Archived Posts » 59,859,448
HF2114 - Preemption Reform...
2/15/2012 5:01:41 AM
repost from over on IFC:
With respect to preemption bill (HF2114), the following members voted to add an anti-gun amendment that would allow the governing boards of city halls, courthouses, and public hospitals to ban the carrying or possession of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition on the grounds or in the buildings of city halls, courthouses, and public hospitals.
As you're no doubt aware, none of the described places are lawfully off limits now.
The following members voted to approve the amendment (anti-gun vote):
Chair, Baudler
Kressig
Abdul-Samad
Berry
Gaines
Muhlbauer
R. Olson
S. Olson
Swaim
Tjepkes
Wolfe
Worthan
The following members OPPOSED the amendment:
Shaw
Alons
Brandenburg
Fry
Hagenow
Klein
Rayhons
Sands
Windschitl
The bill passed committee 19-2. We are working with Republican leadership to amend the bill on the floor to the original language.
also, when asked later in the thread what he amendment was or who wrote it:
It is not listed anywhere, yet. It was a "committee" amendment.
Here is what it says:
Page 3, after line 20 by inserting:
<g. A governing board for a city hall, courthouse, or public hospital from adopting and enforcing rules regulating or prohibiting persons from carrying or possessing firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition in the buildings or on the grounds of the city hall, courthouse, or public hospital. For purposes of this paragraph, "public hospital" means the same as defined in section 249J.3.>
It was offered by Clel Baudler and requested by Worthan, Tjepkes, and S. Olson.
With respect to preemption bill (HF2114), the following members voted to add an anti-gun amendment that would allow the governing boards of city halls, courthouses, and public hospitals to ban the carrying or possession of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition on the grounds or in the buildings of city halls, courthouses, and public hospitals.
As you're no doubt aware, none of the described places are lawfully off limits now.
The following members voted to approve the amendment (anti-gun vote):
Chair, Baudler
Kressig
Abdul-Samad
Berry
Gaines
Muhlbauer
R. Olson
S. Olson
Swaim
Tjepkes
Wolfe
Worthan
The following members OPPOSED the amendment:
Shaw
Alons
Brandenburg
Fry
Hagenow
Klein
Rayhons
Sands
Windschitl
The bill passed committee 19-2. We are working with Republican leadership to amend the bill on the floor to the original language.
also, when asked later in the thread what he amendment was or who wrote it:
It is not listed anywhere, yet. It was a "committee" amendment.
Here is what it says:
Page 3, after line 20 by inserting:
<g. A governing board for a city hall, courthouse, or public hospital from adopting and enforcing rules regulating or prohibiting persons from carrying or possessing firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition in the buildings or on the grounds of the city hall, courthouse, or public hospital. For purposes of this paragraph, "public hospital" means the same as defined in section 249J.3.>
It was offered by Clel Baudler and requested by Worthan, Tjepkes, and S. Olson.
2/15/2012 5:04:37 AM
what are your thoughts?
2/15/2012 7:31:30 AM
thanks for the info
that amendment castrates the whole bill and needs to be removed.
i will be sending my emails.
that amendment castrates the whole bill and needs to be removed.
i will be sending my emails.
2/15/2012 8:54:48 AM
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
2/15/2012 9:35:25 AM
Originally Posted By F224:
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
Debatable. On one hand, this is politics: he is a senior house member with power, and I think this is his first major offense. On the other hand, this is not something we want to compromise on, and he voted against we, the people.
http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-des-moines/hjr-2005-and-hf-2114-watered-down-committee?CID=examiner_alerts_article
HJR 2005 and HF 2114 were debated in the House Public Safety Committee (PSC) today. Unfortunately for gun owners in Iowa, the true intent of both of these pieces of legislation was evidently lost on the Chairman of the committee. Representative Clel Baudler sided with the Democrat members of the committee, and both bills were watered down to the point of being useless.
HJR 2005 was intended to add the right to keep and bear arms to the Iowa Constitution. Taking into account all of the challenges that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has faced over the years, the wording of HJR 2005 was specifically crafted to remove any or all ambiguities over the right for citizens to keep and carry firearms. But members of the PSC didn't seem to understand that the founding fathers did not intend to have the Bill of Rights be applicable to the States. Each State was supposed to create their own Constitution with the rights of their citizens protected within. Representative Rick Olson offered an amendment to HJR 2005 that strikes the current language...
