Feinstein's bill sent to commitee


PDA






ol' scratch
January 25, 2013, 12:43 PM
Govtrack only gives it a 10 percent chance of passing commitee and a 1 percent chance of passing the Senate. I felt pretty good about that until I found that 12 percent of all bills make it out of committee and they pass 2 percent of the bills introduced. It still has to pass the House, but I think we should still watch it. The number is SB150

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s150

If you enjoyed reading about "Feinstein's bill sent to commitee" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Hyrulejedi86
January 25, 2013, 12:46 PM
Thank you for posting this. It has less of a chance than the rest of the bills that went through insure last two years.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

John3921
January 25, 2013, 12:51 PM
Write your reps and tell them to sink this bill!

Skribs
January 25, 2013, 12:53 PM
Write your senators, not your reps. Reps is next (well, hopefully not).

Gun-grabbers must be slugs. Who else would be afraid of a salt weapon?

Fryerpower
January 25, 2013, 12:56 PM
Write all of them, now and later.

Jim

armedaccountant
January 25, 2013, 01:06 PM
What committee has it been referred to?

wojownik
January 25, 2013, 01:15 PM
To the Senate Judiciary Committee, probably to the Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee.

The Full committee roster is listed here: http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/members.cfm

Despite what Govtrack says, it could very well creep out of committee.. if the votes go as below. Even on straight partisan lines, it could get out of committee. Will likely get out of committee. This thing is too high profile, too loaded, not to get its day on the Senate floor.

Patrick J. Leahy - yea
Dianne Feinstein - yea
Chuck Schumer - yea
Dick Durban - yea
Sheldon Whitehouse - yea
Amy Klobuchar - yea
Al Franken - yea
Christopher A. Coons - yea
Richard Blumenthal - yea

Orrin G. Hatch - yea?

Chuck Grassley - nay
Jeff Sessions - nay
Lindsey Graham - nay
John Cornyn - nay
Tom Coburn - nay
Michael Lee - nay

Skribs
January 25, 2013, 01:17 PM
According to the link, it says Senate Judiciary. Following the links, it shows 9 members are D, 7 R. I don't have the list of how they've voted on guns, but considering the chairman is democrat, there is a good chance it might make it out of comittee. Granted, one of the dems, Franken, has shown some pause about the Bill, but that could just be politicking.

There are 17 cosponsors on the bill, all democrat. 4 of the cosponsors (not including Feinstein) are on the Judiciary Committee.

Two of the republicans on the committee are from Utah and one is from Texas, so hopefully that works in our favor. Then again, they're fighting a lot of New England states and California.

AlexanderA
January 25, 2013, 01:18 PM
What committee has it been referred to?

Judiciary. Leahy is the chairman.

No text yet. That should be interesting.

Cosponsors are the list of usual suspects.

mrvco
January 25, 2013, 01:26 PM
How much can they modify the bill in committee without it being resubmitted?

If they thought it would pass the Senate, they'd run it through as quickly as possible. The issue is whether they want to submit it for a full vote in the Senate, only to have it defeated. Their 6 seats that will be contested in 2014 have far more to lose voting for it than they do to gain, especially if it doesn't pass ("I voted for controversial failed legislation" is a far better rallying cry for the opposition than their supporters).

wojownik
January 25, 2013, 01:30 PM
They could conceivably rewrite the bill substantially in committee. But, again, don't expect that to go anywhere. Any motions to strike portions or amend of the bill could easily be voted down on partisan lines (in favor of the bill's supporters).

Skribs
January 25, 2013, 01:34 PM
Leahy is at least rated C by the NRA. Although I think he would support things like universal background checks.

beeenbag
January 25, 2013, 01:40 PM
I have sent emails to my senators and reps several times. I decided to call my two senators on this and got a response from both senator's office's that they were both opposed to the bill. I live in KY, and feel like our state will stand firm against this bill.

mcdonl
January 25, 2013, 01:40 PM
Man-o-man! Three letters each and three email each this week! Busy week...

mrvco
January 25, 2013, 01:41 PM
This may be morbid as hell, but I have this strange feeling that their ultimate strategy is to let this thing linger indefinitely in committee, and move on to other legislative priorities, anticipating another gun-related tragedy to occur and then run it through on pure "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING" emotion.

beeenbag
January 25, 2013, 01:44 PM
This may be morbid as hell, but I have this strange feeling that their ultimate strategy is to let this thing linger indefinitely in committee, and move on to other legislative priorities, anticipating another gun-related tragedy to occur and then run it through on pure "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING" emotion.

I would not be suprised. I'm sure the next time anything happens it will be plastered all over our tv screens, followed by "EVIL, MASS MURDERING, HI-CAPACITY, WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION MUST BE BANNED!!!"

wojownik
January 25, 2013, 01:59 PM
Um, isn't that what Piers Morgan is pretty much doing now?

Back on topic, this is going to get played out in committee, then on the Senate floor, and then again in the House. There's another THR thread discussing odds, but I'd say 90% odds it survives the committee (perhaps with some modification), 50/50 it survives the full Senate.

481
January 25, 2013, 02:25 PM
This may be morbid as hell, but I have this strange feeling that their ultimate strategy is to let this thing linger indefinitely in committee, and move on to other legislative priorities, anticipating another gun-related tragedy to occur and then run it through on pure "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING" emotion.
I wouldn't put it past them. The anti-gun thugs will stoop to any level necessary (as we've seen by their exploitation of children) to pass this thing.

