Providing for Consideration of H.J. Res. 41, Providing for Congressional Disapproval of a Rule Submitted by the Securities and Exchange commision, and Providing for Consideration of H.J. Res. 40...
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues, Sam Johnson and Ralph Abraham, for sponsoring this joint resolution. I would also like to point out that my colleague from Colorado is a member of the Second Amendment Caucus, and he has been working hard on this issue.
H.J. Res. 40 would strike down a rule that was finalized by the Social Security Administration just days before the close of the 114th Congress. This rule is yet another example of the previous administration's last-ditch efforts to attack our Second Amendment rights.
Any attempt to curtail the right of Americans to defend themselves and their liberty is untenable. This scheme is particularly appalling because of whom it targets and how the administration sought to implement the rule.
The rule targets our grandparents, our elderly mothers and fathers who have been awarded disability benefits and have had a family member or guardian appointed to handle their finances. They haven't committed a crime or demonstrated that they were a danger to society. There is no trial, no presumption of innocence. Their names are sent to the NICS database and their firearms are taken away, their right to own a firearm.
Hardened criminals don't have their rights violated to that extent without due process, so why would it be acceptable for our seniors? These men and women have worked hard to raise families, worked a job, and paid their fair share of taxes. Now they are being told that, in order to receive their Social Security benefits, they must first surrender the fundamental right to defend themselves. Is this the level of pettiness to which we have sunk?
The House and the American people have soundly rejected gun control in all of its forms year after year; yet this last administration bypassed the legislative process, imposed a rule, and completely disregarded due process in order to strip seniors of their constitutional rights. Our seniors deserve better than that.
This rule is not about protecting anyone. This rule should be seen for what it truly is: awful, politically motivated, and a dangerous infringement on our Second Amendment rights.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source