20190314 - HB740 JUD Amendments

Bertfish · Mar 19, 2019

Malleovic said:
Also, try try try to get the bill amended on the Senate side. If it were to then pass in the Senate, it would be different from the bill as passed by the House and would then need to be voted on again or sent to an additional committee for reconciliation of the two. More hurdles=good.

Why cant R senators just flood it with amendments?

PowPow · Mar 19, 2019

Malleovic said:
Also, try try try to get the bill amended on the Senate side. If it were to then pass in the Senate, it would be different from the bill as passed by the House and would then need to be voted on again or sent to an additional committee for reconciliation of the two. More hurdles=good.

It should be easy to accomplish given that 740 was rushed out with all sorts of loose language and questionable definitions.

PowPow · Mar 19, 2019

Bertfish said:
Why cant R senators just flood it with amendments?

Even offering one constructive amendment at this point forces a slower process to the bill making it to the Governor's desk.

Malleovic · Mar 19, 2019

Bertfish said:
Why cant R senators just flood it with amendments?

In committee? I'm not familiar enough with intra-committee mechanics to give you a firm answer; suffice to say that if this were a tactic that could actually prevent bills from moving through the process, it would have already been used, abused, and removed so the establishment can get done what it wants done.

At the very least the committee chairs have a huge amount of power over that part of the process, so I'm sure they can lock it down as much or as little as they like.

This is partly why I am thankful that Dumais is not on Judiciary, so that she was unable to control what happened amendment-wise to HB740. However! Take note that its crossfiled counterpart in the senate (SB882) is sponsored by Sen. Smith, who IS on the Judicial Proceedings committee, and has clearly given the issue of 3D firearms some thought, as evidenced by the stimulating back-and-forth he had with some people bringing opposition testimony during the hearing for that bill.

Since his bill does not appear to be moving, I am going to assume that he will pay close attention to HB740 since it was the counterpart and appears to be the focus now. I have no idea how he feels about the amendments, but at the very least he is both interested in the subject matter and sitting on a committee that can determine its near-term fate. IMO both he and Zirkin (com chair) should be of primary focus when it comes to applying beneficial pressure.

mac1_131 · Mar 19, 2019

They are moving the house version.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

Malleovic · Mar 19, 2019

mac1_131 said:
They are moving the house version.

Yes, I was only highlighting the senate version because Sen. Smith sponsored it and he is on Judicial Proceedings which is considering the house bill, AND has already shown that he's willing to engage with the subject matter.

dblas · Mar 19, 2019

Malleovic said:
In committee? I'm not familiar enough with intra-committee mechanics to give you a firm answer; suffice to say that if this were a tactic that could actually prevent bills from moving through the process, it would have already been used, abused, and removed so the establishment can get done what it wants done.

At the very least the committee chairs have a huge amount of power over that part of the process, so I'm sure they can lock it down as much or as little as they like.

This is partly why I am thankful that Dumais is not on Judiciary, so that she was unable to control what happened amendment-wise to HB740. However! Take note that its crossfiled counterpart in the senate (SB882) is sponsored by Sen. Smith, who IS on the Judicial Proceedings committee, and has clearly given the issue of 3D firearms some thought, as evidenced by the stimulating back-and-forth he had with some people bringing opposition testimony during the hearing for that bill.

Since his bill does not appear to be moving, I am going to assume that he will pay close attention to HB740 since it was the counterpart and appears to be the focus now. I have no idea how he feels about the amendments, but at the very least he is both interested in the subject matter and sitting on a committee that can determine its near-term fate. IMO both he and Zirkin (com chair) should be of primary focus when it comes to applying beneficial pressure.

His bill didn't move because his Chairman didn't bring it out of the desk drawer. Just because a bill has a cross file and the cross file has made cross over does not in anyway guarantee that it will pass out committee in the 2nd house. Many bills that have had cross files have passed out of the house of origin, only to die in a committee desk drawer in the other house.

Cross file does not equal passage of either bill.

Malleovic · Mar 19, 2019

dblas said:
His bill didn't move because his Chairman didn't bring it out of the desk drawer. Just because a bill has a cross file and the cross file has made cross over does not in anyway guarantee that it will pass out committee in the 2nd house. Many bills that have had cross files have passed out of the house of origin, only to die in a committee desk drawer in the other house.

Cross file does not equal passage of either bill.

I am fully aware of all of this/I'm not sure what your point is, the earlier person's question was specifically about amendments to HB740 in JP. That bill is the primary concern now and it could very easily get a favorable vote from the committee.

My point in bringing up SB882 is to highlight that one of the committee members is interested enough in the issue to have filed the senate counterpart to the bill we are concerned with (besides his engagement with the opposition testimony which goes further to that point), and given that the bill we are concerned with is now in front of him we should keep that in mind.

Not sure what the disagreement/misunderstanding is here.

dblas · Mar 19, 2019

Malleovic said:
I am fully aware of all of this/I'm not sure what your point is, the earlier person's question was specifically about amendments to HB740 in JP. That bill is the primary concern now and it could very easily get a favorable vote from the committee.