I've been writing letters like crazy these last four weeks- ain't gonna stop either.

mrvco
January 25, 2013, 02:40 PM
Or they'll make a big stink about this bill via the media... and some "Great Compromiser" will submit a bill that looks more palatable in relative terms (e.g. Mag Cap Limit, UniBG Checks and no gun ban) and anyone who doesn't vote for it will be labelled retrograde obstructionist with the blood America's children on their hands.

Silent Bob
January 25, 2013, 02:43 PM
This has too much public and media attention for this monstrosity of a bill to die in committee right now, plus the Judiciary Committee is stacked with wide-eyed gun grabbers.

GlowinPontiac
January 25, 2013, 02:52 PM
Gun-grabbers must be slugs. Who else would be afraid of a salt weapon?

Lol!

http://www.bugasalt.com/

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/01/26/qybuvyjy.jpg


Sent from my C5120 using Tapatalk 2

Guvnor
January 25, 2013, 06:40 PM
Harry Reid isn't dumb, he would like to avoid having this bill reaching the senate floor if there is almost no chance of it passing the house later on. Supporting the bill could be disasterous for Democratic senators in pro-gun states. They don't want to lose control of the senate in 2014 over this.

It would be poetic justice to see this bill just languish and never make it out of committee, but if it does make it to a vote, it could be a blessing in disguise if the above scenario plays out.

sota
January 25, 2013, 07:10 PM
in the process of emailing each of the committee members... except for that <deleted> Feinstein. I'm not wasting the bandwidth on her. Here's my letter...


Dear Senator <name>;

I am writing you today to encourage you to vote NAY on Senate Bill S.150. This bill as sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein will have no positive effect on crime or criminal activity, and will only serve to inhibit and endanger law abiding citizens. As it stands, S.150...
* WILL NOT stop or deter violent criminals
* WILL NOT stop or deter individuals intent on mass murder
* WILL prevent law abiding citizens from an adequate defense of the above.
* WILL criminalize law abiding citizens without due process and without cause.

To close I again encourage you to vote NAY on Senate Bill S.150, and uphold your oath as a Senator to defend the Constitution.

I await your reply and hope that it is not of the 'boilerplate' variety.

Sincerely,

<me>

pa350z
January 25, 2013, 07:15 PM
I think Franken will be going NO on this one. He is at risk of losing a reelection on this very issue. He has been unenthusiastic about this.

jfh
January 25, 2013, 07:22 PM
1. Even though he is trying to convince MN voters of his current ambiguity, this guy is an out-and-out gun-grabbing Progressive.

2. He could be jolted by many e-mails if they come from MN voters.

I sent one today, and I will follow up on another the next statement he makes. My basic text is this: "Every time you speak up on this issue, ambiguously or otherwise, I will earmark $50.00 to donate to your opponent in your next election. I will also volunteer my time--and I am retired, and I have lots of time--to your opponent to see you defeated."

I suspect he is re-electable, to be honest--but, if he gets brave and helps push towards a ban, even the Iron Range DFL could turn on him.

Jim H.

sota
January 25, 2013, 07:25 PM
also, I hope I'll find out eventually how they all vote.

Texan Scott
January 25, 2013, 07:25 PM
This is why pressure must be applied to our House reps to be prepared to kill it with fire and put it out with (urine).

sota
January 25, 2013, 07:36 PM
Due to high volume, Senator Blumenthal’s office is only able to receive online messages from his constituents. If you are writing from outside of Connecticut, and wish to contact the Senator, please send a letter to the Senator’s mailing address.

many really naughty words in his direction.

Lateck
January 25, 2013, 08:17 PM
wojownik; thanks for the committee link. I see that my Senator Flake is on it. I just filled out an email to him asking him to oppose it.
Ruger has a large plant here in Arizona.

Lateck,

traderpats
January 25, 2013, 10:22 PM
Harry Reid isn't dumb, he would like to avoid having this bill reaching the senate floor if there is almost no chance of it passing the house later on. Supporting the bill could be disasterous for Democratic senators in pro-gun states. They don't want to lose control of the senate in 2014 over this.

It would be poetic justice to see this bill just languish and never make it out of committee, but if it does make it to a vote, it could be a blessing in disguise if the above scenario plays out.

Exactly what that evil bastard is afraid of and rightly so ....

InkEd
January 25, 2013, 10:41 PM
I wish somebody would put that lying liberal old cow into an Obamacare old folks home to rot out the rest of years. She is cancer on the face of the government and is a truly bad person.

(Sorry, I know it's not exactly THR.)

AlexanderA
January 25, 2013, 10:54 PM
Leahy and Franken could vote to keep this bottled up in the committee, if they're told to do so by Harry Reid. It's no accident that Reid caved on filibuster reform. He wants the excuse of not being able to reach a 60-vote threshold, so that he doesn't have to deal with the gun issue before the next Senate election. Ed Schultz on MSNBC noticed the connection between filibuster reform and guns on his program last night.

hso
January 26, 2013, 01:11 AM
See the threads in Activism on this.

If you enjoyed reading about "Feinstein's bill sent to commitee" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!