Charles L. Cotton wrote:
Campus-carry has widespread support in the House and Senate and it will pass both bodies, if we can get it to the floor. Gov. Perry wants to sign the bill, so the only hurdle is getting it to the floor. Remember, we need 21 votes in the Senate to bring it up for debate and voting. It died in the Senate last session because a Senator broke his word to Sen. Wentworth and we didn't have 21 votes.
Just saw this
Do you know if we have the 21 votes this time for sure? Maybe a few more than 21 just in case?
Charles L. Cotton wrote:I hate the phrase "guardedly optimistic" because it's so over used, but it applies to my feelings at this time. Many people, me included, were very concerned about the appointment of an El Paso Democrat, Joe Pickett, as Chairman of the House Homeland Security & Public Safety Committee. It appeared to play into the hands of liberal, anti-gun Democrats because that is the most important House committee for gun owners in Texas.
So why am I feeling better about major bills this session? In spite of tremendous pressure from within his own Party in Texas and elsewhere, Chairman Pickett scheduled public hearings on two high profile, emotionally charged bills and he did it earlier than in last session. I'm speaking of campus-carry and open-carry bills. We also expect those bills to be voted on in a timely fashion, i.e. one week after the hearings. If the votes occur as we have been led to believe, then there is every reason to believe the House will not be an impediment to passing pro-gun bills. That said, this isn't my first rodeo and only time will tell, but again, I'm "guardedly optimistic."
Charles L. Cotton wrote:I hate the phrase "guardedly optimistic" because it's so over used, but it applies to my feelings at this time. Many people, me included, were very concerned about the appointment of an El Paso Democrat, Joe Pickett, as Chairman of the House Homeland Security & Public Safety Committee. It appeared to play into the hands of liberal, anti-gun Democrats because that is the most important House committee for gun owners in Texas.
So why am I feeling better about major bills this session? In spite of tremendous pressure from within his own Party in Texas and elsewhere, Chairman Pickett scheduled public hearings on two high profile, emotionally charged bills and he did it earlier than in last session. I'm speaking of campus-carry and open-carry bills. We also expect those bills to be voted on in a timely fashion, i.e. one week after the hearings. If the votes occur as we have been led to believe, then there is every reason to believe the House will not be an impediment to passing pro-gun bills. That said, this isn't my first rodeo and only time will tell, but again, I'm "guardedly optimistic."
Chas.
Neither of them was voted on one week after the hearings and neither of them is sceduled to be considered during next week's meeting on the 28th.
Charles L. Cotton wrote:I hate the phrase "guardedly optimistic" because it's so over used, but it applies to my feelings at this time. Many people, me included, were very concerned about the appointment of an El Paso Democrat, Joe Pickett, as Chairman of the House Homeland Security & Public Safety Committee. It appeared to play into the hands of liberal, anti-gun Democrats because that is the most important House committee for gun owners in Texas.
So why am I feeling better about major bills this session? In spite of tremendous pressure from within his own Party in Texas and elsewhere, Chairman Pickett scheduled public hearings on two high profile, emotionally charged bills and he did it earlier than in last session. I'm speaking of campus-carry and open-carry bills. We also expect those bills to be voted on in a timely fashion, i.e. one week after the hearings. If the votes occur as we have been led to believe, then there is every reason to believe the House will not be an impediment to passing pro-gun bills. That said, this isn't my first rodeo and only time will tell, but again, I'm "guardedly optimistic."
Chas.
Neither of them was voted on one week after the hearings and neither of them is sceduled to be considered during next week's meeting on the 28th.
The scheduled bills are the bills on which the committee will hear testimony. Since the committee already heard testimony on the gun bills, those bills obviously wouldn't be scheduled again. The committee can vote on any pending bill any time they meet. The actual votes are frequently done as "desk votes" (at the chairperson's desk on the House floor) rather than in formal committee hearings. Don't start freaking out yet.
