Posted: 7/4/2013 3:20:52 PM EDT
| Were there enough republicans in the state senate to block the SAFE act? Someone says dems had enough votes and didn't need republicans to pass it. |
|
Quoted:
Were there enough republicans in the state senate to block the SAFE act? Someone says dems had enough votes and didn't need republicans to pass it. NO and YES The RINOs combined with the IDC control the Senate. If the IDC sides with the Dems, they control the Senate. |
|
Quoted:
That's what I thought as well, but an attorney on another forum says once the governor has issued a message of necessity the bill must come to the floor for a vote. I do not believe that is correct. The MON only allows a vote without the normal three day aging of the bill. The Governor can not bring legislation to the floor. That is the sole domain of the legislature. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's what I thought as well, but an attorney on another forum says once the governor has issued a message of necessity the bill must come to the floor for a vote. I do not believe that is correct. The MON only allows a vote without the normal three day aging of the bill. The Governor can not bring legislation to the floor. That is the sole domain of the legislature. He said it's in NYS constitution. I asked him to cite it. Will see. |
|
www.dos.ny.gov/info/constitution.htm
Article 3 §14 [Manner of passing bills; message of necessity for immediate vote] §14.No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon, in which case it must nevertheless be upon the desks of the members in final form, not necessarily printed, before its final passage; nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature; and upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereof shall be allowed, and the question upon its final passage shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the ayes and nays entered on the journal. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That's what I thought as well, but an attorney on another forum says once the governor has issued a message of necessity the bill must come to the floor for a vote. I do not believe that is correct. The MON only allows a vote without the normal three day aging of the bill. The Governor can not bring legislation to the floor. That is the sole domain of the legislature. He said it's in NYS constitution. I asked him to cite it. Will see. He can't: [Enacting clause of bills; no law to be enacted except by bill] §13.The enacting clause of all bills shall be "The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows," and no law shall be enacted except by bill. (Formerly §14. Renumbered by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938.) [Manner of passing bills; message of necessity for immediate vote] §14.No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon, in which case it must nevertheless be upon the desks of the members in final form, not necessarily printed, before its final passage; nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature; and upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereof shall be allowed, and the question upon its final passage shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the ayes and nays entered on the journal. (Formerly §15. Renumbered and amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938; further amended by vote of the people November 6, 2001.) [Powers of each house] §9.A majority of each house shall constitute a quorum to do business. Each house shall determine the rules of its own proceedings, and be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members; shall choose its own officers; and the senate shall choose a temporary president and the assembly shall choose a speaker. (Formerly §10. Renumbered by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938. Amended by vote of the people November 5, 1963.) [Powers and duties of governor; compensation] §3.The governor shall be commander-in-chief of the military and naval forces of the state. The governor shall have power to convene the legislature, or the senate only, on extraordinary occasions. At extraordinary sessions convened pursuant to the provisions of this section no subject shall be acted upon, except such as the governor may recommend for consideration. The governor shall communicate by message to the legislature at every session the condition of the state, and recommend such matters to it as he or she shall judge expedient. The governor shall expedite all such measures as may be resolved upon by the legislature, and shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed. The governor shall receive for his or her services an annual salary to be fixed by joint resolution of the senate and assembly, and there shall be provided for his or her use a suitable and furnished executive residence. (Formerly §4. Renumbered and amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938; further amended by vote of the people November 3, 1953; November 5, 1963; November 6, 2001.) |
|
Quoted:
www.dos.ny.gov/info/constitution.htm Article 3 §14 [Manner of passing bills; message of necessity for immediate vote] §14.No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon, in which case it must nevertheless be upon the desks of the members in final form, not necessarily printed, before its final passage; nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature; and upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereof shall be allowed, and the question upon its final passage shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the ayes and nays entered on the journal. That does NOT say the Governor can bring a bill to the floor; it ONLY says that the Governor can waive the three day rule for bills with a MOA. The Speaker/Majority Leader still have to put the bill on the floor, the Governor can not do that. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
www.dos.ny.gov/info/constitution.htm Article 3 §14 [Manner of passing bills; message of necessity for immediate vote] §14.No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon, in which case it must nevertheless be upon the desks of the members in final form, not necessarily printed, before its final passage; nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature; and upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereof shall be allowed, and the question upon its final passage shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the ayes and nays entered on the journal. That does NOT say the Governor can bring a bill to the floor; it ONLY says that the Governor can waive the three day rule for bills with a MOA. The Speaker/Majority Leader still have to put the bill on the floor, the Governor can not do that. Correct, if I remember one of the court's arguments against Schultz or however you spell his name, is the Senate ACCEPTED the message of necessity, they are not obligated to do so. |
|
I also don't see anything in that section, that will allow the governor to bring the bill to the floor through message of necessity, but it's not crystal clear. Can any of the attorneys here comment on this.
