I am probably not breaking news here, but I rely on C-SPAN for a lot of my access to the workings — or more often dysfunctionings — of Congress.

That means I rely on cable operators around the country who fund the channel — make that channels and website.

It is, in a word, indispensable.

It is also often taken for granted, for which C-SPAN has only itself to blame. Because it is so pervasive and so professionally run, the access it provides to our sausage-makers has come to feel like an entitlement, or at least a constitutional right.

Last week, Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.) introduced what he called a “simple change” to House rules that would ensure the next congressional sit-in does not have to rely on Periscope or Facebook video streams to get out.

Actually, many were still relying on C-SPAN during the House sit-in last month, when the cameras were turned off, but social media lit up and the network was there to tap into it.

Bera said he figured most viewers assumed C-SPAN was part of the “public domain,” adding: “We ought to give control of those cameras back over to the media and the public, and have independent control.”

C-SPAN has long sought to be able to use its own cameras rather than have to take the feed from House cameras controlled by the Speaker. I agree, and this seems a good time for Congress to consider it.

Members of Congress will be going off to campaign for re-election in a week or so. When they get back, perhaps they can make that a parting gift to the nation.

But also noteworthy was Bera’s comment that most people probably thought C-SPAN was the public’s domain. Of course, that is just what it has become, thanks to the investment of the cable industry.

It was a different kind of political theater on C-SPAN Thursday (July 7) as Democrats continued to try and get a vote on expanded background check legislation .

House Democrats were taking a new tack on their gun legislation protest, this time endlessly peppering the Speaker of the House with the same unanimous consent request to bring up HR 1217, the "bipartisan expanded background checks" legislation, which were as quickly denied.

The House remained in session, so C-SPAN got to cover it with cameras rather than the social network feeds it tapped into during the last sit-in protest, when House cameras were turned off after the House was adjourned.

Related: House Speaker Ryan Looking Into Sanctions Over House Sit-In

Each side was accusing the other of being obstructionists, the Democrats by continuing to make the request--each accompanied by the picture of a gun victim "who never received a moment of silence on the House floor"--the Republicans by refusing to bring up the bill for a vote.

The response from the speaker was always the same: "As previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained."

At press time, the parade of UC requests had been going on for almost an hour, with no other business having been conducted except for the repetitive requests and denials, interspersed with requests to the speaker who initially controlled the time Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.), to accede to the request.

Byrne, who occasionally responded, did not directly respond, instead attempting to resume consideration of other legislation.

Related: Rep. Bera Seeks Declaration of House Camera Independence

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) said Thursday (July 7) that he has been meeting with the House Rules Committee, parliamentarians and others about possible sanctions over Democrats' sit-in protest on the House floor two weeks ago over gun violence legislation.

Meanwhile, House Democrats continued to talk on the floor about gun violence after the House recessed following morning business Thursday.

Ryan called the protest a troubling trend and said that if the House floor became a partisan war zone there would be no chance of bipartisanship. Some House Democrats had live streamed the June 22-23 sit-in via Facebook and Periscope after Ryan ordered the House cameras turned off, a violation of House floor rules. C-SPAN aired the live streams throughout the protest.

Ryan signaled he would not allow the rule of law to be "thrown out the window," and opined that the House floor had become virtually the only place that he could get to know members of the other party.

Andy Parker, the father of slain WDBJ reporter Allison Parker, called on the media not to let the gun violence issue be put on the back burner after the WDBJ story has faded and said that if he had to be the "John Walsh" of gun control, he would be.

That was a reference to the father of the murdered Adam Walsh, now with CNN, who made his life's work getting kidnapped children returned and cold cases solved.

In an interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo, Parker (above, at right) said he wanted to make it harder for people with mental issues, like the WDBJ shooter, to get guns. "There has to be a mechanism," he said, and vowed not to rest until that mechanism is in place.

He called out political cowards in the pockets of gun lobbies who sidestep the issue or kick it down the road and said all he wanted were sensible laws "so that crazy people can't get guns."

Cuomo pointed out that Donald Trump had just talked about the issue and said it was not about access to guns.

Parker said he did not want to take away guns, but that it was not unreasonable to want legislators to take action.

He said hew was appealing to journalists to take up that cause as well. "She was one of you guys. This has to hit home with journalists."

He also said that he had talked with Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe and told him his plan--to become a crusader for a mechanism for keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill--and said the governor had said "you go for it,"

McAuliffe used the incident to call for stricter gun laws.