Iowa bill that lowers age to own a handgun advances in Senate
DES MOINES, Iowa — An Iowa Senate judiciary subcommittee voted to unanimously move a bill that lowers the age to own and purchase a handgun to the full committee level on Tuesday morning.
The bill was voted through the full Iowa House chamber last week by a vote of 79 to 18. The wording in the legislation changes the age from 21 to 18-years-old to purchase, acquire or carry a pistol or a revolver in the state.
All three state senators signed off on moving the bill forward, with the one democrat on the subcommittee wrestling with his vote.
'What's fair is if we set the adult age of 18 and you become 18, then you get adult rights. That's hard to swallow in some cases,' said State Senator Tony Bisignano (D), District 15 from Des Moines. Sen. Bisignano weighed not wanting to put more guns on the streets with what is constitutionally fair. He added at the end that he is reluctant to sign off on it, but deemed it appropriate.
Urbandale Food Pantry reopens in new facility
The chair of the subcommittee, State Senator Scott Webster (R), District 47 shared that his daughter had just turned 18 and is a real estate agent. He signed off on the bill saying that this gives him more comfort that she will be able to properly defend herself.
Two members of the public shared their thoughts on if the bill should advance or not, the Iowa Firearms Coalition argued that at 18 you are considered an adult, so this law change is necessary.
'Iowa law provides that when you reach 18, you're an adult, you may marry, vote, join the military,' said Richard Rogers with the Iowa Firearms Coalition.
The second speaker cited the high rates of violence amongst the younger population, and also added that someone is not fully matured, and the brain not developed at age 18.
'18 to 20-year-olds comprise of 4% of the U.S. population, but account for 17% of known gun homicide offenders,' said Connie Ryan, the executive director at the Interfaith Alliance of Iowa.
Ryan also noted the high suicide rates and these weapons being a large contributing factor to those causes of death.
Federal law does not allow someone to purchase a handgun under the age of 18 from a federally licensed dealer, but the state is able to change Iowa code to allow for an 18-year-old to purchase a gun from a private dealer, or have a parent or guardian purchase it and gift it to the individual; along with allowing the person to carry the handgun as well.
The bill must be passed through the Iowa Senate Judiciary committee before Friday, April 4 to be considered 'funnel-proof.'
Iowa News:
Iowa bill that lowers age to own a handgun advances in Senate
Whirlpool to lay off hundreds at Amana facility
WHO 13 Farm Report: Tuesday, April 1st
2025 Remarkable Women honoree has been revealed
4-year-old dies in Ames shooting, police investigating
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's actions in Los Angeles spur debate over deportation funds in his ‘big, beautiful' bill
'All you have to do is look at what's happening in Los Angeles to realize that our law enforcement needs all the support that we can possibly give them,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The focus on some $350 billion in national security funding comes as action on the massive package is lumbering along in Congress at a critical moment. Trump wants the bill on his desk by the Fourth of July. But Senate Republicans trying to heave it to passage without Democrats are also running up against objections from within their GOP ranks over the details. Advertisement At the same time, Democrats are warning that Trump's executive reach into California — sending in the National Guard over the governor's objections and calling up the Marines — is inflaming tensions in what had been isolated protests in pockets of LA. They warned the president's heavy-handed approach has the potential to spread, if unchecked, to other communities nationwide. Advertisement 'We are at a dangerous inflection point in our country,' said Rep. Jimmy Gomez, who represents the Los Angeles area. 'Trump created this political distraction to divide us and keep our focus away from his policies that are wreaking havoc on our economy and hurting working families,' he said. 'It's a deliberate attempt by Trump to incite unrest, test the limits of executive power and distract from the lawlessness of his administration.' At its core, the bill extends some $4.5 trillion in existing tax breaks that would otherwise expire at the end of the year without action in Congress, cutting some $1.4 trillion in spending over the decade to help offset costs. The Congressional Budget Office found the bill's changes to Medicaid and other programs would leave an estimated 10.9 million more people without health insurance and at least 3 million each month without food stamps from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. At the same time, CBO said the package will add some $2.4 trillion to deficits over the decade. One emerging area of concern for Republican leaders has been the bill's status before the Senate parliamentarian's office, which assesses whether the package complies with the strict rules used for legislation under the so-called budget reconciliation process. Late Monday, Republicans acknowledged potential 'red flags' coming from the parliamentarian's office that will require changes in the House bill before it can be sent to the Senate. Leaders are using the reconciliation process because it allows for simple majority passage in both chambers, were GOP majorities are razor-thin. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said Republicans are preparing to address the concerns with a vote in the House, possibly as soon as this week, to change the package. Advertisement Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer seized on the House's upcoming do-over vote as a chance for Republicans who are dissatisfied with the package to reassert their leverage and 'force the bill back to the drawing board.' 'They say they don't like parts of the bill — now is their opportunity to change it,' Schumer said. On Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance was dispatched to speak with one GOP holdout, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has pushed for deeper spending reductions in the bill to prevent skyrocketing deficits from adding to the nation's $36 trillion debt load. Other Republican senators have raised concerns about the health care cuts. But Republicans are in agreement on border security, deportation and military funding, over the objections of Democrats who fought vigorously during the committee process to strip those provisions from the bill. The package includes about $150 billion for border security and deportation operations, including funding for hiring 10,000 new ICE officers — with what Johnson said are $10,000 hiring bonuses — as well as 3,000 new Border Patrol agents and other field operations and support staff. There's also funding for a daily detention capacity for 100,000 migrants and for flights for 1 million deportations annually. The package includes $46 billion for construction of Trump's long promised wall between the U.S.