Did Skelos have the power under state constitution to stop or block this bill? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Were there enough republicans in the state senate to block the SAFE act? Someone says dems had enough votes and didn't need republicans to pass it. NO and YES The RINOs combined with the IDC control the Senate. If the IDC sides with the Dems, they control the Senate. This. Andy told Skelos to play ball on SAFE or he would lose his job as senate majority leader. Easy to buy off a few crooked Democrats. Spineless RINO fuck folded like a house of cards. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: www.dos.ny.gov/info/constitution.htm Article 3 §14 [Manner of passing bills; message of necessity for immediate vote] §14.No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon, in which case it must nevertheless be upon the desks of the members in final form, not necessarily printed, before its final passage; nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature; and upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereof shall be allowed, and the question upon its final passage shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the ayes and nays entered on the journal. That does NOT say the Governor can bring a bill to the floor; it ONLY says that the Governor can waive the three day rule for bills with a MOA. The Speaker/Majority Leader still have to put the bill on the floor, the Governor can not do that. Correct, if I remember one of the court's arguments against Schultz or however you spell his name, is the Senate ACCEPTED the message of necessity, they are not obligated to do so. My understanding is the Legislature at their request actually requests the Governor to certify the facts of the MON so they can proceed with the bill. AFAIK they are not compelled to either request or act on the MOS and obviously are not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote. AFAIK Skelos is fully responsible for enacting the SAFE Act. Without his three men in a room secrecy, back door politics and dark of night session it would have never been brought to the floor for a vote. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Were there enough republicans in the state senate to block the SAFE act? Someone says dems had enough votes and didn't need republicans to pass it. NO and YES The RINOs combined with the IDC control the Senate. If the IDC sides with the Dems, they control the Senate. This. Andy told Skelos to play ball on SAFE or he would lose his job as senate majority leader. Easy to buy off a few crooked Democrats. Spineless RINO fuck folded like a house of cards. If Skelos and the Senate Republicans refused to request and act on the MOS they would have come up smelling like roses when the provisions of the the flawed SAFE Act bill was eventually made public. The bill would never had made it out of committee for a floor vote and there would have been overwhelming support for them in the 2014 elections. Hopefully Skelos and the IDC lose their positions of power in the 2015/2016 session. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
www.dos.ny.gov/info/constitution.htm Article 3 §14 [Manner of passing bills; message of necessity for immediate vote] §14.No bill shall be passed or become a law unless it shall have been printed and upon the desks of the members, in its final form, at least three calendar legislative days prior to its final passage, unless the governor, or the acting governor, shall have certified, under his or her hand and the seal of the state, the facts which in his or her opinion necessitate an immediate vote thereon, in which case it must nevertheless be upon the desks of the members in final form, not necessarily printed, before its final passage; nor shall any bill be passed or become a law, except by the assent of a majority of the members elected to each branch of the legislature; and upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereof shall be allowed, and the question upon its final passage shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the ayes and nays entered on the journal. That does NOT say the Governor can bring a bill to the floor; it ONLY says that the Governor can waive the three day rule for bills with a MOA. The Speaker/Majority Leader still have to put the bill on the floor, the Governor can not do that. Correct, if I remember one of the court's arguments against Schultz or however you spell his name, is the Senate ACCEPTED the message of necessity, they are not obligated to do so. My understanding is the Legislature at their request actually requests the Governor to certify the facts of the MON so they can proceed with the bill. AFAIK they are not compelled to either request or act on the MOS and obviously are not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote. AFAIK Skelos is fully responsible for enacting the SAFE Act. Without his three men in a room secrecy, back door politics and dark of night session it would have never been brought to the floor for a vote. THIS |
