WI: Weapons bill passage raises veto questions

Status
Not open for further replies.

xenophon

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2003
Messages
153
Location
Milwaukee, WI
http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/nov03/183224.asp

Weapons bill passage raises veto questions

GOP 2 votes away from concealed-carry override

Madison - Assembly Republicans during an overnight session rewrote parts of the concealed weapons bill to attract more Democratic votes, and it worked in a way that raises questions about whether Gov. Jim Doyle's promised veto of the bill would stand.

Minutes after the changes were made, seven Assembly Democrats joined 57 Republicans at 2:40 a.m. Thursday in voting for the bill that would allow those 21 and older to obtain permits authorizing them to carry handguns, stun guns, non-switchblade knives or billy clubs.

Although the revised bill passed, 64-35, that was still short of the 66-vote Assembly majority needed to override any veto by the governor.

Two Republicans, Reps. Luther Olsen of Berlin and John Townsend of Fond du Lac, voted against it. But Townsend indicated later Thursday that he would reverse himself if it comes to an override vote, and Olsen said he would consider doing the same.

The Assembly vote returned the bill to the Senate, which is expected to quickly approve it Tuesday and lay it on Doyle's desk.

The middle-of-the-night concessions "make a lot of folks in this (Assembly) feel more comfortable" with repealing the ban of concealed weapons passed in 1870, said Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Town of Norway).

Democratic Rep. Wayne Wood of Janesville said the final changes earned his vote. With them, he said, "this is a better bill - a much better bill."

The final Gunderson-Wood compromise that got the Assembly within two votes of being able to override a Doyle veto made these changes:

Requiring that anyone with a concealed weapon permit issued in another state must have completed a firearms training program similar to the one required in Wisconsin, or that person could not legally carry a weapon in Wisconsin.
Barring concealed weapons in any business with a liquor license - a change Rep. Leon Young (D-Milwaukee) said would close the "Chuck E Cheese" loophole. Young argued that adults who carry concealed weapons should not be allowed to take them into pizza parlors that cater to children and serve alcohol.
Prohibiting concealed weapons at all "organized" youth sporting events, so the governor would have to stop stirring up opposition by telling Wisconsin residents that the bill would let parents carry handguns to Little League games.
Broadening the list of health-care facilities where concealed weapons would be prohibited. Unless facility officials decided otherwise, the ban would apply to hospitals, nursing homes, mental health centers, abortion clinics and physicians' offices.
Deal struck
Assembly Republicans scrambled to negotiate the final changes with Democrats and National Rifle Association lobbyists who monitored the bill from the Assembly sidelines. Republicans had to be careful not to make so many changes that they would lose their GOP core votes.

"Little by little, these things came together," said Jim Fendry, director of the Wisconsin Pro-Gun Movement and one of the NRA strategists who negotiated the final compromise.

For example, Fendry said, Wood supported the bill but had decided that it wasn't fair for Republicans to kill every one of almost 70 changes proposed by Democrats.

Wood voted for the bill because some changes suggested by members of his party were in the final package, Fendry said.

Fendry said another Democrat, first-term Rep. Amy Sue Vruwink of Milladore, had refused to vote for the bill until the change keeping weapons out of health care facilities was added. Vruwink's district includes the Marshfield Clinic, whose executives did not want handguns brought into their medical centers, Fendry noted.

"We said, 'Yeah, I guess that's a problem,' " Fendry said.

When the bill was changed, Vruwink was one of the seven Democrats who voted for the bill.

Veto showdown
If Doyle makes good on his promise to veto the concealed carry bill, the state Senate would take the first vote to override. Only if the Senate voted to override would an Assembly vote occur.

But Fendry said he expects the state Senate to ultimately override the governor's veto, when at least four Democratic senators vote against their party's leader. Fendry identified those as: Roger Breske, Eland; Jeff Plale, South Milwaukee; Bob Wirch, Kenosha; and Julie Lassa, Stevens Point.

The Senate passed the concealed weapons bill, 24-8, last month, with now-recalled Sen. Gary George (D-Milwaukee) absent. On that vote, all 18 Senate Republicans were joined by six Democrats.

But Senate Democratic Leader Jon Erpenbach predicted that enough Democrats would stick together to block any override, which requires a two-thirds majority.