Charles L. Cotton wrote:I hate the phrase "guardedly optimistic" because it's so over used, but it applies to my feelings at this time. Many people, me included, were very concerned about the appointment of an El Paso Democrat, Joe Pickett, as Chairman of the House Homeland Security & Public Safety Committee. It appeared to play into the hands of liberal, anti-gun Democrats because that is the most important House committee for gun owners in Texas.
So why am I feeling better about major bills this session? In spite of tremendous pressure from within his own Party in Texas and elsewhere, Chairman Pickett scheduled public hearings on two high profile, emotionally charged bills and he did it earlier than in last session. I'm speaking of campus-carry and open-carry bills. We also expect those bills to be voted on in a timely fashion, i.e. one week after the hearings. If the votes occur as we have been led to believe, then there is every reason to believe the House will not be an impediment to passing pro-gun bills. That said, this isn't my first rodeo and only time will tell, but again, I'm "guardedly optimistic."
Chas.
Neither of them was voted on one week after the hearings and neither of them is sceduled to be considered during next week's meeting on the 28th.
Charles L. Cotton wrote:I hate the phrase "guardedly optimistic" because it's so over used, but it applies to my feelings at this time. Many people, me included, were very concerned about the appointment of an El Paso Democrat, Joe Pickett, as Chairman of the House Homeland Security & Public Safety Committee. It appeared to play into the hands of liberal, anti-gun Democrats because that is the most important House committee for gun owners in Texas.
So why am I feeling better about major bills this session? In spite of tremendous pressure from within his own Party in Texas and elsewhere, Chairman Pickett scheduled public hearings on two high profile, emotionally charged bills and he did it earlier than in last session. I'm speaking of campus-carry and open-carry bills. We also expect those bills to be voted on in a timely fashion, i.e. one week after the hearings. If the votes occur as we have been led to believe, then there is every reason to believe the House will not be an impediment to passing pro-gun bills. That said, this isn't my first rodeo and only time will tell, but again, I'm "guardedly optimistic."
Chas.
Neither of them was voted on one week after the hearings and neither of them is sceduled to be considered during next week's meeting on the 28th.
If they are not voted on this Thursday, then a call-to-action will go out.
Chas.
There seems to be a lot of feet dragging going on. Homeland Security & Public Safety still hasn't voted on the gun bills, and Urban Affairs still hasn't voted on the knife preemption bill.
Why are we having this problem in a state that's been Republican for two decades??? The GOP has a 2-1 advantage in the House - why are we letting Democrats chair committees???
Let me know if what I'm saying is off base but does the NRA and or the TSRA have the same influence on Texas representatives as they do in Washington? Presumably and again I may be off base and just regurgitating what I've heard, but the Democrats in Washington that are not wanting major gun reform are only doing so because they are afraid of what happened last time from the assault weapons ban and don't want to lose their seats. Supposedly the NRA "helped" get officials elected that were friendlier to the cause or just oust those that were for the ban.
If there is any truth to that is there not the same type of clout in Austin with our less gun friendly Senators or maybe because they don't make a living off the Texas senate there isn't as much power in the fear of losing a seat?
It seems to me that far too many conservatives just continue to try to "play nice" while far too many liberals don't seem to try at all. Why are we "playing nice"? If we cannot sieze the opportunity to do the right thing when we control so much of the State House as well as the Govenorship, then we are doomed to suffer under so many very wrong things that are simply being forced upon us. I have answered every call to action this legislative session and intend to continue to do so. We are talking about trying to protect some of our basic rights and freedoms. If we do not respond in large enough numbers with loud (but respectful) voices and use logical reasoned points of discussion, another legislative session will dribble down the drain with more accumulated incrimental losses and little or no gains. How many of you wore the uniform during times of conflict ? You were willing then to stand up and be counted and to go that extra mile. It is time we do that again. All of the above applies several fold to what is going on in Washington D.C.
Some days are better than others, but every day is a good day.