|
Quoted:
I also don't see anything in that section, that will allow the governor to bring the bill to the floor through message of necessity, but it's not crystal clear. Can any of the attorneys here comment on this. Did Skelos have the power under state constitution to stop or block this bill? Lenny, it IS crystal clear. We have three branches of government, each with it's own powers. The Governor can "sponsor" a bill. That is called a "Program Bill". The retiree exemption appears to be a program bill, when andy says "That was OUR amendment". However, the governor can NOT bring a bill to the floor under any circumstances. NONE. THAT is a power reserved to the Legislature. |
|
Guys,
This comes from Long Island Firearms Forum. It's in the thread titled: "Who are we going to vote for in the next elections?" There is a poster who is a respected lawyer there and he stands firm that MON forces the bill on to the floor for a vote. This is what he wrote: "Basically, the "certification" is the Message of Necessity itself. The Governor merely needs to articulate a set of facts that HE believes necessitates an immediate vote and the legislation comes to the floor. Abuse of the Message of Necessity to circumvent the normal course of business has increased considerably in the last dozen years or so, but this issue has been a problem for the last 100 years. The courts have ruled that the Governors reasons are not subject to review and only requires the Governor to submit a pro forma message. As for the absurd assertion that the legislation is "obviously" not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, beyond the fact that the NYS Constitution contradicts this assertion on its face, the assertion itself makes no sense within the context of why the Message of Neccessity provision exists. The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " |
|
Quoted:
Guys, This comes from Long Island Firearms Forum. It's in the thread titled: "Who are we going to vote for in the next elections?" There is a poster there who is a respected lawyer there and he stands firm that MON forces the bill on to the floor. This is what he wrote: "Basically, the "certification" is the Message of Necessity itself. The Governor merely needs to articulate a set of facts that HE believes necessitates an immediate vote and the legislation comes to the floor. Abuse of the Message of Necessity to circumvent the normal course of business has increased considerably in the last dozen years or so, but this issue has been a problem for the last 100 years. The courts have ruled that the Governors reasons are not subject to review and only requires the Governor to submit a pro forma message. As for the absurd assertion that the legislation is "obviously" not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, beyond the fact that the NYS Constitution contradicts this assertion on its face, the assertion itself makes no sense within the context of why the Message of Neccessity provision exists. The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " AGAIN, it allows an immediate vote without waiting the three days. It does NOT force a vote on a bill that the Majority Leader/Speaker has not allowed to the floor. IF it forced a bill to the floor that the speaker did not want to allow, it would violate Separation of Powers and the section I posted above that states that the Legislature makes it's own rules. Again, read carefully what you posted that he said. IT ALLOWS THE BILL TO COME TO THE FLOOR FOR AN IMMEDIATE VOTE. IT DOES NOT PUT A BILL ON THE FLOOR THAT OTHERWISE WAS NOT GOING TO BE VOTED ON. These are two different concepts. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Guys, This comes from Long Island Firearms Forum. It's in the thread titled: "Who are we going to vote for in the next elections?" There is a poster there who is a respected lawyer there and he stands firm that MON forces the bill on to the floor. This is what he wrote: "Basically, the "certification" is the Message of Necessity itself. The Governor merely needs to articulate a set of facts that HE believes necessitates an immediate vote and the legislation comes to the floor. Abuse of the Message of Necessity to circumvent the normal course of business has increased considerably in the last dozen years or so, but this issue has been a problem for the last 100 years. The courts have ruled that the Governors reasons are not subject to review and only requires the Governor to submit a pro forma message. As for the absurd assertion that the legislation is "obviously" not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, beyond the fact that the NYS Constitution contradicts this assertion