Sen. John Rodgers on Thursday at the Vermont Statehouse
The Vermont Senate passed a bill Friday that would both raise the legal age for purchasing guns from 16 to 21 and mandate universal background checks.
Debate focused on raising the legal age; the Senate had given preliminary approval to universal background checks on Thursday.
The age-limit proposal came from Senate President Pro Tempore Tim Ashe (D/P-Chittenden) and 15 cosponsors, effectively guaranteeing its passage in the 30-member Senate.
On the Senate floor, Ashe said the goal behind that proposalwas to keep young people from impulsively harming themselves or others.
Sen. Phil Baruth introduces his universal background checks amendment Thursday.
Updated at 6:34 p.m.
The Vermont Senate gave preliminary approval Thursday to a proposal that would mandate background checks for most gun transactions, including private sales between individuals.
The measure, authored by Sen. Phil Baruth (D/P-Chittenden), had languished for years in the Senate Judiciary Committee. On Thursday, Baruth bypassed the panel by amending another bill on the Senate floor to include the universal background check language.
Baruth’s amendment passed the Senate by a vote of 17 to 13. The underlying legislation, which addresses state storage of seized firearms, will face another vote in the chamber on Friday before it is sent to the House.
Vermont’s Senate unanimously approved a bill Wednesday that would allow police to take guns away from people deemed by a court to be an “extreme risk” to themselves or others.
Just before the vote on S.221, its sponsor, Senate Judiciary chair Dick Sears (D-Bennington) said that he hadn't initially expected the proposal to make it to the floor. A narrowly avoided school shooting in Fair Haven, he said, brought a sense of urgency to the Senate’s work.
“The one thing I’m sure of is, Vermont’s not immune [to gun violence],” Sears said. “And I think we knew that before Fair Haven, but I think Fair Haven jolted us all.”
It took years, but the Vermont Senate finally approved a ban on corporate campaign donations Wednesday.
The bill states that only individuals, parties and political action committees can contribute money to state candidates.
After giving preliminary approval to similar legislation in 2013, the Senate did an about-face. Wednesday's debate was less eventful, but still included complaints from lawmakers worried about losing some of their funding streams.
Sen. Ann Cummings (D-Washington) expressed concern that the bill would discourage contributions from "my very warm, friendly, voting elderly constituents who frequently have their money in a revocable trust."
Vermont Public Interest Research Group executive director Paul Burns
Vermont senators have revived a long-stalled effort to limit corporate cash in state elections. Last week, the Senate Government Operations Committee advanced a bill that would prohibit corporations from donating directly to candidates, clearing the way for a vote before the full Senate this week.
“It’s a significant step to try to at least address the issue of corporations having direct influence over candidates,” said Paul Burns, executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, which has long pushed for such a measure.
The federal government has prohibited corporations from contributing directly to candidates since 1907, and more than 20 states have enacted such bans. But Vermont politicians had been reluctant to follow suit. In 2013, the Vermont Senate voted to impose a ban, only to reverse its decision days later.
Since then, "I think there has been more and more concern about money in campaigns," said Senate Government Operations chair Jeanette White (D-Windham). To avoid confusion about the definition of a corporation, the bill would simply prohibit donations from anyone other than an individual, a state party or a political action committee.
Bill Moore of the Vermont Traditions Coalition testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday.
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday unanimously approved legislation to create a judicial process that would allow police to take guns away from those ruled to be an “extreme risk” to themselves or others.
The bill, known as S.221, now advances to the Senate floor with support from domestic violence prevention and gun-control groups — and even grudging acceptance from some gun-rights groups.
The legislation would allow law enforcement officials to file for an “extreme risk protection order” even at the scene of an incident. If a judge approved such an order, police could take guns away from a subject for up to 60 days.
Senate President Pro Tempore Tim Ashe (D/P-Burlington) promised Thursday that the proposal, which died in committee in 2015, would come to a vote next week on the Senate floor — likely as an amendment to related firearm legislation. In interviews around the Statehouse that day, 17 of Vermont's 30 state senators told Seven Days they would definitely vote for the measure, which would close the so-called "gun show loophole."
Six senators said they would vote against it: Joe Benning (R-Caledonia), Brian Collamore (R-Rutland), Alice Nitka (D-Windsor), John Rodgers (D-Essex/Orleans), Dick Sears (D-Bennington) and Bobby Starr (D-Essex/Orleans).
Gov. Phil Scott said Thursday that Vermont officials are exploring alternatives to its current prison deal with the state of Pennsylvania, which houses more than 200 Vermont inmates.
Secretary of Human Services Al Gobeille didn’t specify exact issues with the current arrangement, but he said Vermont officials aren’t happy with how it’s working. Officials plan to solicit proposals for a new deal.
“I think that issuing [a request for proposals] is an indication that we’re looking for something different than what we have,” Gobeille said. “We’re in the process of doing that. It has not been issued yet.”
Gov. Phil Scott outlines new gun-control proposals.
Updated at 6:22 p.m.
Vermont’s gun politics experienced a historic shift Thursday morning.
“It’s a sea change,” said Sen. Dick Sears (D-Bennington), who has served in Montpelier for a quarter-century. “This issue has roused the Vermont public in a way I haven’t seen since civil unions.”
During separate press conferences at the Vermont Statehouse, Republican Gov. Phil Scott and the state’s most powerful Democrats called for swift action on a series of gun-control measures. While differences remained between them, both camps appeared intent on passing significant new laws before the end of the legislative session.
Posted
ByTaylor Dobbs
on Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 5:11 PM
Tuesday afternoon, Rep. Paul Lefebvre (R-Newark) sat at a bench next to a bolt-action .308 hunting rifle with a suppressor screwed onto the barrel. He chambered a round, looked down the scope and fired.
Lefebvre was one of three Vermont lawmakers attending an event sponsored by the American Suppressor Association at a shooting range in Barre. Hours earlier and just four miles away at the Vermont Statehouse, students and activists had rallied for new gun control legislation in the wake of last week's mass school shooting in Florida. But at the Barre Fish & Game Club, state legislators were focused on why suppressors, better known as "silencers," should be legal for hunting in Vermont.