Hahaha. I'm no judge.

Close your dick in the door a few times while looking at it to cure yourself.

Lmao.

Back on topic from my infatuation with a Joker K Harris - I got an email from TSRA saying that the House had appointed some good pro-gun members to the conference committee, as I would expect Speaker Phelan to do (he's been dreamy this session).  Now LTG Patrick will need to appoint the Senate ones - three I think from each chamber.  

Then they will hash out what needs to happen next.  Not sure if the bill is still subject to a Point of Order challenge, or just needs a majority vote in the House.  In any case, great news that it's off to conference committee to have details worked out, instead of having to sent the bill back to the full Senate for a do-over.

Once the committee members are announced, I'd suggest contacting them all to voice support for a CC bill that can pass both chambers, and to show how important the bill is.  Myself or others on here will post who's on the committee after its announced.

Constitutional Carry is on the move once again.  Got about 2-1/2 weeks to get it done and onto the Governor's desk.

There was a point of order raised, then dropped.  So it was somewhat of an issue.  Not sure why it was dropped by the House member.  Was he told that it would be found to not be subject to a POO, so he quit rather than lose?  We're all hobby legislators here so hard to tell from 187 miles away from the Capitol.  

Anyway, CC off to conference committee to hash it all out.  Good times.

Ah, come on.  Explain to me one more time the amendment that violates House rules.  I’m ready to learn.

It was dropped because it wasn’t valid...and yes, he was told it didn’t stand a chance.

Only one POO on a bill of this magnitude, shows that it’s a pretty rock solid bill.

I think most if not all of us, even the dedicated / lifeless types like me, are learning a lot as the process goes on as to the ins and outs of the Texas legislature.  As with most things, if you're not doing them for a living, it's hard to know what can and can't be done, and what's a huge problem and what's no big deal.  

Anyway, next steps will be for the Senate in the form of the LTG to pick 3 Senators for the conference committee, and for them to hash out a bill that meets the goals of both chambers, and can pass.  Then back to the House and Senate for a vote on the final bill.

When it comes time for the final vote, we'll need another round of engagements with the reps, so be ready to holler at both your Representative.  e and Senator.

We're in good shape on CC, and the other bills are moving through the Legislature as well.  This is shaping up to be the biggest advancement of gun rights session since probably the original CHL in 95.  Couldn't have gotten this far without all the great work for you all, contacting your reps and being involved in the process.  

House has chosen their conference appointments.

Matt Schaefer (R)
James White (R)
Terry Canales (D)
Ryan Guillen (D)
Dustin Burrows (R)

Of note, Canales voted n favor of 1927 wi an impassioned speech to close debate.

You are absolutely right. The TX lege is a unique animal.  I do however have some experience here and when I get pm’s telling me to “just go somewhere else” and “you’re bitching is not helping”, I don’t mind embarrassing somebody with good intentions and little knowledge.

So at least 4 of 5 good votes for CC.  Glad to see Rep White on there - he'd done so much to advance CC, and was such a good Committee Chair the night the bills were heard until 530 the next morning.

Yep and only 3 senators will be on the committee. This is going to happen.

I don’t expect this to be completed and sent to Abbott until May 27 or 28th at the soonest. Stay diligent but don’t panic until then.

Can you give advice as to what people should be doing to ensure this bill gets passed?  Or are you going to just laugh and point at folks who are trying with the best of intentions to get something moving?

Sure.  Things are moving.  Have some patience.

Oh and btw, the people you are defending, sent me shitty dm’s and insulted me....and they don’t know shit other than a goa tx alert.

I wasn't defending anyone. I asked if you had advice other than just saying "ha I told you so, peasant"

ETA and you didn't get a DM from me.

Cheers for not fucking off & standing up as the adult in the room.

IIRC the argument is that the amendment that increases the penalty for felon in possession is non-germaine.  The purpose of the bill was to legalize carry for lawful citizens, and increasing a penalty on a felons has nothing to do with that purpose.

Yea, had a few few drinks and surrendered the high road. I’ll regret this in the morning. It’s out of character for me.

He's offered advice on which senators needed some more contact during the run up to the Senate vote, which was helpful.

This post Senate vote week has been a confusing one for a lot of people.  Rep. Schaefer (the author of HB1927) had concerns about the amendments the day they were added to the bill.  And to be honest, while I've voted for him 5 times like I've said, I don't particular trust LT Gov. Patrick on gun issues.  I think he looks upon them as an irritant that gets in the way of either doing other things, or making the Texas Republican party more moderate looking to get more suburb votes - the always in demand "soccer mom", for whom politicans have lusted after since the 90's.

That said, unless there's some big train wreck between now and the end of the session, if you close you eyes and hear what Patrick has done, either by design or accident, for CC, you couldn't ask for anything more.  

Latest GOA update on the status of things:

https://texas.gunowners.org/constitutional-carry-conference-committee/

No violations of House rules.

