Dear Neighbor,
House Democrats must have promised to only push their most extreme bills on days that end in “Y” this session … or so it seems.
In all seriousness – because this is very, very serious – not a day goes by during this 2023 session where somewhere in the process another extreme proposal from the majority surfaces in committee or on the House floor itself. They've already done the Blackout Bill and a the nation’s most radical abortion bill. This week, universal driver’s licenses, anti-gun bills, the National Popular Vote and more bad energy policy were just some of the objectionable proposals that made news.
Here's a quick rundown:
Anti-Second Amendment bills
As an unwavering supporter of the Second Amendment, I strongly object to a series of gun bills House Democrats are presenting during a House Public Safety Finance & Policy Committee meeting today. Here’s a snapshot:
- HF 14 (Universal Background Checks): Criminal background checks required for firearm transfers, and grounds modified for disqualification of transferee permit.
- HF 15 (Red Flag Law): Red Flag Gun Confiscation Orders: Law enforcement and family members enabled to petition a court to prohibit people from possessing firearms if they pose a significant danger to themselves or others by possessing a firearm, and money appropriated.
- HF 396: Safe storage of firearms and ammunition required, locking device required to be included in each firearm transfer, and criminal penalties imposed.
- HF 601: Lost and stolen firearms required to be reported promptly to law enforcement.
Once again, it’s a case of House Democrats targeting law-abiding citizens in a misguided attempt to address crime. I say we could do a better job of combating violent crime by actually cracking down on violent criminals – and adhering to sentencing guidelines – instead of eroding constitutional rights for all of us.
National Popular Vote
House Democrats moved through a committee legislation adopt the National Popular Vote, which would cede power to more populous states. Minnesota currently has about 3.5 million voters, a mere fraction of states such as California. Shifting to NPV would wipe out balance in our electoral process, resulting in those larger population bases making decisions for the rest of us. California has its own set of issues and what’s good for the people who live there could be the last thing we need here in Minnesota. Gov. Walz already acted unilaterally to put California in charge of Minnesota’s energy policy but adopting NPV would only make it worse.
Gas energy prohibition
I am a member of the House Climate and Energy Finance and Policy Committee, which this week heard a presentation of a bill which says “each new adopted commercial energy code shall establish efficiency and performance standards that result in buildings and building systems that can be powered completely by carbon-neutral energy sources by the year 2036 and thereafter.”
In other words, buh-bye natural gas. This would result in new costs imposed on building owners, including on-site generation, stricter energy codes, and costs related to an ever-changing energy code. And mandating an undefined net-zero standard without knowing whether it is practical or achievable with existing technology causes reliability concerns.
If businesses want to take the leap and construct “net zero” buildings right now, even with ever-changing definitions of what "net zero" is, there is nothing preventing them from doing so. They can do it now. But forcing this blanket mandate into existence is wrong. And, if Democrats are successful in making this bill become law, do you think they’ll stop there – or is residential gas next on the chopping block? It’s what happened in California (ahem, NPV bill).
The ink isn’t even dry on the Blackout Bill House Democrats just passed which increases consumer energy prices, reduces power reliability and causes safety risks. But here they are, back at it again.
It must be a day ending in “Y.” Have a good one.
Sincerely,
Shane