Help Get HB700 out of Committee!!!!

[Mexican_Hippie]

I'm really not trying to be difficult. I just don't think it takes that long to read a bill and consider it, especially one that's already had public testimony. If I moved that slow at work for my clients I'd get fired.

My expectation for the TX legislature is that they work day and night getting bills analyzed, scheduled, and voted nearly round the clock while they're in session. I don't see 12-16 hour days as unreasonable for them during a very limited window that only comes every two years. An intelligent person (especially with a staff) should be able to read 165 bills within a month and have markups with comments and questions.

Based on those readings they should be able to set a priority and dive deeper into the comments and questions from that smaller prioritized list.

I read HB700, HB972 and HB3218 all within an hour. I don't see the big deal.

 

[navyguy]

I'm really not trying to be difficult. I just don't think it takes that long to read a bill and consider it, especially one that's already had public testimony. If I moved that slow at work for my clients I'd get fired.

My expectation for the TX legislature is that they work day and night getting bills analyzed, scheduled, and voted nearly round the clock while they're in session. I don't see 12-16 hour days as unreasonable for them during a very limited window that only comes every two years. An intelligent person (especially with a staff) should be able to read 165 bills within a month and have markups with comments and questions.

Based on those readings they should be able to set a priority and dive deeper into the comments and questions from that smaller prioritized list.

I read HB700, HB972 and HB3218 all within an hour. I don't see the big deal.

I agree. They have "People" who read, analyze and provide Cliff Notes, so they pretty much know what's in the bill.

 

[JKTex]

I read HB700, HB972 and HB3218 all within an hour. I don't see the big deal.

I'm excited every time a new session starts, but at the same time it's frustrating as hell knowing what's at stake and how it works/doesn't work.

But nothing is no big deal. I did not write this, but I'm borrowing it and sharing it here. The first part alone is something I'm sure very few people realize. Passing a bill is not, no big deal. It's a very big deal. The slightest mistake or oversight and we're stuck with it for at least 2 years, then time is wasted trying to correct it next time with a whole new process. It happens every session. We can't allow these bills we want to pass, to pass with any kind of oversight.

***********
In the 2013 legislative session 5,561 bills were filed in the Texas House and 2,594 bills were filed in the Texas Senate. (You can find links to those reports here.)

The legislature meets for up to 140 days every other year. The only thing the legislature is statutorily mandated to do is pass a budget. The rest is optional.

Were they to consider each and every one of those bills, the House would have to debate at least 1.65 bills every hour working seven days a week 24 hours a day. But they don't work 24 hours a day and they don't work 7 days a week, so each bill can get no more than 20 minutes of debate, and those bills that pass must go to the Senate as well. For each bill that takes more than 20 minutes of debate (the budget bill can take days and they're required to debate that one) some other bill or bills must suffer.

There are also deadlines for when bills must be filed, when they must be passed, and so forth. It doesn't take a math genius to figure out that some prioritizing must be done if anything is going to be accomplished.

So, while there may be 20 gun-related bills introduced in a session, those bills represent less than 4/10ths of 1 percent of the total. For them to make progress they must have a champion - someone who sincerely wants to see the bill passed and is willing to make the effort to shepherd it through committees and to the floor of the House so it can be voted on. The more champions for a bill, the more likely it is to succeed, and the more support for a bill the more likely those who are not champions for it will believe it has sufficient support to pass. And each Representative and Senator has more than one bill that they care about. (My representative authored 14 bills, all of which I'm sure she cares about and none of which have anything to do with firearms.) So even the authors have to prioritize what goes first, second, third and so forth on their personal list of things they care about. The later a bill gets started, the more likely it is to die before a vote can occur.

For a bill to become law it has to pass both houses AND be signed by the Governor. Each session the Governor has to sign about 1400 bills into law. What do you think the chances are that he even knows what he's signing? O, sure, there are "signature" bills that everyone knows about, but there have to be tons of them that he signs simply because someone on his staff said he should. He has to depend on his staff to vet the bills and cull the ones he wants to veto (25 in 2011, for example) unless he's conscientious enough to read each and every one and consult attorneys as to their meaning and legality.

