Bipartisan Safer Communities Act advances 64 to 34 in the Senate

14 Republicans joined all 50 Democrats in supporting the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, assuring that it will pass the Senate likely by Thursday. 34 Republicans voted no and 2 Republicans did not vote.

I would expect that it will pass the House quickly, given that House Democrats know they can get nothing else through the Senate.

Text of the bill as agreed on.

Some provisions I support, the bill overall is acceptable. Nothing in it that is noxious to the Second Amendment. And the mental health provisions of the bill will actually be helpful.

Enhanced youth background checks are not noxious. Neither are the anti-straw purchase and anti-trafficking provisions.

I will support its passage since it shows a decent measure of utility and is not noxious to the Second Amendment.

Breakdown of the Senate vote.

YEAs —64

Baldwin (D-WI)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Booker (D-NJ)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Capito (R-WV)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Cassidy (R-LA)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Cortez Masto (D-NV)
Duckworth (D-IL)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ernst (R-IA)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hassan (D-NH)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Hickenlooper (D-CO)
Hirono (D-HI)
Kaine (D-VA)
Kelly (D-AZ)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lujan (D-NM)
Manchin (D-WV)
Markey (D-MA)
McConnell (R-KY)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Ossoff (D-GA)
Padilla (D-CA)
Peters (D-MI)
Portman (R-OH)
Reed (D-RI)
Romney (R-UT)
Rosen (D-NV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Sinema (D-AZ)
Smith (D-MN)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Tillis (R-NC)
Van Hollen (D-MD)
Warner (D-VA)
Warnock (D-GA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Young (R-IN)

NAYs —34

Barrasso (R-WY)
Blackburn (R-TN)
Boozman (R-AR)
Braun (R-IN)
Cotton (R-AR)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Daines (R-MT)
Fischer (R-NE)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagerty (R-TN)
Hawley (R-MO)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hyde-Smith (R-MS)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kennedy (R-LA)
Lankford (R-OK)
Lee (R-UT)
Lummis (R-WY)
Marshall (R-KS)
Moran (R-KS)
Paul (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Rounds (R-SD)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sasse (R-NE)
Scott (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Shelby (R-AL)
Sullivan (R-AK)
Thune (R-SD)
Tuberville (R-AL)
Wicker (R-MS)

Not Voting - 2

Cramer (R-ND)
Toomey (R-PA)

Note to self: oppose Roy Blunt.


But will it do anything.

Blunt is retiring. :smile:

The mental health provisions may be helpful, we shall see.



Yeah something, like remove peoples constitutional rights without due process.


Due process is mandated in the bill.

Oh? So you get a jury trial before they take your guns in a red flag thing?


“Due process” and “jury trial” are not synonyms.

Procedural due process, in this country consists of three things:

  1. Notice.
  2. The opportunity to respond.
  3. A neutral decisionmaker.

*Edit - it also usually includes the right to be represented.

1 Like

Still no enumerated power for it.

1 Like

Umm no, several red flag laws have it so the person who’s rights and property are removed don’t get to see a judge until after their rights and property are removed. And worse, then have to prove they deserve them back at their own expense. That is not due process counselor.


Of course it is. There’s no “right” that the process must occur before the deprivation.

This is why jails aren’t unconstitutional.

pai mei no

1 Like


Welcome to America. That’s how things work here - it costs money to defend your rights.

But the bill that’s about to pass does require that states provide representation to the indigent who seek to regain/keep their weapons.

So what is the expected outcome and when will the goal be achieved?

1 Like

Oh well, probably a good thing that liberals in blue states be disarmed. They seem to be itching for a civil war.



That remains to be seen.

1 Like