C-Span Alert (Debate begins this morning @ 9:30am on S. 1805 & Assasult Weapons Ban Renewal)

[Dead Corpse]

We are waiting for the amendment to be added to Thomas.loc.gov to see exactly what it DOES say.

Did you miss this one then? You may be a gun owner, but you seem to see nothing wrong with allowing an arbitrary safety standard to be foisted off on otherwise legal gun dealers and manufacturers by gun control advocates whose stated goal is the incremental destruction of our remaining gun Rights.

Good going Ace. With friends like you, who needs Democrats?

[CougarGA7]

Thanks. At 10 buck a piece I will just get them both.

[longtermmemmory]

Lawyers will go after your homeowners insurance for settlemnt purposes. I know I would.

Despite the intervening supervening criminal act, this is an effort ot push back proximate cause to a source of insurance. Would not surprise me if the plaintiff's bar wrote this.

Follow the money.

[LisaMalia]

Just the Unemployment silliness?

Glad you think it's silliness, what a moronic statement. Thanks to what you call "unemployment silliness", I who has worked for the last 30 years (and payed taxes for the welfare bunch who haven't worked a day in their lives), am not getting an extention on my unemployment benefits. I lost my job through no fault of my own, the telecommunications company I worked for downsized. I got my last check today.

I have spent the last 6 months applying for everything here in my small town in my field (clerical) with no success. I certainly could have used another 13 weeks to look for something in my field, but now I'll be lucky to be saying "would you like fries with that".

I am a conservative and a Republican, and have voted a straight ticket since I first cast a vote. My two Republican senators voted for the extension, but most Republicans didn't. That is sad. Ironically, Kerry, the scourge, and Edwards could been the two deciding votes, but they're too busy glad handing and kissing babies right now.

I will vote for President Bush, because I agree with how he stands on national security and morality issues. However, at this point, I'm just sick and tired of politics in general. The middle class working people of this country are getting the shaft on this one.

[LisaMalia]

^

should have read in first paragraph....."I have worked"....... I'm so mad I can barely type.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Just the Unemployment silliness?

Glad you think it's silliness, what a moronic statement. Thanks to what you call "unemployment silliness", I who has worked for the last 30 years (and payed taxes for the welfare bunch who haven't worked a day in their lives), am not getting an extention on my unemployment benefits.

---

My apologies. The unemployment issue is a serious one, and I did not intend to comment on the issue. I was merely commenting that it is silly to bring it up as an amendment on an unrelated bill.

[LisaMalia]

Actually that IS the original bill as I understand it. The Democrats are playing politics with it, by adding the gun issues. And it sucks.

(S.1805 To extend and expand the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002, and for other purposes.)

[Dead Corpse]

Nope. S.1805 PCS is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

[LisaMalia]

You're right, just trying to sort through the mess now on the Senate website. Anyone know how the the unemp. extension amend. got lumped up in this bill?

[No.6]

Cantwell (D-Wa) introduced it.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00018

[LisaMalia]

Cantwell (D-Wa) introduced it.

Yeah, that much I've figured out. Maybe you, or someone can help me understand how this works.

The unemployment extension thing has been renewed (every 6 months), without a problem for a couple of years now. Your respective state pays for initial benefits, then the feds pick up the emergency extensions.

When it needed to be renewed in December, it got approved by congress without a hitch. And that's where I kinda lose track of it. I've been researching on the Senate website, and I'm not sure what happened.

I guess I need to take a refresher course in Government, I haven't had one since high school.

Can anyone help me understand how this amendment got tacked on with a gun bill, and why?

Thanks.

[looscnnn]

"Can anyone help me understand how this amendment got tacked on with a gun bill, and why?"

Why, because Cantwell most likely figured that S1805 will pass the Senate and House so she tacked it on hoping that the GOP will go along by being compassionate.

How, I can't remember for sure (been a long time since a Government class), but I believe that someone draws up an amendment just like a bill and then introduces it as a rider/attachment to a bill that is being debated/voted on. This allows something that may not pass by itself to pass while attached to another bill.

Sorry to hear about your unemployment, unfortunately I do not know anyone in Ohio that still has a business that I could refer you to. Good luck in your search.

[LisaMalia]

Thanks for your response.
Lisa

[No.6]

"Can anyone help me understand how this amendment got tacked on with a gun bill, and why?"

Anyone can amend any bill with anything. (E.g., Feinstein intends to try and attach an extension of the AWB to every bill the Senate touches).

Apparently Cantwell felt that either a) attaching the unemployment extension to the firearms liability bill would hinder its chances of passing, or b) knowing that the amendment would fail, she can run around now and say "See, the Republicans are against your unemployment in the Bush Recession(tm). I stood up for you but the eeeeevil Republicans shut us down." Or something else. Either way, political grandstanding.

[LisaMalia]

Thanks for the info.

OK, I feel really ashamed of myself for not knowing this....(I need to get a Government for Dummies book...;)

HOWEVER, here is my question. You have a bill, with several amendments attached. Can some amendments pass and some not? Or do they vote on the entire bill at some point, and all amendments either pass or fail along with the bill.

And I agree, this is political grandstanding at it's best (WORST).

Thanks!
Lisa

[SunkenCiv]

*IF* that's the only amendment, they need to pass it post haste. They can then go into the elections saying one of these two things:

• my Democretin opponent opposed the extension to the unemployment bill
• my Democretin colleagues voted heavily in favor of the bipartisan 1805, as did I

[cc2k]

LisaMalia wrote:

---

HOWEVER, here is my question. You have a bill, with several amendments attached. Can some amendments pass and some not? Or do they vote on the entire bill at some point, and all amendments either pass or fail along with the bill.

---

The "Senate in a nutshell" version works like this:

• A bill comes up for debate.
• As the bill is debated, amendments may be proposed. Each amendment to the bill is voted on. Amendments that pass modify (or add to) the bill. Amendments that are rejected are gone forever (or until a Senator proposes them again, usually on another bill).
• After all the debate, and all of the amendments have been voted on, there is a final vote on the bill as amended. That final vote will either pass or reject the amended bill

The goal for the Democrats is to get things attached to this bill that wouldn't pass on their own. Either that, or to defeat the bill by attaching a "poisonous" amendment, like making the Assault Weapons Ban permanent. If they get something so bad added that the bill will fail the final vote, then they defeat the entire bill. OTOH, if the final bill passes, anything they get added to it will pass with it.

[alaskanfan]

Larry Craig and bill being addressed on Gun Talk radio right now.

[alaskanfan]

Btt

[El Gato]

Page thorugh it enough and you get to the Frist/Craig AP ammo amendment. It IS performance based and would whipe out about half of the centerfire cartridges out there for hunting/target shooting. Did this one pass? Or did it get shot down?

The Craig/First amendment does not provide for a performance based definition of AP ammo. It does provide for a study that most likely would lead to one. The Kennedy Amendment does provide for a performance standard. Neither amendment has been voted on as of Sunday Feb. 29th. They will vote on them either tomorrow or Tuesday the 2nd.