So, when you contact someone about a bill YOU care about, keep in mind that they also have bills that THEY care about, and their priorities may not be the same as yours. Imagine the pressure they are under to get the "right" bills to the floor and to be knowledgeable about the bills they have to vote on. How do you think they will respond to bullying and berating tactics? How would you respond?

Mind you, this is not to make excuses for the politicians but to get you to see the bigger picture. Campus carry may be high on your list, but water rights and health issues may be higher on your representative's list and education may be a priority for his or her spouse. If you want him or her to get excited about campus carry, you need to give them a positive reason for doing so. You need to convince them it's worth spending what little precious time they have to learn about the bill and decide if they want to vote for it. It wouldn't hurt for you to include, in your communications with them, a brief description of the bill and why they should support it so they don't have to do all the research themselves.

In politics as in life the squeaky wheel gets the grease but it has to be a persistent squeak that's not too annoying.
******

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

The budget is done. When you're in a committee your primary responsibility is analyzing which ones in your committee need to go to the floor (~165 bills not ~5500 bills). I still don't see which others are more important than the carry ones for this committee.

Somehow my rep, Capriglione, is kicking butt and taking names. He's hungry and he's a workhorse. I think some up there simply aren't used to the hard mental work it takes. I'm not saying they're dumb or berating them in any way. I just don't think they're used to the pace it takes.

I see it all the time in my profession with people burning out, except that these guys only have to push through for 140 days not an entire career.

I agree on being polite, but I don't have much sympathy.

 

[Shorts]

If it such a big deal to get bills through, can the process be streamlined from the very outset? An issue looks like for example 4 different versions of the same idea trying to beat each other. How do you get those 4 versions to be introduced as one PRIOR to the hearings so that it can be ready to push through? Is that completely unrealistic, like finding a unicorn?

 

[TheDan]

If people put half the effort into making their voices heard respectfully, understanding that a committee member can't make a bill appear before them, there would be a lot more positive outcomes. If I sat on a committee and had people calling and emailing in this manner, regardless of the bill, I'd be hesitant to move on it or I'd wonder what or if they had other motives. Either way, that kind of ignorance is destructive...

I agree that being disrespectful is counterproductive, but what I've never been able to understand is how the progressives get what they want by being loud and obnoxious. Maybe it's not as counterproductive as one would think? I suppose it depends on your audience. Obviously some representatives are going to be moved more by emotion than information.

 

[JKTex]

If it such a big deal to get bills through, can the process be streamlined from the very outset? An issue looks like for example 4 different versions of the same idea trying to beat each other. How do you get those 4 versions to be introduced as one PRIOR to the hearings so that it can be ready to push through? Is that completely unrealistic, like finding a unicorn?

That would be great, but it's not easy I suppose. If one doens't know another has something or a 100 other reasons. An example might be, for example, a bill that someone writes, then has to go find sponsors for it. Without sponsors you don't have anyone to champion the bill. A lot of them are scared to sponsor gun rights bills right now. Another for example, is HB700. It was written by legislative council and not how Lavander wanted it written so right off the bat, a committee substitute had to be written. Hopefully that's the version that is brought up. Had it been written as he intended it to, maybe(?) it would have come up quicker.

You make a good point though, when these things come up during a session, they have to get together and rewrite or combine etc. and it all takes time. It's really kind of a mess. Can you imagine what it would be like if they met every year?

They also have to weigh the chances every bill has and f one has a better chance than another, it'll get the time dedicated to it rather than gamble on losing the time.

 

[Shorts]

That would be great, but it's not easy I suppose. If one doens't know another has something or a 100 other reasons. An example might be, for example, a bill that someone writes, then has to go find sponsors for it. Without sponsors you don't have anyone to champion the bill. A lot of them are scared to sponsor gun rights bills right now. Another for example, is HB700. It was written by legislative council and not how Lavander wanted it written so right off the bat, a committee substitute had to be written. Hopefully that's the version that is brought up. Had it been written as he intended it to, maybe(?) it would have come up quicker.

