House 5/27 - HB910 or SB11

[shootnfish]

I found this information about conference committees in the
Guide to Texas Legislative Information at http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/gtli/legproc ... oncom.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; :

" A conference committee’s charge is limited to reconciling differences between the two chambers, and the committee, unless so directed, may not alter, amend, or omit text that is not in disagreement. Nor may the committee add text on any matter that is not in disagreement or that is not included in either version of the bill in question."

So what can the conference committee legitimately do, when there are not any substantive differences between the bills?

[gljjt]

Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

I know Phil personally so my opinion of him isn't pure conjecture. Also, we should look at the long term track record of some of the reps being trashed. Throwing them out could be short sighted. There is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes and its not all negative. Equating historically strong RKBA reps to OCT isn't helpful. This isn't over.

[safety1]

I found this information about conference committees in the
Guide to Texas Legislative Information at http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/gtli/legproc ... oncom.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; :

" A conference committee’s charge is limited to reconciling differences between the two chambers, and the committee, unless so directed, may not alter, amend, or omit text that is not in disagreement. Nor may the committee add text on any matter that is not in disagreement or that is not included in either version of the bill in question."

So what can the conference committee legitimately do, when there are not any substantive differences between the bills?

This is an excellent point, maybe someone will come along a clarify this.

[sugar land dave]

Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

I know Phil personally so my opinion of him isn't pure conjecture. Also, we should look at the long term track record of some of the reps being trashed. Throwing them out could be short sighted. There is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes and its not all negative. Equating historically strong RKBA reps to OCT isn't helpful. This isn't over.

The above bolded statement is what I was referring to.

[NotRPB]

mold spores exploded after rain I wasn't able to read a lot,felt like sand in the eyes, had trouble reading

but found where Charles explained the Rules on confer/concur/conference committee rules, thank you for clearing up, ... looks like OCT should have listened to him yet again

If I only get to mow shirtless in my yard and have to put on a shirt to use a leaf blower in the street ... I know why now.

[NotRPB]

what nobody is talking about but what I'm seeing is that if HB910 dies then so does the $200 Class C misdemeanor for accidental 30.0violations.

That will be a bigger loss than open-carry.

Chas.

An important point ...

I thought I could live without 910 in my above post, now I want 910 for reduced punishment, and care less about police stop amendments that do nothing..as one stated ... :something like "it's needed but does nothing other than educate police to prevent unnecessary stops" or something like that

[FormerTSgt]

Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

I know Phil personally so my opinion of him isn't pure conjecture. Also, we should look at the long term track record of some of the reps being trashed. Throwing them out could be short sighted. There is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes and its not all negative. Equating historically strong RKBA reps to OCT isn't helpful. This isn't over.

With all due respect, & I mean that, if you know Phil personally maybe you could ask him why he felt it necessary to risk open carry not passing at all just to make this point about the amendment. Don't get me wrong, I am in agreement that the amendment is foolish but if that's what it took to get open carry passed then I would have bet the bullet and voted for it. I guess my question is is it really that unimportant to him? Just trying to get a handle on why he would put the status of open carry as a whole at such risk with so little time left.

[XinTX]

I found this information about conference committees in the
Guide to Texas Legislative Information at http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/gtli/legproc ... oncom.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; :

" A conference committee’s charge is limited to reconciling differences between the two chambers, and the committee, unless so directed, may not alter, amend, or omit text that is not in disagreement. Nor may the committee add text on any matter that is not in disagreement or that is not included in either version of the bill in question."

So what can the conference committee legitimately do, when there are not any substantive differences between the bills?

For one thing, the Democrats could chub it do death and run out the clock. So they can kill the bill over three words of difference.

[NotRPB]

Article today
http://www.texasobserver.org/a-house-di ... provision/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"The move could unexpectedly put open carry legislation—once considered a done deal"

"critical 910 update" I trust Charles interpretation best, I think this is just Interesting Blog entry i saw on Twitter that had info on it
http://texascarry.org/1/post/2015/05/hb ... pdate.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[gljjt]

Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

I know Phil personally so my opinion of him isn't pure conjecture. Also, we should look at the long term track record of some of the reps being trashed. Throwing them out could be short sighted. There is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes and its not all negative. Equating historically strong RKBA reps to OCT isn't helpful. This isn't over.

The above bolded statement is what I was referring to.