Read more at the linkHJR 2005 was intended to add the right to keep and bear arms to the Iowa Constitution. Taking into account all of the challenges that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has faced over the years, the wording of HJR 2005 was specifically crafted to remove any or all ambiguities over the right for citizens to keep and carry firearms. But members of the PSC didn't seem to understand that the founding fathers did not intend to have the Bill of Rights be applicable to the States. Each State was supposed to create their own Constitution with the rights of their citizens protected within. Representative Rick Olson offered an amendment to HJR 2005 that strikes the current language...
2/15/2012 9:39:54 AM
Here's what Hagenow's response was after I emailed him yesterday,
"Thanks for the email. We are considering both of these bills today in Public Safety Committee. We already passed out the constitutional amendment language, and will be taking up preemption later today.
On the RKBA, there was a weakening amendment offered which would have gutted much of the bill, and I voted "no". Unfortunately, the amendment was adopted. In order to keep the bill alive, I voted "yes" on the amended version. There will be an amended version on the floor, where I will again support the strongest language possible.
On preemption, again there is going to be weakening amendment offered. I will oppose these amendment, as I think that a law-abiding citizen should have the right to carry statewide. Allowing these restriction to state are confusing, and restrict our rights.
Thanks for your support on these important bills. Please stay in touch.
Best regards,"
Thoughts? I think he did the right thing on premption, what about RKBA?
"Thanks for the email. We are considering both of these bills today in Public Safety Committee. We already passed out the constitutional amendment language, and will be taking up preemption later today.
On the RKBA, there was a weakening amendment offered which would have gutted much of the bill, and I voted "no". Unfortunately, the amendment was adopted. In order to keep the bill alive, I voted "yes" on the amended version. There will be an amended version on the floor, where I will again support the strongest language possible.
On preemption, again there is going to be weakening amendment offered. I will oppose these amendment, as I think that a law-abiding citizen should have the right to carry statewide. Allowing these restriction to state are confusing, and restrict our rights.
Thanks for your support on these important bills. Please stay in touch.
Best regards,"
Thoughts? I think he did the right thing on premption, what about RKBA?
2/15/2012 9:41:53 AM
What happened to Mr. Blauder and his support of our rights? If politicians think that needs to be added then there should also be an amendment added that if any of those stated public entities ban firearms they must provide the same level of protection that they remove, ie take my gun give me an armed escort on their property.
2/15/2012 9:55:23 AM
Originally Posted By amaixner:
Debatable. On one hand, this is politics: he is a senior house member with power, and I think this is his first major offense. On the other hand, this is not something we want to compromise on, and he voted against we, the people.
Originally Posted By F224:
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
Debatable. On one hand, this is politics: he is a senior house member with power, and I think this is his first major offense. On the other hand, this is not something we want to compromise on, and he voted against we, the people.
I don't think this is his first offense. I seem to remember the two previous years before weapons permit reform passed he gutted and or amended the bills to kill them. Also giving the excuse that he could muster the votes or didn't have the support. It seems to me that once IFC and the NRA became the driving force and his roll in the legislative process was lessened he showed to be less on our side. Course I'm not at the capitol and don't play politics very well.
2/15/2012 10:46:29 AM
Remember that the legislative process is frequently messy, confusing, and not always as it seems. Sometimes you have to vote for less than ideal legislation tactically to gain strategically.
2/15/2012 11:24:39 AM
Looking at the numbers on the DM Register poll for/against the new proposed legislation most were at least 80 percent in favor....some more so. What the hell were they thinking?
R
R
2/15/2012 1:49:53 PM
Ugh... Baudler, I can't figure him out sometimes. I'll see what he says in response to my email.
2/15/2012 2:18:54 PM
Originally Posted By F224:
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
it would be hard for me to see it any other way.
here are the facts:
-R controlled committee
-R controlled bill
-R authored bill
-R chairperson (Baudler)
-R controlled house
yet Rep Baudler opted to weaken both pieces of legislation in a completely R controlled to the point of uselessness AT COMMITTEE LEVEL... they may have been amended or slightly weakend in the house, and possibly in the senate with return to the house. so why on God's green earth would an NRA board member and somebody who often takes credit for passing SHALL ISSUE (which in fact he did nearly nothing on) literally gut the bills?
we all can come up with answers and most of them will be valid. not being Baudler i couldn't know for sure. however, there are some pretty serious things that need to come out of this...
1- Baudler needs to go. he needs to go from iowa congress and he damn sure doesn't represent iowans and firearm supporters with NRA...
2- Baudler wasn't the only R to operate without a spine yesterday... there better be some serious questions asked of these folks too. why give them a pass when they participated in this?
we've got a situation that is completely untenable here... NRA and IFC along with certain legislators work their butts off year round to make this happen. Baudler rolls up, kills it all, thumbs his nose at NRA, thumbs his nose at the R party, thumbs his nose at his fellow legislators, thumbs his nose at the leadership of the R party, and for what?
does it really matter? i don't care what the excuse is.
as a patron life member of NRA, my wife and daughter being life NRA members, i'm mad as hell.