on its face, the assertion itself makes no sense within the context of why the Message of Neccessity provision exists. The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " AGAIN, it allows an immediate vote without waiting the three days. It does NOT force a vote on a bill that the Majority Leader/Speaker has not allowed to the floor. IF it forced a bill to the floor that the speaker did not want to allow, it would violate Separation of Powers and the section I posted above that states that the Legislature makes it's own rules. Again, read carefully what you posted that he said. IT ALLOWS THE BILL TO COME TO THE FLOOR FOR AN IMMEDIATE VOTE. IT DOES NOT PUT A BILL ON THE FLOOR THAT OTHERWISE WAS NOT GOING TO BE VOTED ON. These are two different concepts. I understand that, but on Long Island FIrearms board this guy is their legal authority. I would lose taking him on. His screen name starts with letters Col. Maybe some of you guys who post there can set the record straight on what role Skelos played. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Guys, This comes from Long Island Firearms Forum. It's in the thread titled: "Who are we going to vote for in the next elections?" There is a poster there who is a respected lawyer there and he stands firm that MON forces the bill on to the floor. This is what he wrote: "Basically, the "certification" is the Message of Necessity itself. The Governor merely needs to articulate a set of facts that HE believes necessitates an immediate vote and the legislation comes to the floor. Abuse of the Message of Necessity to circumvent the normal course of business has increased considerably in the last dozen years or so, but this issue has been a problem for the last 100 years. The courts have ruled that the Governors reasons are not subject to review and only requires the Governor to submit a pro forma message. As for the absurd assertion that the legislation is "obviously" not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, beyond the fact that the NYS Constitution contradicts this assertion on its face, the assertion itself makes no sense within the context of why the Message of Neccessity provision exists. The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " AGAIN, it allows an immediate vote without waiting the three days. It does NOT force a vote on a bill that the Majority Leader/Speaker has not allowed to the floor. IF it forced a bill to the floor that the speaker did not want to allow, it would violate Separation of Powers and the section I posted above that states that the Legislature makes it's own rules. Again, read carefully what you posted that he said. IT ALLOWS THE BILL TO COME TO THE FLOOR FOR AN IMMEDIATE VOTE. IT DOES NOT PUT A BILL ON THE FLOOR THAT OTHERWISE WAS NOT GOING TO BE VOTED ON. These are two different concepts. I understand that, but on Long Island FIrearms board this guy is their legal authority. I would lose taking him on. His screen name starts with letters Col. Maybe some of you guys who post there can set the record straight on what role Skelos played. I know who he is and you are not reading it right. He said: The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " The bill still needs a sponsor and the leader has to allow it to be voted under the rules. The MON waives the statutory three days and the printing of the bill. And the reason he did it was to cut off all sales of "AW's" immediately. The bill could have been passed and signed three days later, but another few thousands of "AW" would have been sold and therefore legal. |
|
Quoted: I understand that, but on Long Island FIrearms board this guy is their legal authority. I would lose taking him on. His screen name starts with letters Col. Maybe some of you guys who post there can set the record straight on what role Skelos played. For whatever reason there has been "bad blood" between LIF and ARFCOM which resulted in the banning of several ARFCOM member's including IIRC our own esteemed NYHTF moderator and possibly a ARFCOM site staff member. You can't even browse the LIF forums without creating an account there. I have no intention in getting into a pissing match over this dopey case. What I posted is my understanding of the MOS procedure based on the case filings including the MOL prepared by the NY AG's office. I are done with this meaningless case.  |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Guys, This comes from Long Island Firearms Forum. It's in the thread titled: "Who are we going to vote for in the next elections?" There is a poster there who is a respected lawyer there and he stands firm that MON forces the bill on to the floor. This is what he wrote: "Basically, the "certification" is the Message of Necessity itself. The Governor merely needs to articulate a set of facts that HE believes necessitates an immediate vote and the legislation comes to the floor. Abuse of the Message of Necessity to circumvent the normal course of business has increased considerably in the last dozen years or so, but this issue has been a problem for the last 100 years. The courts have ruled that the Governors reasons are not subject to review and only requires the Governor to submit a pro forma message. But the section he cites from NY Constitution doesn't really supports what he says. As for the absurd assertion that the legislation is "obviously" not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, beyond the fact that the NYS Constitution contradicts this assertion on its face, the assertion itself makes no sense within the context of why the Message of Neccessity provision exists. The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " AGAIN, it allows an immediate vote without waiting the three days. It does NOT force a vote on a bill that the Majority Leader/Speaker has not allowed to the floor. IF it forced a bill to the floor that the speaker did not want to allow, it would violate Separation of Powers and the section I posted above that states that the Legislature makes it's own rules. Again, read carefully what you posted that he said. IT ALLOWS THE BILL TO COME TO THE FLOOR FOR AN IMMEDIATE VOTE. IT DOES NOT PUT A BILL ON THE FLOOR THAT OTHERWISE WAS NOT GOING TO BE VOTED ON. These are two different concepts. I understand that, but on Long Island FIrearms board this guy is their legal authority. I would lose taking him on. His screen name starts with letters Col. Maybe some of you guys who post there can set the record straight on what role Skelos played. I know who he is and you are not reading it right. He said: The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " The bill still needs a sponsor and the leader has to allow it to be voted under the rules. The MON waives the statutory three days and the printing of the bill. And the reason he did it was to cut off all sales of "AW's" immediately. The bill could have been passed and signed three days later, but another few thousands of "AW" would have been sold and therefore legal. No, it's not my misreading. This was just one of the series of posts, he insisted in all of his posts that the bill can't be blocked by majority leader once the governor issues MON. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Guys, This comes from Long Island Firearms Forum. It's in the thread titled: "Who are we going to vote for in the next elections?" There is a poster there who is a respected lawyer there and he stands firm that MON forces the bill on to the floor. This is what he wrote: "Basically, the "certification" is the Message of Necessity itself. The Governor merely needs to articulate a set of facts that HE believes necessitates an immediate vote and the legislation comes to the floor. Abuse of the Message of Necessity to circumvent the normal course of business has increased considerably in the last dozen years or so, but this issue has been a problem for the last 100 years. The courts have ruled that the Governors reasons are not subject to review and only requires the Governor to submit a pro forma message. But the section he cites from NY Constitution doesn't really supports what he says. As for the absurd assertion that the legislation is "obviously" not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, beyond the fact that the NYS Constitution contradicts this assertion on its face, the assertion itself makes no sense within the context of why the Message of Neccessity provision exists. The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " AGAIN, it allows an immediate vote without waiting the three days. It does NOT force a vote on a bill that the Majority Leader/Speaker has not allowed to the floor. IF it forced a bill to the floor that the speaker did not want to allow, it would violate Separation of Powers and the section I posted above that states that the Legislature makes it's own rules. Again, read carefully what you posted that he said. IT ALLOWS THE BILL TO COME TO THE FLOOR FOR AN IMMEDIATE VOTE. IT DOES NOT PUT A BILL ON THE FLOOR THAT OTHERWISE WAS NOT GOING TO BE VOTED ON. These are two different concepts. I understand that, but on Long Island FIrearms board this guy is their legal authority. I would lose taking him on. His screen name starts with letters Col. Maybe some of you guys who post there can set the record straight on what role Skelos played. I know who he is and you are not reading it right. He said: The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " The bill still needs a sponsor and the leader has to allow it to be voted under the rules. The MON waives the statutory three days and the printing of the bill. And the reason he did it was to cut off all sales of "AW's" immediately. The bill could have been passed and signed three days later, but another few thousands of "AW" would have been sold and therefore legal. No, it's not my misreading. This was just one of the series of posts, he insisted in all of his posts that the bill can't be blocked by majority leader once the governor issues MON. I must disagree. The Governor can not force the Legislature to vote on something, you can not show me any law that speaks to that. