Senate Republicans are pressing forward with a key component of President Donald Trump’s anticipated ‘big, beautiful bill’, which includes provisions aimed at reducing federal taxes and registration requirements on firearms. The proposed changes, detailed in the Stop Harassing Owners of Rifles Today (SHORT) Act, seek to delist short-barrel rifles, shotguns, and suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA). This would eliminate the $200 federal excise tax and the registration process required for these weapons.
The initiative, spearheaded by Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., and Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., is part of a broader effort to reshape gun ownership laws in the United States. Marshall argued that the changes would enhance the ‘beauty’ of Trump’s megabill, while Clyde emphasized that it would ‘restore our Second Amendment rights.’ The provision would effectively remove these items from the NFA, which has been a long-standing regulatory framework for firearms in the U.S.
However, Senate Democrats have vowed to challenge the provisions using the Byrd Bath process. Led by top Finance Committee Democrat Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Democrats argue that these provisions are not budgetary and should be removed from the reconciliation bill. Wyden criticized the GOP strategy, calling it an attempt to ‘convince the parliamentarian that something really is spending when it’s really an ideological trophy.’ The Byrd Bath, a process that allows Democrats to scrutinize and eliminate non-budgetary items from reconciliation bills, is anticipated to play a critical role in determining whether the gun language survives the legislative process.
The debate over the inclusion of gun-related provisions in the ‘big, beautiful bill’ underscores a broader conflict within Congress over gun policy and the use of reconciliation as a legislative tool. Critics argue that the process is being used to advance ideological goals rather than budgetary priorities, while Republicans insist that it is the only viable path to pass major changes to the NFA. As the Senate continues to navigate the complexities of the reconciliation process, the outcome of this debate could have lasting implications for U.S. firearm regulations and the balance of power between the two parties.