Vivek Murthy for Surgeon General.

Surgeons general of the United States have often championed important causes that improve the nation’s health. Leroy Burney and Luther Terry took on the issue of smoking and health. C. Everett Koop championed the treatment of HIV-AIDS as a medical condition. With the nomination of Dr. Vivek Murthy, who aims to take on the epidemic of obesity, President Barack Obama is striving to continue this tradition. Murthy, whose parents immigrated to the United States from India, has lived the American dream. He was educated at two of our nation’s most prestigious universities, earning his undergraduate degree at Harvard and both an M.D. and an M.B.A. degree at Yale. He currently practices medicine at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital and is a member of the faculty of Harvard Medical School. Murthy was one of the founders and is currently the president of Doctors for America, an organization focused on broadening access to high-quality health care. In his impressive career, he has been strongly committed to disease prevention and health promotion, having served on the Presidential Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health. He cofounded Visions Worldwide, a nonprofit organization working on HIV prevention and education. He is the chair of TrialNetworks, an initiative that assists drug developers with clinical trials. On February 27, a bipartisan group of senators on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee approved Murthy’s nomination for surgeon general and forwarded it for a vote by the full Senate. But now, astonishingly, the nomination appears to be in jeopardy and may be delayed or withdrawn altogether. How could this have happened to such a distinguished and highly qualified nominee? The answer lies with the National Rifle Association (NRA). It is of great concern to us and to many other members of the health care community that Murthy’s nomination is in jeopardy because of NRA opposition. The NRA opposes Murthy solely on the grounds that he has advocated reasonable and mainstream forms of gun regulation, including an assault-weapons ban, a limit on ammunition sales, and required safety training. Given that there are more than 30,000 firearm deaths in the United States each year, Murthy’s views on potential safeguards are unsurprising. This is the first time that the NRA has flexed its political muscle over the appointment of a surgeon general. The NRA has taken this action even though the surgeon general has no authority over firearm regulation and even though Murthy made it clear in his testimony before the Senate HELP Committee that if he is confirmed, his principal focus will be on the important national problem of obesity prevention, not firearm policy. Still, 10 Senate Democrats are apparently prepared to vote against Murthy’s confirmation because of his personal views on firearms — a demonstration of just how much political power our legislators have ceded to the NRA. The critical question is this: Should a specialinterest organization like the NRA have veto power over the appointment of the nation’s top doctor? The very idea is unacceptable. Despite the continuing American tragedy of mass shootings — Newtown, Aurora, Fort Hood, Virginia Tech — the NRA has redoubled its ef-