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Guys, This comes from Long Island Firearms Forum. It's in the thread titled: "Who are we going to vote for in the next elections?" There is a poster there who is a respected lawyer there and he stands firm that MON forces the bill on to the floor. This is what he wrote: "Basically, the "certification" is the Message of Necessity itself. The Governor merely needs to articulate a set of facts that HE believes necessitates an immediate vote and the legislation comes to the floor. Abuse of the Message of Necessity to circumvent the normal course of business has increased considerably in the last dozen years or so, but this issue has been a problem for the last 100 years. The courts have ruled that the Governors reasons are not subject to review and only requires the Governor to submit a pro forma message. But the section he cites from NY Constitution doesn't really supports what he says. As for the absurd assertion that the legislation is "obviously" not required to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, beyond the fact that the NYS Constitution contradicts this assertion on its face, the assertion itself makes no sense within the context of why the Message of Neccessity provision exists. The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " AGAIN, it allows an immediate vote without waiting the three days. It does NOT force a vote on a bill that the Majority Leader/Speaker has not allowed to the floor. IF it forced a bill to the floor that the speaker did not want to allow, it would violate Separation of Powers and the section I posted above that states that the Legislature makes it's own rules. Again, read carefully what you posted that he said. IT ALLOWS THE BILL TO COME TO THE FLOOR FOR AN IMMEDIATE VOTE. IT DOES NOT PUT A BILL ON THE FLOOR THAT OTHERWISE WAS NOT GOING TO BE VOTED ON. These are two different concepts. I understand that, but on Long Island FIrearms board this guy is their legal authority. I would lose taking him on. His screen name starts with letters Col. Maybe some of you guys who post there can set the record straight on what role Skelos played. I know who he is and you are not reading it right. He said: The intent was to provide the Governor a means of getting a bill to the floor for an immediate vote in times of emergency. The fact that the provision was drafted in a way that subjects it to abuse does not change the fact that it is a means to express legislation straight to the floor for a vote. " The bill still needs a sponsor and the leader has to allow it to be voted under the rules. The MON waives the statutory three days and the printing of the bill. And the reason he did it was to cut off all sales of "AW's" immediately. The bill could have been passed and signed three days later, but another few thousands of "AW" would have been sold and therefore legal. No, it's not my misreading. This was just one of the series of posts, he insisted in all of his posts that the bill can't be blocked by majority leader once the governor issues MON. I must disagree. The Governor can not force the Legislature to vote on something, you can not show me any law that speaks to that. Do you post on Log Island firearms? It starts with post #30: www.longislandfirearms.com/forum/topic/75723-who-are-we-going-to-vote-for-at-the-next-election/page__st__20 |
|
Quoted: No, it's not my misreading. This was just one of the series of posts, he insisted in all of his posts that the bill can't be blocked by majority leader once the governor issues MON. AFAIK the Legislature by action of the leadership of the Assembly (Silver) and Senate (Klein, Skelos) initiates the MON by submitting and requesting the Governor to certify the facts of the MON. AFAIK once the Governor certifies the facts of the MON the Assembly and Senate are permitted to act on the bill immediately but are not required to do so. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, it's not my misreading. This was just one of the series of posts, he insisted in all of his posts that the bill can't be blocked by majority leader once the governor issues MON. AFAIK the Legislature by action of the leadership of the Assembly (Silver) and Senate (Klein, Skelos) initiates the MON by submitting and requesting the Governor to certify the facts of the MON. AFAIK once the Governor certifies the facts of the MON the Assembly and Senate are permitted to act on the bill immediately but are not required to do so. Correct |