Thanks. Once they get their greedy claws on our money they never want to let it go. They always have some way to repurpose our money.Papa_Tiger wrote:http://www.mystatesman.com/news/state-- ... 1nyIk3SzJ/mojo84 wrote:Can you provide a link to the article? That sounds like a bunch of bull. More fake news.AF-Odin wrote:Newspaper article this morning about SB-16 stating that this bill will "strip" millions of dollars from state education funding because of reducing LTC fees. Hmmmm, thought I paid a substantial amount in taxes that fund education/ Why should a DPS licensing program fund other state agencies? LTC fee should pay for DPS to conduct a background check and process the plastic, nothing more. The antis will grasp at any straw.
From the ever unbiased Austin American Statesman -
The bill would cost the state $22 million in lost revenue over the next two years, according to the Legislative Budget Board.
State Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth who voted against the bill, said that the money should be spent on more pressing matters like schools or child welfare. She also said that guns are being given special treatment.
SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Moderators: carlson1, Keith B, Charles L. Cotton
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 5
- Posts: 9043
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
- Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Note: Me sharing a link and information published by others does not constitute my endorsement, agreement, disagreement, my opinion or publishing by me. If you do not like what is contained at a link I share, take it up with the author or publisher of the content.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 5350
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
- Location: Johnson County, Texas
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
The LTC licensing fees were never supposed to be a profiteering system. But that doesn't keep the tax and spend Liberals from trying to get their hands on it.
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 9
- Posts: 867
- Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 9:55 am
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Passed the House today 129-17! Now back to the Senate for concurrence and on to the Governor's desk!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 4
- Posts: 5350
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:23 pm
- Location: Johnson County, Texas
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Papa_Tiger wrote:Passed the House today 129-17! Now back to the Senate for concurrence and on to the Governor's desk!
That means that there were several Democrats who voted for it. I will be interested to see who they were.
Take away the Second first, and the First is gone in a second
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 2275
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:53 pm
- Location: North East Texas
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
FROM TLO
SB 16
, as amended, was passed to third reading by (Record 607): 111 Yeas,
30 Nays, 2 Present, not voting.
Yeas — Allen; Alvarado; Anderson, R.; Ashby; Bailes; Biedermann; Bohac;
Bonnen, D.; Bonnen, G.; Burkett; Burns; Burrows; Button; Cain; Canales;
Capriglione; Clardy; Cook; Cortez; Cosper; Craddick; Cyrier; Dale; Darby;
Davis, S.; Dean; Elkins; Faircloth; Fallon; Farrar; Flynn; Frank; Frullo; Geren;
Goldman; Gooden; Guerra; Guillen; Gutierrez; Hefner; Herrero; Holland;
Huberty; Hunter; Isaac; Johnson, J.; Keough; King, K.; King, P.; King, T.; Klick;
Koop; Krause; Kuempel; Lambert; Landgraf; Lang; Larson; Laubenberg; Leach;
Lozano; Lucio; Martinez; Metcalf; Meyer; Morrison; Mun ̃oz; Murphy; Murr;
Nevarez; Oliveira; Oliverson; Paddie; Parker; Paul; Perez; Phelan; Phillips;
Pickett; Price; Raney; Raymond; Rinaldi; Roberts; Rodriguez, E.; Sanford;
Schaefer; Schofield; Schubert; Shaheen; Sheffield; Shine; Simmons; Smithee;
2224
85th LEGISLATURE — REGULAR SESSION
Springer; Stephenson; Stickland; Stucky; Swanson; Thierry; Thompson, E.;
Thompson, S.; Tinderholt; VanDeaver; Villalba; White; Wilson; Workman; Wray;
Zedler; Zerwas.
Nays — Alonzo; Anchia; Are ́valo; Bernal; Blanco; Coleman; Collier; Davis,
Y.; Deshotel; Dutton; Gervin-Hawkins; Giddings; Hernandez; Hinojosa; Howard;
Israel; Johnson, E.; Minjarez; Moody; Neave; Ortega; Reynolds; Rodriguez, J.;
Romero; Rose; Turner; Uresti; Vo; Walle; Wu.
Present, not voting — Mr. Speaker; Kacal(C).
Absent, Excused — Anderson, C.; Bell; Miller.
Absent, Excused, Committee Meeting — Gonzales; Longoria.
