Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under the Rule Submitted By the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Relating to ``Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached `Stabilizing Braces'

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I actually want to welcome the people who are here in the gallery. I am glad they are here to see this. What they are witnessing is actually something functional that Congress should be doing.

We have a Federal agency called the ATF that has unilaterally decided that they want to make illegal a piece of equipment that they legalized more than a decade ago. The ATF said that the pistol brace is a functional and legal piece that can be added to--and I stress ``added to''--a firearm, and they allowed it to be sold in the United States for more than a decade.

Now, why do I say, ``added to''? The question for the people in the gallery and the people watching on C-SPAN across the country is: Have you ever seen a pistol brace? It is mostly plastic and/or carbon fiber. It wraps around your forearm, and it has a little pole that sticks out to the midpoint of your hand. The purpose of said brace is for people who actually had an arm injury but still wanted to take advantage of their Second Amendment rights, and the ATF more than a decade ago allowed that brace to be sold in the United States.

We now have the same ATF who is deciding unilaterally to go back and say that that brace now needs to be registered, and if you don't register it, you are a felon in the United States. If that is not a gross violation of separation of powers, I don't know what is. Congress never gave the ATF that authority to criminalize American citizens after they were allowed to buy a piece of equipment.

If an agency says that they think a piece of equipment is a detriment to public safety, then it is the requirement of the agency and the executive branch to come to this body and ask for legal permission to say so. They did not.

They don't just get to act on their own accord. They don't just get to define terms for themselves unless Congress gives them that ability.

Mr. Speaker, one of the fundamental problems we are having here at the national level is that we have too many agencies who are taking too much latitude with the liberties of the American people. Instead of going to their Representatives for clarification, they decide that they want to make them felons through the back door. That is abhorrent.

That is a violation of separation of powers. It is a violation of the very Constitution, and it is a violation of the liberties of the American people that we are all here to represent.

Regardless of how you feel about guns, and regardless of how you may feel about a pistol brace, none of us should be supportive of an agency using their authorities or not using any of their authorities to criminalize the American people.

This is a good CRA. We should be voting up on this CRA.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague from Texas yielding me additional time, but I don't think I will need another minute.

Mr. Speaker, we should be voting for this measure. This is a measure to stop a Federal agency from stepping over its bounds and turning law- abiding American citizens into felons. A ``no'' vote on this measure is a vote to allow the Federal agencies to run amok, unobstructed over the will of the people. Our Members should be supporting it. Frankly, every Member in this Chamber should be supporting this resolution today.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source