-Mexico border. Additionally, the bill includes $150 billion for the Pentagon, with $5 billion for the military deployment in support of border security, along with nearly $25 billion for Trump's 'Golden Dome' defense system over the U.S. Separately, the bill adds another $21 billion for the Coast Guard. Advertisement Democrats have argued against the deportations, and warned that Trump appears to be stirring up protests so he can clamp down on migrant communities. Rep. Nanette Barragan — whose district represents the suburban city of Paramount, where the weekend Home Depot raid touched off protests — implored Americans: 'Listen to the words of this administration: They're using words like insurrection. They're using words like invasion.' She warned the administration is laying the groundwork for even steeper actions. 'That's a concern,' she said. 'That is dangerous. It's wrong.' Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Nathan Boyles easily secures District 3 state House seat with win over Democrat Dondre Wise
The rough and tumble April 1 Republican primary turned out to be the biggest obstacle Holt resident Nathan Boyles would face on his way to securing the District 3 seat in the Florida House of Representatives. Neither Democratic opponent Dondre Wise nor a healthy dose of voter indifference could prevent Boyles from securing election to the office in a June 10 special election. In an unofficial tally with all precincts counted but some mail in votes still outstanding in Santa Rosa County, Boyles had received 8,175 votes to 4,013 for Wise. The district is composed of all of Santa Rosa County except the southwestern edge, which includes Gulf Breeze and Navarre Beach. District 3 also extends into North Okaloosa to encompass rural areas north of the county seat of Crestview. In a break down by county, Boyles received 6,756 (66%) votes to 3,438 (34%) in Santa Rosa County and 1,419 (71%) votes to 575 (29%) in Okaloosa County. Boyles accepted the victory with humility. "Obviously it's overwhelming to see the report we received. Having served as an elected official you know you can't take that kind of support for granted," he said. The dismal final unofficial accounting showed that of the 118,401 registered Santa Rosa County voters just 10,199 or 8.6% cast ballots this cycle, while in Okaloosa County, where 22,449 voters were eligible, 1,997, or 8.9%, voted. Boyles attributed the low turnout to voter fatigue created by a special election held in the immediate wake of a hectic 2024 election cycle. "I'll take every vote we got," he said. Due to the late date of the special election vote Boyles did not get to participate in the bulk of the 2025 Legislative session. He will, however, be sworn in on June 16 and have the opportunity to vote in the overtime period of the session when the state House and state Senate come to agreement on a balanced state budget, probably some time next week. Boyles is an Okaloosa County resident who served three terms as a county commissioner. In District 3 he will represent a constituency made up primarily of Santa Rosa County residents. Though a sizeable segment of the Santa Rosa population argued early on that a county resident should hold the seat, Boyles has insisted all along the election was not about Okaloosa or Santa Rosa counties, but about finding someone suitable to represent District 3 in Tallahassee. The state representative elect has been preparing for his role in Tallahassee since emerging victorious April 1 over a slate of seven GOP candidates, all of whom competed in the primary knowing the winner would be a heavy favorite to replace Joel Rudman in the super conservative district. Boyles spent time in Tallahassee during the 2025 legislative session familiarizing himself with lawmakers and the legislative process and has stopped in to address the Santa Rosa County Commission as well as the governing bodies of the city of Milton and town of Jay. "It's been exciting to go over there and see the process and the people who make it run," he said. "It helps to understand the rules. I've enjoyed the opportunity of a running head start and hopefully I'll be educated and be the best representative of the district I can be." Boyles burst upon the Santa Rosa County scene in 2020 when his upstart Adams Sanitation business began luring customers in the north end of the county away from established WastePro which, as the only service provider, had decreased weekly pickups to one time a week while at the same time raising fees. After a protracted legal squabble, Adams Sanitation emerged victorious from litigation with both WastePro and the county itself. It now services thousands of customers county wide and employs 75 Santa Rosa County residents. The familiarity Boyles has gained in Santa Rosa showed in the Republican primary where Jay mayor Shon Owens, the popular choice among Santa Rosa County leadership, only outpolled him by 441 votes. In contrast, Boyles captured 1,399 more Okaloosa County votes than Owens, who ultimately finished 949 votes behind the winner. Boyles relied on his experience as a county commissioner to campaign for the District 3 seat. He spoke of his "significant experience in prioritizing infrastructure while keeping taxes low" and touched on key Okaloosa County achievements Santa Rosa residents could relate to. Those included paving dirt roads, improving rural broadband, preserving contaminant free drinking water, providing adequate stormwater treatment, protecting the environment and offering modern sewage treatment and disposal. Wise, who fielded no opposition on the Democratic side of the special election ticket, had moved just last month from Pensacola to Navarre. He has said that he knew he was facing an uphill battle in the heavily Republican District 3, but he was hopeful he'd been able to demonstrate through his campaign the importance of the election process. "I most wanted to make people aware of the election process and advocate for voter registration. I want real change and I believe this community does too," he said. "Regardless of the election outcome, I think people are starting to understand." The special election, which Gov. Ron DeSantis waited until Jan. 21 to schedule, was necessitated when Rudman resigned his seat to run for the Florida First Congressional District seat which was left empty after the November 2024 resignation of former U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz. Rudman lost the congressional race to former Florida Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis. This article originally appeared on Pensacola News Journal: Nathan Boyles wins Florida House District 3 special election
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Why are more Americans filing for Social Security benefits?