I missed that. I apologize. Thanks for clarifying. And I agree faith you.

[gljjt]

Well looks like -- Appointed (05/27/2015) Phillips (Chair) | Burns | Geren | King, Phil | Nevárez (2 voted for it 3 against it)

Will be overseeing the committee for the House, when and where can you see who from the Senate will be there and when this committee will get started on this?

Phil King voted nay, but he supports OC. I am sure he will do everything he can to get OC moving in conference. In spite of his vote today, he is in the "us" camp. I think we should hold public anger until all is said and done. This thing is so close, let's don't throw a wrench in the gears. Contacting our reps in anger and threatening to vote for someone else next election probably would cause more harm than good. IMHO.

That's what the OCT guys did and we know how that turned out.....

I know Phil personally so my opinion of him isn't pure conjecture. Also, we should look at the long term track record of some of the reps being trashed. Throwing them out could be short sighted. There is a lot more that goes on behind the scenes and its not all negative. Equating historically strong RKBA reps to OCT isn't helpful. This isn't over.

With all due respect, & I mean that, if you know Phil personally maybe you could ask him why he felt it necessary to risk open carry not passing at all just to make this point about the amendment. Don't get me wrong, I am in agreement that the amendment is foolish but if that's what it took to get open carry passed then I would have bet the bullet and voted for it. I guess my question is is it really that unimportant to him? Just trying to get a handle on why he would put the status of open carry as a whole at such risk with so little time left.

I no longer work for the state where I interacted with him on non-gun related state business. I'd like to know why he did what he did as well. I think it was the wrong route to go. My only point is, I believe he will work to get this through. He is on our side, even if he mistakenly voiced the opinion he did and voted for non-concurrence with presumably the true belief OC will still pass.

[mr1337]

I found this information about conference committees in the
Guide to Texas Legislative Information at http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/gtli/legproc ... oncom.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; :

" A conference committee’s charge is limited to reconciling differences between the two chambers, and the committee, unless so directed, may not alter, amend, or omit text that is not in disagreement. Nor may the committee add text on any matter that is not in disagreement or that is not included in either version of the bill in question."

So what can the conference committee legitimately do, when there are not any substantive differences between the bills?

I'm assuming this means that the committee must choose between the Dutton amendment and the Huffines amendment.

I don't see how that is going to help any more than just concurring the Huffines amendment if this is the case.

I found it interesting that so many changed their votes between the Dutton amendment and the concurrence vote. The political backlash from LEO groups must have been immense.

With or without the amendment, police still cannot detain a person without RS, so I wish they would have just done what gets HB910 passed. If that means go without the amendment, we still have the court cases to back us up.

[mr1337]

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/ho ... er-premium" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If the 10-member conference committee fails to come to an agreement, he said, the House will accept the Huffines amendment rather than kill the bill all together.

This sentence gives me hope.

"I have no doubt that at the end of the day there will be an open carry bill passed in the 84th session," said bill sponsor Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman.

This one too.

[PBR]

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/ho ... er-premium

If the 10-member conference committee fails to come to an agreement, he said, the House will accept the Huffines amendment rather than kill the bill all together.

This sentence gives me hope.

"I have no doubt that at the end of the day there will be an open carry bill passed in the 84th session," said bill sponsor Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman.

This one too.

yea gives hope but also Huffines also stated it was the exact same amendment (which wasnt true) and that no worries cause it passed House overwhelmingly with a 133 to 10 vote -- see where that got us

[Charles L. Cotton]

Ultimately, the House heeded the advice of law enforcement, and 79 representatives voted against accepting the Senate changes, sending the bill to conference committee. That left some lawmakers predicting the end of open carry, and worrying that it won’t get out of committee quickly enough to pass before the Legislature wraps up on Monday. Rinaldi tweeted: “The House just killed Open Carry.”

The appointed House conferees include the bill’s author, and other supporters of open carry, which gives the legislation a good chance to get out of committee. Still, Rinaldi might be on to something. At a Texas Tribune event Thursday morning, Sen. Jose Rodriguez (D-El Paso) said he’d filibuster open carry if given the opportunity. The bill must go back to both chamber for final approval once it leaves committee, so if it gets out late enough, Rodriguez could have the power to keep open carry from becoming law.

Full article at: http://www.texasobserver.org/a-house-di ... provision/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chas.