You make a good point though, when these things come up during a session, they have to get together and rewrite or combine etc. and it all takes time. It's really kind of a mess. Can you imagine what it would be like if they met every year?

They also have to weigh the chances every bill has and f one has a better chance than another, it'll get the time dedicated to it rather than gamble on losing the time.

Seems like the idea of a dedicated subject matter liaison each session would be a help to compile bills. I can see why it is daunting for Reps to undertake bills on matters they aren't familiar with. I'd be worthless if I was a Rep in charge of writing health care language. I'd seek out SMEs(subject matter experts) who are involved in the movement to help me get the facts rights.

Anyhow... everything gets so complicated. It would be nice if it could just be.

 

[JKTex]

Seems like the idea of a dedicated subject matter liaison each session would be a help to compile bills. I can see why it is daunting for Reps to undertake bills on matters they aren't familiar with. I'd be worthless if I was a Rep in charge of writing health care language. I'd seek out SMEs(subject matter experts) who are involved in the movement to help me get the facts rights.

Anyhow... everything gets so complicated. It would be nice if it could just be.

I think they do to a point but I also think there so much to do in such a short time, if its not already got a foundation of support and well constructed, it's really hard to get that done with everything else in a hurried rush. I have no idea why Texas legislature only meets once every 2 years but it sure seems like it would make things a little easier. At least waiting until the next session to work a bill wouldn't be as hard to swallow.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Y'all bring up a good point. Good legislation is written before a session starts, just like good candidates are really decided during the primaries. Having a good bill months before the session starts and beginning to circulate it among key individuals is a recipe for success.

I'm glad they only meet for 140 days every two years though. It means they can only screw it up half as fast as the Feds. Besides, the Governor can always call a special session if there's something important that needs attention.

 

[Danang1970]

Well, I would have waited for campus carry to clear

at least campus carry would go through..... I would not want both on the floor at the same time? Does campus carry state concealed only? I think campus carry is concealed only and if HB700 goes through will that mean open carry on a campus?

The committee is all Republicans- Can't blame the Democrats if it doesn't get out of committee-
I think its more a matter of being committee-
About all I hear about it the campus carry business and all the hate thrown at it.
Maybe open carry could slip through...........I know cross fingers.

 

[JKTex]

Campus Carry has nothing to do with open carry, it only effects CHL holders.

The problem is, the HB really, is gutted. I'm not sure there's much effort behind it in Austin anymore, but I could be wrong. Allowing schools to opt out pretty much neuters the bill. I think the SB is still in tact, but it's stuck.

At least they've made more headway this time. If it doesn't pass, it should have a better head-start next session. Remember how many sessions CHL bill took.....

 

[tx_transplant]

I just picked this up off my FB feed. Soundl like it's now a dead issue.
[h=5]From Lavender's office just now:

I regret to inform everyone who is following HB 700 that Rep. Joe Pickett will not bring this crucial and important piece of legislation up for a vote.

It is truly a sad time for supporters of the second amendment as well as CHL holders of Texas.

We appreciate all of the hard work and support.

Please take the time and voice your displeasure to Rep. Joe Pickett-(512) 463-0596 and Speaker Joe Straus-(512) 463-1000.[/h]

 

[warmachine77]

What district does Strauss cover? He needs to be voted out asap.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

[TxDad]

Figured it would. That guy needs to quit politics.

 

[ATX_Shawn]

What district does Strauss cover? He needs to be voted out asap.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

He's not the only one..

 

[jordanmills]

A single person not elected by a vast majority of us can stop legislation for the entire state. Lovely.

 

[RstyShcklfrd]

I severely dislike Joe Pickett.

 

[cbigclarke]

I will donate to who opposes him

 

[Jeffrey]

I will donate to who opposes him

http://www.texasguntalk.com/forums/politics/45990-unopposed.html