Baudler needs to go, and the Republicans need to hear from you about this. if the R's end up screwing up shall issue by letting 200 little towns and counties set up 'gun free' zones, because Baudler is lacking a spine, then every person regardless of voter registration that voted against the forward motion of a good bill needs burned...
2/15/2012 3:24:44 PM
Originally Posted By F224:
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
Should Baulder be removed from the NRA BOD over this?
It would appear that Mr. Baudler has become a useful idiot for the Libs. Time to clean out your desk Clel.
2/16/2012 12:16:29 AM
NRA board of directors. Got to love it.
Hopefully that black eye will be removed quickly. It is too bad it can't happen tomorrow.
Hopefully that black eye will be removed quickly. It is too bad it can't happen tomorrow.
2/16/2012 12:31:48 AM
Originally Posted By septic-tank13:
if the R's end up screwing up shall issue by letting 200 little towns and counties set up 'gun free' zones, because Baudler is lacking a spine, then every person regardless of voter registration that voted against the forward motion of a good bill needs burned...
if the R's end up screwing up shall issue by letting 200 little towns and counties set up 'gun free' zones, because Baudler is lacking a spine, then every person regardless of voter registration that voted against the forward motion of a good bill needs burned...
This, but Baudler needs to go first, fast, and hard. As NRA BOD this becomes as much, if not more, about lessening momentum on ALL pro-firearms legislation as it is about these two bills.
2/16/2012 11:10:21 AM
Septic, who should be contacted in the R party?
2/16/2012 11:44:19 AM
i'd contact clel and let him know you don't want poor amendments and also contact your local legislators and get them on board. this way there are no excuses anyone has for not acting.
2/17/2012 9:05:30 PM
My current thoughts concerning Clel are somewhat influenced by my finishing reading "Unintended Consequences" last night, but I'm not quite that pissed off yet. I do think that his ilk should not be on the NRA BOD.
2/18/2012 1:41:07 PM
Interesting email exchange with Mr. Baudler. He thinks I'm with IGO and says that he did what he was told to do by NRA, Rep. party, and IFC.
"My job was to get the bill out of committee."
"My job was to get the bill out of committee."
2/18/2012 3:58:25 PM
Response was the same for me:
Coltgunner- There were not enough votes to get HF 2114 out of committee. With that amendment on, I gained three votes which got the bill out of the committee and onto the floor of the Iowa House. That was my job, as ordered. Apparently, Aaron Dorr of Iowa Gun Owners is so ineffective at he could not get the three votes himself. Looks to me like he just wants an excuse to email people and ask them for $35. -Clel Dear Honorable Baudler: I am writing to express my bitter disappointment with the passing a Preemption Reform of HF2114 that had an anti-gun amendment that would allow the governing boards of city halls, courthouses, and public hospitals to ban the carrying or possession of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition on the grounds or in the buildings of city halls, courthouses, and public hospitals. Honorable Baudler, you, as a NRA BOD member, surprises me that you voted for such amendment. I would like to know, as I am a voting NRA member, why you voted for such amendment. An overall majority of Iowan's agree that people should have the right to carry on PUBLIC property (survey from Des Moines Register, link: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/interactive/article/20120208/NEWS/120207034/Lawmakers-set-pull-trigger-gun-bills-Vote-Do-you-agree-disagree-these-) I and other voting NRA members along with law abiding members of this state will be watching these votes very carefully. We hope that you will vote for the expansion of gun rights instead of voting to limit them. Thank you for your time. Coltgunner
Originally Posted By blackta6:
Interesting email exchange with Mr. Baudler. He thinks I'm with IGO and says that he did what he was told to do by NRA, Rep. party, and IFC.
"My job was to get the bill out of committee."
Interesting email exchange with Mr. Baudler. He thinks I'm with IGO and says that he did what he was told to do by NRA, Rep. party, and IFC.
"My job was to get the bill out of committee."
2/18/2012 5:05:05 PM
two things need to come out of this thread.
1- Clel is suspect in a big way at a minimum
2- Preemption and the Constitutional Amendment will be coming up on the floor and we'll need to push like never before to strip those goofy amendments off and get this through.
BE PREPARED TO GO LIKE HELL WHEN THIS COMES UP IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS!
1- Clel is suspect in a big way at a minimum
2- Preemption and the Constitutional Amendment will be coming up on the floor and we'll need to push like never before to strip those goofy amendments off and get this through.
BE PREPARED TO GO LIKE HELL WHEN THIS COMES UP IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS!