"In the end, we sustain it," said Erpenbach, of Middleton.

Erpenbach said the Assembly improved the concealed weapons proposal, but not to the point where it should become law. The Assembly "just kind of scratched the surface on what we're concerned about," Erpenbach said.

Doyle aide Dan Leistikow said it has become "comical" for the governor to point out problems with the concealed weapons bill and then watch Republican legislators scramble to try to fix those problems. "This bill really hasn't changed," he said.

For example, Leistikow said, Republicans amended the bill to ban concealed weapons from day care centers and Little League games only after the governor pointed out those loopholes. But the bill would still allow handguns to be carried into shopping malls, crowded movie theaters and Summerfest in Milwaukee, Leistikow noted.

He said that Doyle is not worried about losing override votes in the Assembly and Senate because of changes made to the bill Thursday. "That's not even a factor in his decision-making," the spokesman said.

But Fendry said that if the Senate overturned the governor's veto, gun owners who live in the districts of Olsen and Townsend would be asked to pressure those two Republicans into reversing their votes and providing a sufficient majority for the override.

Olsen said Thursday he voted against a similar bill in 2002 and had warned his fellow Republicans pushing the bill that he would do so again.

"I don't think Wisconsin has become so dangerous that we have to have people walking around with weapons to protect themselves," Olsen said.

But Olsen would not say what would happen if he gets a chance to vote on overriding the governor's veto. "I'll have to do some serious soul-searching between now and then," he said.

Townsend said his vote was influenced by finding the body of a neighbor, a single mother who was slain with a handgun 20 years ago by her boyfriend in Oklahoma.

"The memories remain forever," he said.

Townsend indicated that he would vote to override the governor's veto, however, if he got a chance to do so. "I'm not anti-gun," he said. "I will not be an impediment to the will of the majority."




From the Nov. 7, 2003 editions of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
 
Yes, very very close to achieving our goal. I think the latest deal they made gained some Democrats, and it's looking like the two republicans who voted no in the assembly will probably vote to override the governor if that time comes. But then we'd need to keep every Democrat who voted yes. The pressure is building on Doyle now. And pressure is especially building on Republicans on the "dark" side. I just hope a few more small deals are made to gain more support and make it veto proof. The medical center deal was a good compromise as that gained the support of a few more Democrats, and especially the "youth sports" compromise also will appeal to those who say "it's for the children" and gained more votes also. Keep the pressure on Gov. Doyle, let him know that you support CCW with some phone calls!

x
 
Just so everyone understands the real truth: there were no "NRA lobbyists" present. Jim Fendry is not a lobbyist for the NRA. He's a lobbyist for the Wisconsin Pro-Gun Movement. Darren LaSorte--Wisconsin's NRA lobbyist--was called away back home on a personal emegency.

There were lobbyists of all sorts present: from Froedert Hospital, other hospitals, the city of Milwaukee, the police chiefs' Chair Polishers Organization, and many others.

Taken together, the salaries of these anti-gun lobbyists could pay off the state's budget crisis.

You just have to love it when the ultra-liberals decry special-interest politics when it suits them, then utilize high-paid lobbyists (and I mean lobbyists who make more than $100K) to take their whining to the capitol.
 
Lonnie, you're sitting over in Oregon where the details were probably settled before you were born. (Unless you're as old as Mike Irwin, CR Sam, or me ;) ).

I got an email yesterday from a volunteer who's been very gung-ho in this fight for the past year. He thought that--using today's vernacular--everything sucked.

Here's my reply to him. I hope it makes sense to you as well.

************
Hi, Jon. Things are not as bad as they seem today. There are some representatives who voted for the bill who won't vote to override. But there are also some who voted against who will vote for the override.

I was feeling kind of down myself when I sent out that email, but was encouraged by what Zien's office told me. I'm not "spinning" when I say that we still have an excellent chance of getting this past Doyle. In fact, our chances are better than what I thought they were a few weeks back.

Balow, Hubler and Krueser crossed Representative Gunderson, and the NRA will make them pay for it if they don't vote to override. Darren LaSorte wasn't in town yesterday, in part I believe because he wasn't expecting those three to turn. They will still have a chance to redeem themselves.

