And once it hits the floor, Senators can amend it. And vote on it.
...If it passes, it goes over to the House, where they can
Sadly, treason trials and public hangings don't look to be a part of the process. I suppose the paradox of the last Congressthing left having to hang itself was too much for them to work around.
7 comments:
Whatever happened to committee hearings and publishing of proposed bills before they get to the floor?
Obamacare seems to have made them think that all bills should be passed so that we can know what is in them.
If someone can find 535 rails and a bunch o' tar and feathers, I'm thinking it's pret'near time to pay Capitol Hill a little visit.
I agree with your read of the approach. No chance of passing the house and plays up to the Please Do Something! voting block.
Gerry
"Whatever happened to committee hearings and publishing of proposed bills before they get to the floor?"
Oh, the actual bill has been through committee and published, this is just an amendment. Those can be thrown in anywhere without warning, right up until the bill is voted on.
It seems to have become an art form for congresscritters to run a bill that they never intend to pass through committee, etc., just to have a vehicle to amend into what they really wanted. The fact that not a single word of the original bill is left untouched apparently doesn't mean that it's actually a different bill. After all, it's still got the same number, doesn't it?
How come I can only think of McCain-Feingold, years of wasted time and the constant realization politicians create more problems than they ever fix?
Don't now about Treason Trials, but Public Hangings? Hell, all we have to do is look at their Voting Record, especially those Lifers like Feinstein, Schumer, Pelosi.....
Will it drown in the house tub though?
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/11/boehner-theres-no-rule-that-says-i-need-a-republican-majority-in-order-to-pass-bills-in-the-house/
I do not agree that the Toomey-Manchin language has no chance of passing the House. Last night Toomey posted the actual text of his proposed amendment at his website. As usual it's a dense mass of legal jargon, but several items jumped out at me:
1)explicit statement that the bill can't be used as grounds for a federal firearms registry
2) a whole section on sales of handguns, which apparently is from the Brady Act, is repealed.
3) the "expanded background check" is a requirement that any sale or transfer of a firearm which takes place at a gun show or as a result of an advertisement in print or on the Internet must go through a licensed FFL dealer and have a background check run on the buyer. All the problems that "temporary" transfers would have under Schumer's original language seem to be gone.
4) there's 'safe transport of firearms' language that overrides states like New York, which charge you with a felony if you so much as cross the state line with a handgun that isn't licensed in the state. Unfortunately, that language only applies to motor vehicles and does not include aircraft.
On the surface it looks reasonable. It will appeal to low-information voters and to the politicians who depend on their votes. Only to those of us who believe that the Second Amendment means exactly what it says - "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" -- will it be seen for what it is: another move of the Overton window.
Post a Comment