i wouldn't be surprised if it went to a senate vote it would even reach a majority in favor of it.
My understanding -
Based on Senate rules THEY established -
If its in a budget reconciliation Bill, they it can pass with a simple majority.
AS taking suppressors and SBRS, off the NFA was not a budget thing, the parliamentarian (I would say rightly) threw it back.
That's why the language of the Bill changed to just take away the $200 tax, but language was struck to take them off the NFA - this (by Senate's own rules) allows passage with a 51 majority.
Now - the Senate could change the rules and blow up the fillibuster and make everything pass by a simple majority. However, bioth parties when in control have been reluctant to do that.
The Senate has the ability to change their rules. They can blow up the filibuster, overriding the Parliamentarian, and add, or create another Bill to take SBRs and suppressors off the NFA.
Everything is really on the Legislature. Blaming an "un-elected Bureaucrat" is taking the responsibility off of legislators - I.e. a distraction to take any blame/responsibility from themselves.
Having said that - the 60 votes majority very well has stopped, and can stop gun control legislation from going too far when Democrats control the Senate.
The 60 votes rule is supposed to be there to make it difficult for a simple majority to run over the party not in control.
The question is - does anyone want that when their party is not in control of the Senate?
