The Ohio House of Representatives passed its first bill of the 133rd General Assembly on Wednesday, legislation correcting what Speaker Larry Householder (R-Glenford) called a “clerical error” in the enacted version of 132-HB228 (Johnson) which had led to questions whether it would make certain firearms illegal by mistake once effective on Thursday, March 28. (See The Hannah Report, 2/20/19.)
Householder further said that they were “cleaning up a broken egg” from lame-duck session and that he appreciated Democratic votes in support, saying it was an effort to fix the error rather than debating the merits of the bill.
Rep. Phil Plummer (R-Dayton) sponsored HB86, correcting the language on “dangerous ordnance” that resulted from 132-HB228 and declaring an emergency. The emergency clause passed by a vote of 73-23, with the bill in turn receiving a 76-20 vote. The Ohio Senate passed companion emergency legislation in SB53 (Roegner) Tuesday by a 24-8 vote for that bill and its emergency clause. (See The Hannah Report, 2/26/19.)
Plummer, a former sheriff, said that if the language was not changed it could potentially make certain hunters and gun collectors into criminals, despite that not being the intent of the original bill, and that shotguns and rifles did not belong under the “dangerous ordnance” category he said was used for automatic firearms, “sawed-off” firearms, explosives and rocket launchers.
Democratic members raised concerns over the speed the bill was moving – it was referred out of the House Federalism Committee in its first hearing – particularly given that it was meant to correct an earlier drafting mistake made during the 2018 lame duck session on a bill enacted after former Gov. John Kasich’s veto was overridden. (See The Hannah Report, 12/27/18.)
Rep. Adam Miller (D-Columbus) thanked the members of the House Federalism Committee and Chair John Becker (R-Cincinnati) in particular for their “civility” on a divisive topic, but said he thought the bill should have received witness testimony.
Miller, a U.S. Army Reserve Judge Advocate General’s Corps officer, specifically said he would have liked to hear from the Ohio National Guard as some of the Ohio Code of Military Justice is “tied” to sections of the Ohio Revised Code affected by the bill.
The speed of the process for the bill was also concern, he said, due to misspellings and other issues in it at first. He said it needed to be “absolutely correct,” and recommended a no vote.
Rep. Joe Miller (D-Amherst) said that while he supported the bill because it would correct a mistake made “in the fog of the night,” also cited the circumstance to compare it to the creation of the academic distress commissions under 131-HB70 (Driehaus-Brenner), including one overseeing Lorain City School District. He said those were also the result of last-minute changes without public input. He requested the members consider what had made HB86 necessary and apply the same urgency to other issues such as the distress commissions.
Rep. Brigid Kelly (D-Cincinnati) said that they were meeting in a “hasty process to correct the mistakes made by another hasty process” and also said there are other issues, such as school funding, that should receive similar urgency.
Householder fielded questions from reporters after session on the proposed 18 cent motor fuel tax increase in Gov. Mike DeWine’s transportation and public safety budget, saying committee discussions are ongoing, with potential amendments forthcoming, so the “cake isn’t baked yet.”
There is “no question” there’s a revenue hole, though, he added, and the House hasn’t discussed offsetting the increase with an income tax cut as floated by Senate President Larry Obhof (R-Medina). (See The Hannah Report, 2/26/19.) Householder also said there’s a “long-standing history” of using the motor fuel tax revenue for roads and bridges, as required in the Ohio Constitution, and so he thought the proper place for an increase was in the transportation budget rather than making it part of the operating budget.
Asked about calls for an increase in public transit spending, Householder said that is a subject for ongoing negotiations and recommended a single proposed increase be brought to him rather than multiple differing requests.
Story originally published in The Hannah Report on February 27, 2019. Copyright 2019 Hannah News Service, Inc.