(NewsNation) — More older Americans are claiming their Social Security benefits earlier, a potentially alarming trend that could significantly reduce the income many rely on in their golden years. As of May, individual retirement claims are up 13% in the current fiscal year compared to the same period last year, an increase of nearly 320,000 claims, according to the latest Social Security data. To put the recent surge in perspective: From 2012 to 2024, retirement claims rose by an average of just 3% per year, according to an analysis by the Urban Institute, a research group. Plan to garnish Social Security checks for student loan debt paused Part of the recent uptick is due to more retirees claiming Social Security benefits earlier, a choice that permanently reduces their monthly checks if done before full retirement age. Jack Smalligan, a senior policy fellow at the Urban Institute, described the increase in earlier claims as 'disconcerting' because it can impact people's 'long-term retirement security.' 'For most individuals, delaying the time that they claim Social Security is a smart retirement decision,' Smalligan said. While demographic factors, such as an aging population, have contributed to the rise, increased concern over the Trump administration's handling of the system may also help explain the surge. Social Security data shows the spike in monthly claims was especially pronounced in November and January — the month Trump was elected and the month he took office. Polling shows public concern about Social Security is now at a 15-year high, an uptick that coincides with the Trump administration's plans to slash the agency's workforce. The president and advisers, like Elon Musk, have made unfounded claims about rampant fraud within the system, while website outages have also caused confusion. Smalligan pointed to the recent surge in calls to Social Security and the rise in field office visits as further signs of growing anxiety. At the same time, top Democrats, including former President Joe Biden, have amplified those fears with misleading claims that give the impression Americans' monthly retirement checks may not arrive. Democrats sound alarm on Social Security as Biden returns to stage Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has warned that Trump and Musk are coming for people's benefits and hiding behind bogus fraud claims to justify stealing people's checks. The political rhetoric appears to be resonating, but it's also fueling the broader uncertainty, potentially causing real harm. During a meeting in March, Social Security officials said that 'fearmongering has driven people to claim benefits earlier,' The Wall Street Journal reported. Overall, 52% of Americans say they worry a 'great deal' about the Social Security system, up from 43% in 2024, according to Gallup. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, that figure rises to 65% — a 30-point increase from the previous year. 'No one's scheming right now to privatize Social Security or dismantle it … that type of fearmongering is not helpful,' said Charles Blahous, a researcher at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University who specializes in Social Security. While Social Security does face long-term financial challenges, the system isn't going away, and future policy uncertainty isn't a good reason to claim benefits early today, Blahous said. Trump has repeatedly promised not to cut Social Security benefits, while Democrats argue that staffing reductions will make it harder for retirees to access services, undermining the system in a different way. Other factors, unrelated to political rhetoric, could also be driving the rise in retirement claims. There are three key reasons for the uptick, according to a Social Security official: The start of the peak 65 baby boom, a massive surge of Americans turning 65 years old Implementation of the Social Security Fairness Act, which increased benefits for certain workers receiving pensions from jobs not covered by Social Security Improved outreach notifying spouses of Social Security beneficiaries that they may be eligible for a higher benefit Blahous acknowledged that the three factors are real but thinks 'the jury's still out' on how much of the recent rise is due to anxiety about the program's future. Another possibility is that stock market volatility, partly driven by Trump's ever-changing trade policies, temporarily lowered the balances of millions of retirement accounts and prompted some older Americans to claim their more reliable Social Security benefits earlier than planned. Americans can start collecting Social Security retirement benefits as early as age 62, but that doesn't mean they should. Claiming before full retirement age permanently reduces monthly benefits, which is why waiting often makes more financial sense. It's even more concerning when that decision is driven by fear about the program's future rather than a careful assessment of personal circumstances. 'It's basically an irrevocable decision, which is all the more reason why people should be very cautious about when they make it,' Blahous said. When is the best age to take Social Security? Someone who turns 62 in 2025 would see their monthly benefit lowered by about 30% versus what it would be at their full retirement age of 67. On the other hand, those who delay claiming until after their full retirement age receive an 8% increase for each year they wait, up to age 70. That can amount to thousands of dollars. In 2025, the maximum Social Security benefit is $2,831 for someone retiring at 62, but it rises to $5,108 for those retiring at 70. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