Absent — Dukes; Gonza ́lez.
from TLO
SB 16
, as amended, was passed to third reading by (Record 607): 111 Yeas,
30 Nays, 2 Present, not voting.
Yeas — Allen; Alvarado; Anderson, R.; Ashby; Bailes; Biedermann; Bohac;
Bonnen, D.; Bonnen, G.; Burkett; Burns; Burrows; Button; Cain; Canales;
Capriglione; Clardy; Cook; Cortez; Cosper; Craddick; Cyrier; Dale; Darby;
Davis, S.; Dean; Elkins; Faircloth; Fallon; Farrar; Flynn; Frank; Frullo; Geren;
Goldman; Gooden; Guerra; Guillen; Gutierrez; Hefner; Herrero; Holland;
Huberty; Hunter; Isaac; Johnson, J.; Keough; King, K.; King, P.; King, T.; Klick;
Koop; Krause; Kuempel; Lambert; Landgraf; Lang; Larson; Laubenberg; Leach;
Lozano; Lucio; Martinez; Metcalf; Meyer; Morrison; Mun ̃oz; Murphy; Murr;
Nevarez; Oliveira; Oliverson; Paddie; Parker; Paul; Perez; Phelan; Phillips;
Pickett; Price; Raney; Raymond; Rinaldi; Roberts; Rodriguez, E.; Sanford;
Schaefer; Schofield; Schubert; Shaheen; Sheffield; Shine; Simmons; Smithee;
2224
85th LEGISLATURE — REGULAR SESSION
Springer; Stephenson; Stickland; Stucky; Swanson; Thierry; Thompson, E.;
Thompson, S.; Tinderholt; VanDeaver; Villalba; White; Wilson; Workman; Wray;
Zedler; Zerwas.
Nays — Alonzo; Anchia; Are ́valo; Bernal; Blanco; Coleman; Collier; Davis,
Y.; Deshotel; Dutton; Gervin-Hawkins; Giddings; Hernandez; Hinojosa; Howard;
Israel; Johnson, E.; Minjarez; Moody; Neave; Ortega; Reynolds; Rodriguez, J.;
Romero; Rose; Turner; Uresti; Vo; Walle; Wu.
Present, not voting — Mr. Speaker; Kacal(C).
Absent, Excused — Anderson, C.; Bell; Miller.
Absent, Excused, Committee Meeting — Gonzales; Longoria.
Absent — Dukes; Gonza ́lez.
from TLO
Proud to have served for over 22 Years in the U.S. Navy Certificated FAA A&P technician since 1996
-
- Member
- Posts in topic: 2
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 11:39 am
- Location: Hell Paso
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Dog gone if my "rep" (even though he doesn't represent me on matters I care about) Joe Moody isn't on there as a Nay. Just can't seem to get anyone in El Paso to get motivated to get him replaced.powerboatr wrote:FROM TLO
SB 16
, as amended, was passed to third reading by (Record 607): 111 Yeas,
30 Nays, 2 Present, not voting.
Yeas — Allen; Alvarado; Anderson, R.; Ashby; Bailes; Biedermann; Bohac;
Bonnen, D.; Bonnen, G.; Burkett; Burns; Burrows; Button; Cain; Canales;
Capriglione; Clardy; Cook; Cortez; Cosper; Craddick; Cyrier; Dale; Darby;
Davis, S.; Dean; Elkins; Faircloth; Fallon; Farrar; Flynn; Frank; Frullo; Geren;
Goldman; Gooden; Guerra; Guillen; Gutierrez; Hefner; Herrero; Holland;
Huberty; Hunter; Isaac; Johnson, J.; Keough; King, K.; King, P.; King, T.; Klick;
Koop; Krause; Kuempel; Lambert; Landgraf; Lang; Larson; Laubenberg; Leach;
Lozano; Lucio; Martinez; Metcalf; Meyer; Morrison; Mun ̃oz; Murphy; Murr;
Nevarez; Oliveira; Oliverson; Paddie; Parker; Paul; Perez; Phelan; Phillips;
Pickett; Price; Raney; Raymond; Rinaldi; Roberts; Rodriguez, E.; Sanford;
Schaefer; Schofield; Schubert; Shaheen; Sheffield; Shine; Simmons; Smithee;
2224
85th LEGISLATURE — REGULAR SESSION
Springer; Stephenson; Stickland; Stucky; Swanson; Thierry; Thompson, E.;
Thompson, S.; Tinderholt; VanDeaver; Villalba; White; Wilson; Workman; Wray;
Zedler; Zerwas.
Nays — Alonzo; Anchia; Are ́valo; Bernal; Blanco; Coleman; Collier; Davis,
Y.; Deshotel; Dutton; Gervin-Hawkins; Giddings; Hernandez; Hinojosa; Howard;
Israel; Johnson, E.; Minjarez; Moody; Neave; Ortega; Reynolds; Rodriguez, J.;
Romero; Rose; Turner; Uresti; Vo; Walle; Wu.
Present, not voting — Mr. Speaker; Kacal(C).
Absent, Excused — Anderson, C.; Bell; Miller.
Absent, Excused, Committee Meeting — Gonzales; Longoria.
Absent — Dukes; Gonza ́lez.
from TLO
"Since it is so likely that children will meet cruel enemies let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic deeds." - C.S. Lewis
My State Rep Joe Moody is a liberal puke who won't even acknowledge my communications with him. How about yours?
My State Rep Joe Moody is a liberal puke who won't even acknowledge my communications with him. How about yours?
