testtest

Republicans Change Text of HPA and SHORT Act to Satisfy an Unelected Bureaucrat

Certified Silly Goose said:
One thing I DO know is that if you just put your head down and do nothing, things will never change. You have to keep trying, as daunting as it may be.
Click to expand...
What part of, we keep beating our heads against the wall and we keep getting a bloody for our effort, didn't you understand? ;)
Sorry I promised to shy away from political discussions. I'm out, and will try to do better in the future.
 
Last edited:
mikep said:
i wouldn't be surprised if it went to a senate vote it would even reach a majority in favor of it.
Click to expand...
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?
 
mikep said:
i wouldn't be surprised if it went to a senate vote it would even reach a majority in favor of it.
Click to expand...
But yes - I think you are right here.
I think it is only hitting 51 as so much is thrown in the BBB. Would be interesting to see a vote on a sole bill to take suppressors/SBRS off, or abolish the NFA entirely.
 
dadoser said:
But yes - I think you are right here.
I think it is only hitting 51 as so much is thrown in the BBB. Would be interesting to see a vote on a sole bill to take suppressors/SBRS off, or abolish the NFA entirely.
Click to expand...
What i was tryingto say is that even with a republican senate majority i doubt a short/hpa bill would even garner that majority.
 
IMG_9842.jpeg
 
🚨Senate Votes to Eliminate NFA Tax on Suppressors & Short-Barreled Firearms🚨

“NRA commends the senators who voted to eliminate the burdensome NFA tax on constitutionally protected suppressors and short-barreled firearms. We urge the House to concur with the Senate’s language, pass the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, and send it to President Trump for his signature.” - John Commerford, NRA-ILA Executive Director
 
shanneba said:
🚨Senate Votes to Eliminate NFA Tax on Suppressors & Short-Barreled Firearms🚨

“NRA commends the senators who voted to eliminate the burdensome NFA tax on constitutionally protected suppressors and short-barreled firearms. We urge the House to concur with the Senate’s language, pass the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, and send it to President Trump for his signature.” - John Commerford, NRA-ILA Executive Director
Click to expand...
The fact that there is still a “registry” is little of no win.

The NRA and Republicans have been AWOL they have basically given everyone a s&$T sandwich but put some seasoning on it to say it doesn’t taste totally like s&$t

IMG_9873.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top