Main Outcomes and Measures: Contributions to US House of Representatives and Senate candidates by stance on firearm safety legislation measured by (1) voting history on US Senate Amendment (SA) 4750, which proposed background check expansion; (2) cosponsorship of US House Resolution (HR) 1217, which sought to expand background checks and strengthen the national criminal background check system; and (3) an A rating (vs not A) by the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF), a measure of overall candidate support for firearm regulation.Results: This study examined the 25 largest physician organization-affiliated PACs during the 2016 election cycle. Twenty of 25 PACs (80%) contributed more in total to incumbent Senate candidates who voted against SA 4750 (n = 21) than to those who voted for it (n = 8), and 24 of 25 PACs (96%) contributed more in total to incumbent US House of Representatives candidates who did not cosponsor HR 1217 (n = 227) than to those who cosponsored it (n = 166). A total of 21 of 25 PACs (84%) contributed more total dollars to US House of Representatives and Senate candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF (n = 386) than to those not rated A (n = 546). Twenty-four of 25 PACs (96%) contributed to a greater proportion of candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF than candidates not rated A. Among PACs whose affiliated organizations endorsed the Call to Action, 8 of 9 (89%) supported a greater proportion of candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF than candidates not rated A, whereas 16 of 16 PACs affiliated with nonendorsing organizations supported a greater proportion of candidates rated A by the NRA-PVF. After adjustment for other political factors, the 9 PACs that endorsed the Call to Action had a lower likelihood of donating to NRA-PVF A-rated candidates compared with PACs that did not endorse the Call to Action (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58-0.99; P = .04).Conclusions and Relevance: Physician organization-affiliated PACs included in this study donated more funds to more US House of Representatives and Senate candidates who oppose firearm safety policies than to candidates in support of such policies. Although endorsement of the Call to Action was associated with a lower likelihood of donating to candidates who oppose firearm safety policies, the overall pattern was not consistent with professional societies' advocacy for firearm safety.

Firearm-Related Injury and Death in the United States: A Call to Action From the Nation's Leading Physician and Public Health Professional Organizations

Promoting Firearm Injury Prevention and Advocacy as Pediatric Surgeons: A Call to Action From the APSA/AAP Advocacy Committee

American Gun Violence & Mental Illness: Reducing Risk, Restoring Health, Respecting Rights & Reviving Communities

Understanding the Role of Law in Reducing Firearm Injury through Clinical Interventions

The State of Firearm Policy Research in the United States

AOA Critical Issues Symposium: Gun Violence as a Public Health Crisis

Firearm-related injuries in children and adolescents: an emergency and critical care perspective

Internists' and Surgeons' Attitudes toward Guns and Firearm Injury Prevention

Pediatric Surgery Firearm Injury Collaborative Symposium

Actionable Steps for Preventing Firearm Suicides among Adolescents and Young Adults

Association of Physician Organization–Affiliated Political Action Committee Contributions With US House of Representatives and Senate Candidates’ Stances on Firearm Regulation

Editorial: Congress Is AWOL and the Public Is Polarized—Is There a Sensible Middle Path for Orthopaedic Surgeons Who Want to Reduce Gun-related Injuries and Deaths?

Pediatric Firearm Trauma on the Rise: A Retrospective Review of Over 1,100 Cases in 12 Years at One Center

Incidence of and Factors Associated With Recurrent Firearm Injury Among Patients Presenting to St. Louis Trauma Centers, 2010 to 2019 : A Cohort Study

Firearm-Related Violence in the Pediatric Population

Firearm violence in the USA: a frank discussion on an American public health crisis—The Kansas City Firearm Violence Symposium

A Decade of Firearm Injuries: Have We Improved?

Firearm Safety Counseling in Pediatric Primary Care

Call to Action: The Rise of Pediatric Gun Violence During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Factors Associated With Recurrent Pediatric Firearm Injury : A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Firearm-Related Injuries and the US Opioid and Other Substance Use Epidemic: A Nationwide Evaluation of Emergency Department Encounters