If we get this past Doyle--and, again, I really believe we can--we will have gotten the biggest part of what we wanted: a shall-issue carry bill. Yes, there are more restrictions on where we'll be able to carry than there were at the outset, but that's to be expected.

We will be able to carry in state buildings, unless the state installs metal detectors and has lockers. What other states have that provision? The only one that springs to mind is Utah.

A year from now, we'll be at a point where the press will report that nothing has happened, and we can then revisit the restaurant issue. The public probably won't even know that the law is being amended at that time, nor will they care.

The "no-guns" signs will disappear from most businesses, just as they have in every other state. And, frankly, I would disagree with any provision in the bill that did not allow the owners of private property to decide whether or not to allow guns, just as I object to laws that don't allow property owners to decide whether to allow smoking (or "chew").

We will in time have reciprocity with as many states as Florida now does. The instant-reciprocity-for-all-states provision in the bill was always intended to be a throwaway to the opponents.

Unlike many states, we will be able to carry whatever weapon we choose, not just the one that we qualified with. Unlike states like Tennessee, we'll be able to carry in parks and other publicly-owned places. (Think about that next time you go hiking, camping or cycling in a state park).

The bill also has provisions that make carrying in prohibited places a minor offense--if you get "made" at all. Compared to other states, it's not even a slap on the wrist.

I've been in a lot of states where I thought the CCW laws were really screwed up. For just coming out of the box, this one is still pretty good, and we can make it better once it becomes law.

Don't lose faith.

Dick
 
Minnesota is a great recent example though it has an advantage of having a pro Governor. No single shot has been fired for about half a year since the law was enacted there.

Also, would boycotting Milwaukee for travel campaign make any sense (to pressure a few legislators)?
 
Oh, they are VERY dissapointed. I think that there are people here that would actually be happy if a permit holder went on a double-digit murder spree. Sick and sad, but true.
 
the ban would apply to hospitals, nursing homes, mental health centers, abortion clinics and physicians' offices.
I'm glad you can't carry in an abortion clinic. We wouldn't want anybody getting killed there.:D
 
Young argued that adults who carry concealed weapons should not be allowed to take them into pizza parlors that cater to children and serve alcohol.
Why do they serve alcohol if they cater to children? :scrutiny:

Kharn
 
Some of the new provisions are pretty silly. Doesn't every bar, restaurant, gas station, bait shop and church in Wisconsin have a liquor license?

I sincerely hope this bill gets "fixed" a little in conference committee. Is that possible? If not, maybe next year.
 
Mpayne, it's an establishment that has a class B license to serve alcohol for on-site consumption.

But if we get this passed--and I really think we will--we can come back next year when the rhetoric has cooled down and address the restaurant issue.
 
Mpayne, it's an establishment that has a class B license to serve alcohol for on-site consumption.

What does that mean? What type of establishments does this include or exclude?
 
I'm pretty curious about what places have class B liquor licenses, like examples, here in WI. Also, what happens if you accidentally carry into one of those places, not knowing it's a class B place? What's in the bill?

x
 
A place with a class B license is one that sells beer, wine or liquor for on-site consumption: a bar, tavern, restaurant, nightclub, etc. Basically, if you can go there and order a drink, it's off limits.

What I do not know (since the question just popped into my head) is whether this would cover places like Summerfest, church festivals or other events that have beer tents. I'll have to check on that.

Unlike businesses that post signs, these establishments don't have to give a warning. Carrying in places that serve would be a misdemeanor punishable by $1000 or 90 days or both, which is pretty much the law right now.
 
Mpayne: Gas stations in Milwaukee County aren’t allowed to sell liquor or malt beverages. Our local pols decided long ago that gas stations and alcohol didn’t mix. They must have thought that most people walked to the liquor store.

Monkeyleg: The Assembly voted against banning at Summerfest. I don’t know as though anyone thought of the church festival angle.
 
Hunter Rose: County Fairs are open to carry unless they are holding an “organized†youth sporting event as I read it. I guess you would have to ask your county district attorney for his legal opinion as to what a “sport†is. If raising a really nice cow, pig, bunny could be considered a “sportâ€, then my guess is the answer is no. But he/she will be the person having to defend any decision your board makes.

Some still call baseball a sport. I call it a game. So who knows at this point? Sorry I couldn’t offer you an answer you could take back to your County Board.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top