My point in bringing up SB882 is to highlight that one of the committee members is interested enough in the issue to have filed the senate counterpart to the bill we are concerned with (besides his engagement with the opposition testimony which goes further to that point), and given that the bill we are concerned with is now in front of him we should keep that in mind.

Not sure what the disagreement/misunderstanding is here.

No disagreement at all, just advising for those that don't that cross file does not equal a sure thing.

Malleovic · Mar 19, 2019

dblas said:
No disagreement at all, just advising for those that don't that cross file does not equal a sure thing.

Ah ok cool. My bad.

dblas · Mar 19, 2019

Malleovic said:
Ah ok cool. My bad.

Doesn't hurt to ask for clarification.

You pretty much have been spot on on the big picture stuff with regards to the legislature and it's workings. Keep it up, and I won't have to post so often.

Malleovic · Mar 19, 2019

dblas said:
Doesn't hurt to ask for clarification.

You pretty much have been spot on on the big picture stuff with regards to the legislature and it's workings. Keep it up, and I won't have to post so often.

The system is positively byzantine. Its almost as if they don't want people to know what they're doing...

HEY

dblas · Mar 19, 2019

Malleovic said:
The system is positively byzantine. Its almost as if they don't want people to know what they're doing...

HEY

Once you understand the big stuff, then the smaller details start to fall into place somewhat easy. The biggest surprise I had was that they do not follow Robert's Rules when in committee or on the floor.

MJD438 · Mar 19, 2019

dblas said:
Once you understand the big stuff, then the smaller details start to fall into place somewhat easy. The biggest surprise I had was that they do not follow Robert's Rules when in committee or on the floor.

For clarity and those that are not aware, the Maryland General Assembly follows Mason's Manual - http://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/masons-manual-for-legislative-bodies.aspx.

Mark75H · Mar 19, 2019

MJD438 said:
For clarity and those that are not aware, the Maryland General Assembly follows Mason's Manual - http://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/masons-manual-for-legislative-bodies.aspx.

Sometimes

PowPow · Mar 19, 2019

Mark75H said:
Sometimes

More like Mikes' Manuals.

ziptiespec · Mar 20, 2019

I have a question about the most appropriate action to take in regards to this bill as well as the others that have crossed over. Yesterday I received an e-mail from NRA-ILA urging me to contact my state senator. This morning, while driving to work, I did just that. The nice lady that I spoke with informed me that the senator isn't on the committee currently reviewing the bill, but she'd take note of my opinion. I'm not concerned about how my senator will vote as she's supported the 2A unfailingly in the past. I do question the efficacy of the NRA-ILA's call to action however. Isn't it more effective to be contacting the members of the committee where the bill is currently being reviewed?

BeoBill · Mar 20, 2019

You do realize that ATF and all the Annapolis sausage making notwithstanding, if this passes whatever the COMAR says is what goes until the USSC overturn...

Rack&Roll · Mar 21, 2019

ziptiespec said:
I have a question about the most appropriate action to take in regards to this bill as well as the others that have crossed over. Yesterday I received an e-mail from NRA-ILA urging me to contact my state senator. This morning, while driving to work, I did just that. The nice lady that I spoke with informed me that the senator isn't on the committee currently reviewing the bill, but she'd take note of my opinion. I'm not concerned about how my senator will vote as she's supported the 2A unfailingly in the past. I do question the efficacy of the NRA-ILA's call to action however. Isn't it more effective to be contacting the members of the committee where the bill is currently being reviewed?

Well, we should remember that it’s the vote in the Senate chamber—with all Senators voting—that determines its fate.

Blacksmith101 · Mar 21, 2019

ziptiespec said:
I have a question about the most appropriate action to take in regards to this bill as well as the others that have crossed over. Yesterday I received an e-mail from NRA-ILA urging me to contact my state senator. This morning, while driving to work, I did just that. The nice lady that I spoke with informed me that the senator isn't on the committee currently reviewing the bill, but she'd take note of my opinion. I'm not concerned about how my senator will vote as she's supported the 2A unfailingly in the past. I do question the efficacy of the NRA-ILA's call to action however. Isn't it more effective to be contacting the members of the committee where the bill is currently being reviewed?

The best answer is to do both. Your senator will give more weight to your comments, since you are a constituent, if and when the bill comes to a floor vote. The committee members may think you don't matter because you are not a constituent or maybe not the registered in the "right" party but they still pay attention to the volume of heat they are receiving because unhappy voters regardless of party effect the overall legislative picture.

20190314 - HB740 JUD Amendments

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Throw bread on me

Where's the beef?

Where's the beef?

Active Member

MSI Executive Member

Active Member

Past President, MSI

Active Member

Past President, MSI

Active Member

Past President, MSI

Active Member

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Where's the beef?

Active Member

Crank in the Third Row

Attachments

R.I.P

Grumpy Old Man

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics