It's typical Republican bs. Now they can claim I'm pro gun it was that democrat that stoped us. Don't worry we will try again next time. All while leaving out they could have removed her from the position but left her in place just for this reason. Got the keep the fuds happy posture and not get anything pro gun again.

I understand this was stripped from the bill. Can someone explain why the Republicans don't re introduce it as a stand alone bill. Gun rights are important when they are asking for your vote, why don't they expend some political capital and try to at least pass legislation that they say is important and that they are in favor of. Republicans control both branches of the legislature and the oval office. When the Democrats controlled all three in Minnesota (state house, state senate, and governor) they rammed everything through that they possibly could.

X1000!!

Fellas, if they did what they said they’d do while running. They wouldn’t have anything to run on after they did it.

So, they’ll say, it was shot down by the others and they really mean it this time. Just gotta vote for them… honest.

Because of the simple fact if opened back up as a stand alone bill it will require 60 yes votes to pass. They barely may have the 51 needed as a part of the reconciliation bill. There are only 53 or so Republicans, that includes the Rinos. The reconciliation style of bill requires a simple majority vs a standard bill introduced.

Bellyaching isn’t going to fix this. Get the libtards out of office, then maybe we can do some real work…

Read above

TC1, thanks for the explanation, I didn't realize that they would need the 60 Senate votes as a stand alone bill. Not sure how the rules work to go from 60 to a simple majority. Would it be a good thing to still bring it up for a vote, just to make Senators and Representatives take a stand one way or the other? Nature of the beast I guess, it seems like they are gung ho when running for office, when it is time to vote, not so much. Even if it is defeated, I think it would be a good thing to have both parties on the record if they support it or are against it. At least (in theory) they would have to explain their vote to their constituents..

Not disagreeing with you at all, but I think time is limited now with what they are doing. After the 4th deadline they are trying to reach, I’d say go for it.

They won’t bring it up for a vote! It’s taboo to vote on something that they know won’t pass! It’s all about having a “clean” voting record with no votes on losing bills. It would be great to put them on the record, but it’s not happening!

The tax they could have used that argument. It went sideways when they added the SBR and short barrel shotguns to the legislation. That triggered the senate parliamentarian to call it out on that point. They could possibly reintroduce the no tax stamp part, but the other parts need to be in separate legislation. If anyone is waiting on the tax stamp and hoops to go away, it won't be anytime soon.

It goes from 60 to a simple majority through the reconciliation process. That's why this legislation died because of the reconciliation language. They can try again, but it won't be anytime soon.

So the nationwide concealed carry reciprocity bill would need 60 votes in the Senate? What is the status of that bill?