Off to conference committee.

And to be fair for all here, and with various gun rights group, the question of germane-ness of an amendment concerning sentencing guidelines in a bill about firearms carry is pretty down in the weeds, like digging a hole and looking at the roots.  Compare such complicated discussions with the gun grabbers who want say they want to ban those ghost invisible to X-ray machines Glocks that have shoulder things that go up and are semi-automatic machine guns with grenade launchers.

HB 1927 is headed to the Conference Committee for them to "Work Out The Differences"...

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/12/texas-constitutional-carry-handguns-legislation/

The Texas House on Wednesday rejected changes the Senate made to a Republican-backed proposal to allow Texans to carry handguns without a license, sending the bill behind closed doors for further negotiations.

Before the permitless carry bill can head to Gov. Greg Abbott, who has said he would sign it into law, a conference committee made up of representatives and senators will have to reach a compromise that must get approval from both chambers.

House Bill 1927 would nix the requirement for Texas residents to obtain a license to carry handguns if they’re not prohibited by state or federal law from possessing a gun.

Among other changes, state senators last week approved an amendment barring permitless carry from people convicted in the past five years of making a terroristic threat, deadly conduct, assault that causes bodily injury or disorderly conduct with a firearm. The chamber also approved an amendment that enhances criminal penalties for illegal weapons carried by felons and those convicted of family violence offenses.

Bill author state Rep. Matt Schaefer, R-Tyler, drew cheers Wednesday when he announced he was rejecting the Senate changes. House Speaker Dade Phelan said the House conferees for the committee that will negotiate the bill are Republican Reps. Schaefer, James White and Dustin Burrows and Democratic Reps. Terry Canales and Ryan Guillen – two of the seven Democrats who voted for the bill.

BIGGER_HAMMER

The amendment increasing the penalty for felons is non-Germaine to HB 1927, there was also talk of putting in HB 1927 allowing DA’s in adjacent counties to charge these felons. That would have made things very difficult. Both items should be handled in other bill(s). HB 1927 was not the bill to fix counties that elected shitty DA’s and judges.

OK Guys,,I'm back from our road trip. WHO do I need to focus on getting this deal pushed through?

Now that HB 1927 is in a conference committee, maybe Patrick to send 3 good members to the committee. The House has picked 5 good members, now it is up to the Senate (Patrick) to pick 3.

Any names??

I know Schwertner will be one of the three, the Senate just picked the other 2 as I was driving home, so I need to dig through today’s Senate minutes in a bit. One of the other two will be from the Constitutional Issues committee.

Right now the best attack will be to let Patrick know is Constitutional Carry does not pass the loss will be hung around his neck.

Senate conference members are:

Schwertner (Chair) | Birdwell | Campbell | Creighton | Hughes

Seems like a good crew to my hobby lobbyist eyes.  No fence sitters who had to be contacted in mass to get their vote for the bill in the Senate, such as Neslon, Bettencourt, Taylor, Huffman, Seilger, or Nichols (all of whom voted for the bill in the end, as did all the Republicans).

If the names are already picked then Patrick has fuck all to do w/ it til it comes back out of committee.

We should hammer the 3 Senators and 5 Reps on the committee to make up their minds & pass it back to the House & Senate.  Then you can hammer Patrick to schedule a vote.

It does no good to hit a nail that is already driven in.

I think the idea is that the LTG has a tremendous amount of power in the Senate, so if he wants CC done, it will happen.

That said, sometimes you have to take yes for an answer, and if things are moving in the right direction, let the process play out.

I'll keep an eye on things and provide updates here, but I'm not going to burn the phone and email lines up now.  We all did a tremendous amount of work to get here, which is why we are on the verge of CC passing.

It's 5 from each chamber.

It's my understanding that those 10 members serve as the negotiators to hash out the differences between the bills.  I assume they coordinate their work with other members in the House and Senate - if say a Senator only voted for a bill because something was added, then the conference members would circle back to see what could be added / changed / taken out,  and still have their support, if it was needed.  

It's the sausage-ist of sausage making - grinding up the two bills and coming out with a version than can pass both chambers.

I believe when they are done, they have a final bill, that they goes to each chamber to be voted on.  Don't know if one has to pass it first then sent it to the other, or if both could vote on it at the same time.  But I don't think each amendment has to be voted on - it's a packaged bill at that point - take it or leave it.  Not even sure if amendments can be added to a bill that comes out of conference.

See, not only are we gun nuts, err, enthusiasts, we are buffs about state government, learning the ins and outs of it all, and knowing more than 99.98 percent of the rest of Texas.

And for a side comment about LTG Patrick.  He's as slippery as a greased eel, as the phrase goes, but does have fantastic hair.  Between him and Rick Perry, those two have hair that all men should aspire to have.

