HPA can pass. This is a route to it.

[RangerWalker71]

I came across this in an article today by Dean Weingarten via Ammoland from a few weeks back:

"As a tax item, it [The HPA] could be included in a budget reconciliation bill, which is exempt from the 60 vote filibuster in the Senate. Avoiding the Senate filibuster may not be necessary. The bill is widely popular. There are about 100 million firearms owners in the United States. A bill that positively affects the health and safety of 30% of the population should be popular. Even the partisan Washington Post article on the bill had a hard time finding serious opposition."

I did NOT know a Budget Reconciliation Bill is exempt from the 60 vote Filibuster.

Here is the link to the full article:
New Hearing Protection Act same as old HPA; Both in Top Ten for Attention



If this is true, the HPA is a done deal. The House passes it with ease either as stand alone legislation or in a Budget Reconciliation Bill as described above. The Senate passes it as a either as stand alone legislation (possibly difficult) or as described above (not difficult). In the Senate, the simple majority vote (51) is totally there. President signs. Am I missing something?

Also do you realize that these Democratic Senators listed below often vote "Yea" on 2A issues:
Joe Donnelly (Ind)
Martin Heinrich (NM)
Heidi Heitkamp (ND)
Joe Manchin (WV)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Jon Tester (MT)
Tom Udall (NM)
Mark Warner (VA)
Michael Bennett (CO)

The reality is these Dems decision on the HPA will be heavily influenced by WHEN they are up for re-election I suspect. Assuming the 52 Republican Senators vote "Yea", 8 of the 9 Dems would have to vote "Yea" to get to 60. But with a Tax Bill there is no filibuster. So all they need is 51 votes in the Senate. I don't see how the HPA can NOT pass. Again, am I missing something here? This only strengthens my belief that the HPA is a done deal.

 

[Chorizo]

Only a little bit off on your analysis: To be included in a reconciliation bill (that cannot be filibustered in the Senate) there are requirements:

It must be bill related (If included in tax reform, it is)
It must be about revenue or spending (NFA= tax-revenue item. The Senate version was referred to the Finance Committee)
It must be budget neutral - no cost (removing cans from HPA reduces the costs of examiners and is a net tax savings)

The HPA meets all three IF included in Tax Reform and I have spoken with some on capital hill who have told me that it may be included in the tax reform reconciliation bill AFTER the Obama care bill is done. Hence all the movement of late we are seeing on co-sponsors (125) to include a couple of Dems and all the hoopla of some Dems coming out against it.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/367

So yes, there is a distinct chance of passing this year and before the fall. Push your legislators to include it in the Tax Reform reconciliation bill.

 

[RangerWalker71]

Only a little bit off on your analysis: To be included in a reconciliation bill (that cannot be filibustered in the Senate) there are requirements:

It must be bill related (If included in tax reform, it is)
It must be about revenue or spending (NFA= tax-revenue item. The Senate version was referred to the Finance Committee)
It must be budget neutral - no cost (removing cans from HPA reduces the costs of examiners and is a net tax savings)

The HPA meets all three IF included in Tax Reform and I have spoken with some on capital hill who have told me that it may be included in the tax reform reconciliation bill AFTER the Obama care bill is done. Hence all the movement of late we are seeing on co-sponsors (125) to include a couple of Dems and all the hoopla of some Dems coming out against it.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/367

So yes, there is a distinct chance of passing this year and before the fall. Push your legislators to include it in the Tax Reform reconciliation bill.

Amen. Keep up the pressure, and educating those how need help.