HPA has hit some speed bumps

Hunter 08 said:
Per Gun Owners of America,

Basically bill was voted on with a $0 tax, was passed 17-16 with 4 voting present. Now this means the removal of suppressors can be added on as an amendment, so get on the horn and call your reps!
Click to expand...
Emailed my congresswoman and both senators. Thanks for the heads up.
 
Right. But what about changing anything OTHER than the tax aspect of the bill? Is that allowed under the Byrd Rule?
 
JohnKSa said:
Right. But what about changing anything OTHER than the tax aspect of the bill? Is that allowed under the Byrd Rule?
Click to expand...
As far as I can find, granted I'm at work and can't do a deep dive, it has to be budgetary in regards to that. If it's not apart of the budget it cannot be added on, at least that's my interpretation.
 

A provision is considered to be extraneous if it falls under one or more of the following six definitions:​
​
it does not produce a change in outlays or revenues or a change in the terms and conditions under which outlays are made or revenues are collected;​
it produces an outlay increase or revenue decrease when the instructed committee is not in compliance with its instructions;​
it is outside of the jurisdiction of the committee that submitted the title or provision for inclusion in the reconciliation measure;​
it produces a change in outlays or revenues which is merely incidental to the non-budgetary components of the provision;​
it would increase the deficit for a fiscal year beyond the "budget window" covered by the reconciliation measure;12 and​
it recommends changes in Social Security.​

A Senator opposed to the inclusion of extraneous matter in reconciliation legislation has two principal options for dealing with the issue. First, a Senator may offer an amendment (or a motion to recommit the measure with instructions) that strikes such provisions from the legislation. Second, under the Byrd rule, a Senator may raise a point of order against extraneous matter.​
​
A motion to waive the Byrd rule, or to sustain an appeal of the ruling of the chair on a point of order raised under the Byrd rule, requires the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the membership (60 Senators if no seats are vacant).8 A single waiver motion can (1) apply to the Byrd rule as well as other provisions of the Congressional Budget Act; (2) involve multiple as well as single provisions or amendments; (3) extend (for specified language) through consideration of the conference report as well as initial consideration of the measure or amendment; and (4) be made prior to the raising of a point of order, thus making the point of order moot.​
​
Ok, so educate me. This isn't really my bailiwick, but it looks to me like:

1. Any changes to NFA that aren't directly related to changing tax levels (revenue changes) will be extraneous provisions per the Byrd rule.
2. Any senator who doesn't like an "extraneous provision" can raise an objection which can only be defeated by a 3/5 majority of the Senate.

What am I missing here?
 
​
It is the place to share with others the actions you have taken on behalf of RKBA or to propose practical and workable actions on behalf of RKBA. It is NOT the "Complaints Department".​
​
actions taken or proposed on behalf of RKBA means that your post must describe an action taken or propose a clear concise plan of action or present real tools on behalf of RKBA or it will be deleted.​
​
It is the place to share with others the tools, actions you have taken on behalf of RKBA, or to propose plans on behalf of RKBA ...​
​
It is not for blind "FYI" posts, or musings/rants, or negative comments, or absurd hair shirt posturing. Drive By Posting blind links will cause your post to be removed.​
​
Activism is about what you've actually constructively done or what you propose we all practically do to affect change on behalf of RKBA so that others can follow your lead.​

Getting back to "Activism" ... Take the time to make calls (Before 1 AM EST) as this may be the best opportunity we have in a long while. TIA 👍

​
Tonight—before the 1AM Rules Cmte. markup—is the last chance to get both HPA & SHORT Act in the House version of the reconciliation bill!​
​
Taking action takes less than 60 seconds. Have you called yet?​
​
Your representative: (202) 224-3121​
Speaker Johnson: (202) 225-2777​
Majority Leader Scalise: (202) 225-3015​
Majority Whip Emmer: (202) 225-2210​

​
Been on Capitol Hill all day.​
​
Insider reports hint at potential progress on getting suppressors off of the NFA, but the SHORT Act still faces hurdles.​
​
Nothing's final yet & these last few hours are critical.​
​
Call your member of Congress NOW & demand a full deregulation of suppressors and SHORT Act inclusion in the reconciliation bill!​
​
(202) 224-3121​

​
Call these three often and tell them to include the FULL VERSION of the Hearing Protection Act AND INCLUDE the SHORT Act in the reconciliation bill!​
​
@SpeakerJohnson 202-225-2777​
@SteveScalise 202-225-3015​
@tomemmer 202-225-2210​
 
Last edited:
So I'm torn. I'd love to see both the SHORT and HPA on the bill and get them passed. But, do we say nuke the bill if one or the other are not on there? The HPA has a lot of support for sure, so I just want to know if we should concentrate on that over the SHORT act for now?

Not trying to be a stick in the mud.
 
​
GOA's @erichmpratt got together with @Rep_Clyde to discuss his push to protect suppressors & short barreled firearms.​
​
This is the closest we've been to securing a win against the NFA & its unconstitutional taxation & registration requirements for bearable arms."​
​
This is a rare opportunity to restore our Second Amendment rights. We must deliver, not surrender."​


Ask for the sky.

Our elected representatives must experience the full expectation/anticipation of motivated minority gun owner group of "We the People" (BTW, latest minority group in need of BOR protection) who may hold the power to vote them out of office. We do this by calling/contacting/emailing/commenting to convey our sentiment.

What the elected representatives ultimately decide to do by 1 AM in the Rules Committee is THEIR DECISION.

And if "We the People" disagree with their decision, then they must be prepared to face the consequences of their decision.

I believe the founders were clear when they finalized the wordings of Second Amendment to mean what it says. If our elected representatives somehow do not understand the founders' intent (And they seem to be), "We the People" have the option to replace them with representatives who do.

Destiny awaits.

Make the call.

Hi, this is [Your name] and I’m a voter in [Your state]. I highly encourage you to include the full version of the Hearing Protection Act and the full version of the SHORT Act to be included in the Budget Reconciliation Package. That would remove suppressors and SBR from the NFA. Our state and country is watching closely to who supports the Second Amendment and who doesn’t. Our votes will act accordingly. Thank you and have a good day.
 
Last edited:
Just called up my Representative Mike Flood and told him to support the addition of the HPA and SHORT Act. Unfortunately no one was in the office so left a message.

Also had sent an email.
 
LiveLife\ said:
It is the place to share with others the actions you have taken on behalf of RKBA or to propose practical and workable actions on behalf of RKBA. It is NOT the "Complaints Department".
actions taken or proposed on behalf of RKBA means that your post must describe an action taken or propose a clear concise plan of action or present real tools on behalf of RKBA or it will be deleted.
Click to expand...
I'm not complaining about anything.

And you are exactly correct. This subforum is about PRACTICAL and WORKABLE actions.

If the proposed course of action is not practical or workable (e.g. There's not enough support for the unmodified bill. There's a rule that is going to make it very easy to kill certain provisions of the unmodified bill.) then surely it makes sense to take that into account when choosing a course of action.
 
House Rules Committee is about to convene regarding removal of suppressor from NFA in play (Amendment number 487). No word on SBR yet.

We are watching history in the making in accordance to intent/wishes of the Founders (Along with anxious gun owners watching even closer how elected representatives vote). Let's COME TOGETHER and support/urge our law makers do their job of supporting Second Amendment for now and talk/discuss the realities of passage in the Senate afterwards.

Peace. 🙏
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Thoughts on a complete rewrite...
2 3
Replies
73
Views
11K
Robert
Robert
S
  • Locked
Glossary of terms
Replies
15
Views
995
Sunray
S
Back
Top