I know gun rights are not a big issue for him, probably as I've said an irritant compared to other things he wants to get done, and the image of the party he wants to project.  I'd read that he was very taken aback by the 2018 election, and the inroads the Democrats made in this state, and wants to focus on more fiscal and tax issues, rather that the hot button issues like guns, abortion, 8 year olds being allowed to have their packages cut off, etc.

I don't think he was a big supporter of open and campus carry in the 2015 session either - that said, both bills passed, and not some weak campus carry bill that the schools could backdoor out of, but a good solid bill.

On Constitutional Carry, it hasn't been a priority for him either, and he's had to be pushed to supporting this.  As often happens, when you deal with someone their past history paints your view of what their doing now.  If you have an employee who's always late with a project, and he's having some issues with a new one, you're ready to chew him out for it being late again, even if that's not the case.

All that said, if just look at the movement and actions of the Senate, practically speaking they could not have been more favorable to CC.  He set up a special committee to hear the bill, stacked it with pro-gun Senators, had a quick vote in the full Senate, and against all predictions, all 18 Republicans voted for CC, even the 3 who two years ago would not vote for a short term, disaster zone CC bill.

Yes the Senate added in amendments - that's what chambers do.  I would think if you counted all the bills that either chamber just passed without changing in a full session, you'd still have all 10 fingers in your hands.  And for all we know, behind the scenes, the ones added in were vital to obtaining the support of various Republican fence sitters.  

The concern from many was the amendments were poison pills designed to kill the bill, but that hasn't proved to be the case, as the bill in now in conference committee, and the Senate has sent over 5 very pro-gun Senators for that committee.

Even slippery eels can do what they should, either by accident or design.  Maybe Patrick, as good politicians do, figured that since he can't stop CC he might as well push it through and get the credit.  And if things keep trending in the way they are, he should.  Getting all 18 Republicans to vote yes on CC was a huge accomplishment, and one that he should be complemented on.

Guns have never been a priority for Patrick. He reminds me of Strauss, pass a couple small minor bills and throw them to the 'dumb gun nuts'.

I questioned Strauss on Open Carry once, his response was 'well it is now no longer a crime to print'. He just didn't quite get it, Patrick is cut from the same cloth..

Now after conference committee the Senate only needs 16 votes to get it out. Just a simple majority.

How'd the State Affairs committee meeting go?  No issues with the gun bills?

HB 957 went OK, explained a bit about suppressors and how the bill would work. The other house bills have Senate companion bills that are better, so they got a token support.

Good man, thanks for showing up to the hearing.

As discussed, the suppressor bill isn't a great advancement like SS is, but it's a good bill, and who knows what ball it could get rolling.

Absolutely. Speaker @DadePhelan and I have 10 great conferees on #HB1927 and we are very close to getting #2A Con Carry across the finish line — despite an avalanche of misinformation and just plain lies from outside agitators, we are on track for a big #2A win.  #txlege https://t.co/Vqk29We4Mr

Dan Patrick  (@DanPatrick) May 13, 2021

Ahh politics.  Now Patrick sounds like he's been a been supporter of it all along, and that it's something that he wanted to have passed.  If it was, he'd have put it in his Top 20 bills or such.

As the saying goes, victory has a dozen family members, while defeat is an orphan.  

In any case, it looks like it's moving along quite well.  It would be very surprising if it doesn't pass at this point.  He'd get the heat for having it get this far, but not the credit for having it pass.

Correct. He gets 0 credit from me. Just glad to see that it seems like he finally accepted this is going to happen.

as you or someone else mentioned though, a greased eel. I don't trust him at all.

Yeah I don't either - two years ago he was talking about forcing private gun sales to go through a FFL, and pushing for no-due-process confiscation laws.  Now he's a big 2nd Amd fan.  Shows you what gun owners can do if we put the heat to him and other elected officials.

That said, he could have killed CC if he'd really wanted to.  He'd have paid a political price for it, but could have basked for awhile in the praise from the Democrat media complex (until they geared up to try to defeat him in 22).  

If CC goes through, we need to reward those who by accident or design were instrumental in it passing, as we would have punished them if they've caused it to fail.

That's actually not the case.  

He heard the will of the people and some very influencial members of the republican base loud and clear.

48 hours before the Senate vote he was 6 votes shy.... and he got it done.

Interesting.  As I said, with his history it doesn't take much for people not to trust him on guns.  

But the proof is in the pudding, and it's looking like CC will be passed, due in large part to LTG Patrick.  Wrangling / horse trading as required to get all 18 Republicans to vote for CC was a huge achievement, and I don't think it happened on its own.

If anyone is itching to make a call, give Terry Canales a thank you call.

He is a Democrat that voted for this bill and joined as a sponsor.

Canales could make this process go really smooth.  He is respected by his democratic colleagues in both houses.

He is not a strong proponent of CC but he does listen to his base.

https://www.texastribune.org/directory/terry-canales/

Phone 512-463-0426

Email [email protected]

His main reason for supporting CC is that he believes "firearms only" arrests disproportunately are charged to minorities and lower income people.