With the so-called SHARE Act being heard this morning in the House Natural Resources Committee, I wanted to make sure you saw a few new stories covering the quiet inclusion of NRA-backed legislation that would gut silencer safety laws:
In the Washington Post, Dana Milbank notes today that the SHARE Act “has not been embraced by the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus.” He suggests in his satirical piece that the silencers provision and other components of the bill – including a section on armor-piercing bullets – are a giveaway to NRA leadership.
At Salon, Amanda Marcotte writes that the silencer proposal’s inclusion in the SHARE Act speaks volumes. Calling it “a sneaky and dangerous new revenue stream,” she writes that, “slipping this regulatory rollback into a bill that, on its surface, addresses the use of federal lands for hunting and fishing suggests that Republicans know that the public has no interest in deregulating silencers, and are trying to sneak this bill through Congress while no one notices.”
Marcotte also highlights comments from a gun company CEO, reported by Lois Beckett at the Guardian, who in an earnings call last week described the acquisition of a silencers company as “somewhat opportunistic” given the possibility of “favorable changes in legislation.”
As the House subcommittee turns its attention to the SHARE Act this morning, The Trace reports today that after spending $50 million on the 2016 elections – more than twice what it had spent during any previous election cycle – the NRA is also doubling down on its lobbying efforts. The NRA spent more during the first two quarters of this year on lobbying, $3.2 million, than it did during all of last year.
More information about the proposed legislation about silencers is available here. If you have additional questions, don’t hesitate to reach out.