Georgia State Senator Colton Moore, a Republican from Trenton, who represents Chattooga County and surrounding areas in Northwest Georgia, has introduced a wide-ranging slate of legislation this session, targeting issues from National Guard deployments and gun regulations to taxes, abortion, elections, and lobbying rules. But despite the ambitious scope, the proposals are widely viewed as facing steep obstacles in the Georgia Legislature, where committee gatekeeping and leadership support often determine which bills advance.

Moore’s most prominent proposal is SB 62, the “Defend the Guard Act,” which would require a formal declaration of war by Congress before the Georgia National Guard could be released to federal control. While the bill is currently awaiting a hearing in the Senate Interstate Cooperation Committee, which Moore chairs, critics note that measures attempting to limit federal authority over the Guard have historically struggled to gain traction due to constitutional questions and concerns about federal funding and readiness.

Moore’s other filings include:

  • SB 163, changing the standards for suing a government over unauthorized weapons regulations and increasing damages to at least $50,000;

  • SB 168, reducing Georgia’s state income tax to zero with no fiscal restrictions;

  • SB 200, banning abortion from conception;

  • SB 303, requiring universal hand-marked paper ballots and public hand counts;

  • SB 366, allowing over-the-counter sales of ivermectin;

  • SB 378, disbanding leadership fundraising committees and banning lobbying by any group receiving public funds.

Political observers note that several of the proposals would represent major shifts in state policy, and that large-scale changes—especially those with significant budget impacts, legal challenges, or direct effects on how the Legislature operates—typically require strong backing from Senate leadership and broad support across both chambers to move forward.

In particular, bills dealing with election procedures and tax policy tend to be tightly controlled by legislative leaders and budget writers, while measures affecting lobbying and fundraising structures can face resistance from within the institution itself. Others, such as the income tax elimination proposal, would likely trigger immediate questions about how the state would replace billions in annual revenue used for education, public safety, and other core services.

The bills now await committee action, where many proposals often stall without a hearing. Even if a measure advances out of committee, it would still have to clear the full Senate, then move through the House and ultimately be signed into law—an uphill path for bills that lack broad support.