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Moody had two (failed) amendments to SB16 yesterday. The first one would have made it a requirement to have a gun safe in order to get a carry permit. The second one would have eliminated the $40 fee for people who provide proof they have a gun safe. Both amendments were torpedoed by POO.TresHuevos wrote:Dog gone if my "rep" (even though he doesn't represent me on matters I care about) Joe Moody isn't on there as a Nay. Just can't seem to get anyone in El Paso to get motivated to get him replaced.
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
After reading the latest text, what is the status of the honorably discharged veteran fee? I did not see it mentioned.
USMC Retired - DAV Life Member - VFW Life Member - NRA Life Member
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1457
- Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:46 am
- Location: Harris County
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Wondered about that myself, but I think since it's not addressed in the SB16 text I read that it stands as is.poppo wrote:After reading the latest text, what is the status of the honorably discharged veteran fee? I did not see it mentioned.
LTC / SSC Instructor. NRA - Instructor, CRSO, Life Member.
Sig pistol/rifle & Glock armorer | FFL 07/02 SOT
Sig pistol/rifle & Glock armorer | FFL 07/02 SOT
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 1101
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 9:45 pm
- Location: Alvin
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Does this mean the Rep Collier would oppose a bill outlawing carrying of firearms in Texas and eliminating the LTC all together since it would cost the state revenue?Papa_Tiger wrote:http://www.mystatesman.com/news/state-- ... 1nyIk3SzJ/mojo84 wrote:Can you provide a link to the article? That sounds like a bunch of bull. More fake news.AF-Odin wrote:Newspaper article this morning about SB-16 stating that this bill will "strip" millions of dollars from state education funding because of reducing LTC fees. Hmmmm, thought I paid a substantial amount in taxes that fund education/ Why should a DPS licensing program fund other state agencies? LTC fee should pay for DPS to conduct a background check and process the plastic, nothing more. The antis will grasp at any straw.
From the ever unbiased Austin American Statesman -
The bill would cost the state $22 million in lost revenue over the next two years, according to the Legislative Budget Board.
State Rep. Nicole Collier, D-Fort Worth who voted against the bill, said that the money should be spent on more pressing matters like schools or child welfare. She also said that guns are being given special treatment.
"All bleeding eventually stops.......quit whining!"
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Since this is my first Texas legislative session experience I keep wondering when they are going to stop talking and actually vote in both chambers about all of these proposed bills? Do they waste vast amounts of time and then vote on everything in the last few days?
The left lies about everything. Truth is a liberal value, and truth is a conservative value, but it has never been a left-wing value. People on the left say whatever advances their immediate agenda. Power is their moral lodestar; therefore, truth is always subservient to it. - Dennis Prager
-
- Senior Member
- Posts in topic: 1
- Posts: 865
- Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 5:03 pm
- Location: Webster
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
Yeah... Kinda - least it always seems that way to me. From what I remember in Texas Government class back in the day, the last week or 2 is a flurry of yays and nays on the floor as they speed vote things into law. Granted in most cases I believe they have spent the time in session debating, wheeling-n-dealing, etc on the bill so they already have an idea of how to vote when it comes up.bblhd672 wrote:Since this is my first Texas legislative session experience I keep wondering when they are going to stop talking and actually vote in both chambers about all of these proposed bills? Do they waste vast amounts of time and then vote on everything in the last few days?
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson
-
- Banned
- Posts in topic: 3
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:21 pm
- Location: North Texas
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
yeah, here over the next month it's going to get crazy in there...
TSRA Member since 5/30/15; NRA Member since 10/31/14
Re: SB 16 - priority bill, reduction of LTC fees
The talking is the real work. The voting is the result of the talking.Pariah3j wrote:Yeah... Kinda - least it always seems that way to me. From what I remember in Texas Government class back in the day, the last week or 2 is a flurry of yays and nays on the floor as they speed vote things into law. Granted in most cases I believe they have spent the time in session debating, wheeling-n-dealing, etc on the bill so they already have an idea of how to vote when it comes up.bblhd672 wrote:Since this is my first Texas legislative session experience I keep wondering when they are going to stop talking and actually vote in both chambers about all of these proposed bills? Do they waste vast amounts of time and then vote on everything in the last few days?
Most of the talking happens off the floor between legislators and groups of legislators in formal and informal non-public meetings, on the phone, whatever. Also committee meetings. On the last few days you will see whoever is holding the chair position sounding like an auctioneer as he announces bills for their third reading and has a quick vote on them -- these are bills that everyone knows they are not going to argue about (from all the previous talking), they're just going to get passed, so they put them on a special calendar and run through them all at once.
The ones like you see in the movies, where long debates over various amendments happen, are very few because there is simply not enough time in the whole legislative season to do that for each bill. These are bills with lots of support on both sides, for and agin, to the level that the Speaker of the House or the President of the Senate doesn't think he can get away with killing them in a committee (if he opposes) or run them through the consent calendar (if he likes them). The budget is always in this category, and last time Campus Carry and Open Carry were too.
Going from memory, there are something like 10,000 bills filed each session, of which maybe a few hundred advance beyond that point. Only a relative handful get full-fledged debate on the floor of the Senate and/or House.
USAF 1982-2005
____________
____________