|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 12, 2009, 05:24 PM | #1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
|
National Parks Carry update
I just saw this mentioned on the news, currently attached to, of all things a credit card bill. Any chance of this working, or maybe they don't want the credit card bill to pass?
http://washingtonindependent.com/426...reform-bill-is
__________________
Quote:
|
|
May 12, 2009, 07:04 PM | #2 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
It's now being reported that the Senate passed the credit card bill, 67 to 29, with the Coburn amendment in it.
The bill will now go to conference to resolve the differences between the two houses. The Republicans really don't want finance reform, or we would have seen such during all those years that Bush and the republican party held the majority. So this very well could be a "poison pill" amendment. It should also be noted that the Dems have used this very tactic to get gun-control measures passed. Now the other side of the aisle is using many of the same tactics. |
May 12, 2009, 07:26 PM | #3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
|
Well it's good...but it strikes me that the two are so unrelated seemingly, it's definately fast and loose with legislation games and political payback these days.
I did read that the President wants his credit card legislation on his desk by memorial day to avert the crisis.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
May 12, 2009, 11:02 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2006
Location: Reno, NV.
Posts: 1,026
|
I think it's one of those "If you damn Dems want the credit card reform, we gun totin' Right Wing Extremists want our CCW's in National Parks" type deals....
I'm strangely comfortable with this one.
__________________
Rock out with your Glock out! |
May 13, 2009, 06:53 AM | #5 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Well, if you want to buy guns & ammo on credit, I would do it now because they are going to be pulling back (actually they have already been pulling back) credit card debt before that bill takes effect. It will be interesting to see how bad they want it though
|
May 13, 2009, 02:04 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
|
Something we should take heart in, is the numbers, 67 yeas, 29 naes.
That tells me dems are gonna have a hard time passing any anti - gun legislation.
__________________
Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071 |
May 13, 2009, 02:25 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 16, 2007
Location: Southern Arizona
Posts: 3,888
|
I agree with kraigwy - the numbers certainly seem important. Hopefully those 67 yeas are a strong indication that the leanings in the Senate are more in favor of gun ownership and less inclined to pass new anti gun legislation.
I find it interesting that the press considers the ammendment a poison pill for the credit card legislation rather than a move to get the concealed carry in National Parks bill passed by attaching it to a bill dear to the hearts of the liberal senators. |
May 13, 2009, 02:30 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
Quote:
I, for one, am tired of being the political punching bag and I think this was an extremely well placed thorn! |
|
May 13, 2009, 03:00 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Can the legislative branch override the injunction of the judicial branch?
|
May 13, 2009, 03:03 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
I don't believe so, but it does change the rules of the game. Right now the basis of the injunction is that the "rules change" didn't follow one of the guidelines (that of an "environmental impact study") A change in legislature blows that right out of the water since an EIS isn't required for the proposed law.
|
May 13, 2009, 03:26 PM | #11 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
|
Quote:
Don't wanna wake up tomorrow and find they snuck a total EBR ban into a healthcare bill while nobody was lookin'. Strange days...
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by alloy; May 13, 2009 at 03:34 PM. |
||
May 13, 2009, 04:35 PM | #12 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
The injunction is against a regulation, not a legislated law. In this case, it makes no difference why the injunction was in place. Change the actual law, and the injunction is a moot point. Does anyone have a link to the bill, as amended? |
|
May 13, 2009, 04:41 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
|
the link to it is on this first page of amendments,(1068) but im not good at navigating the site
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer...1:HR00627:@@@S http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/.../~c1116MtsoE::
__________________
Quote:
|
|
May 14, 2009, 01:22 AM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 7, 2007
Location: Lancaster Co, PA
Posts: 2,311
|
Can they sneak in "repeal 922(o) " somewhere? That's a mere 13 characters in what's likely to be over a 100 page bill, as they all are.
__________________
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus http://www.concealedcampus.org "You can't stop insane people from doing insane things by passing insane laws--that's insane!" - Penn Jillette |
May 19, 2009, 11:54 PM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
WSJ editorial: Democrats and Guns
This from a Wall Street Journal editorial entitled "Democrats and Guns":
Quote:
|
|
May 20, 2009, 09:25 AM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
It'd be a great way to start Memorial weekend! <wishful thinking>.
|
May 20, 2009, 12:40 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
|
According to an article I read, many of the new Dems in Congress come from western states, and they don't have the anti-gun attitude of their eastern confreres.
|
May 20, 2009, 01:30 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
It's THROUGH!
Now we see about "resolving the differences" and then to Mr. O's desk it goes.
Govtrack H.R.627 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-627 Current status Occurred: Introduced Jan 22, 2009 Occurred: Referred to Committee View Committee Assignments Occurred: Reported by Committee Apr 22, 2009 Occurred: Amendments (89 proposed) View Amendments Occurred: Passed House Apr 30, 2009 Occurred: Passed Senate May 19, 2009 Not Yet Occurred: Differences Resolved ... Not Yet Occurred: Signed by President ... With "Section 512" still intact and reading as follows Quote:
Last edited by ZeSpectre; May 20, 2009 at 01:38 PM. |
|
May 20, 2009, 01:49 PM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
Another Update
Washington Post
House Passes Credit Card Bill, Sending It to President http://tinyurl.com/qptvtc Quote:
|
|
May 20, 2009, 02:02 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The NY Times has been having hissy fits about the amendment for awhile. Why doesn't Obama stand up to the evil gun lobby? Oh, dear - he is misbehaving.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
May 20, 2009, 02:06 PM | #21 |
Member
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Posts: 30
|
I think this is great news for more than one reason. Now, I am FAR from being an Obama supporter (and would need a lobotomy to become one), but this is one piece of legislation he has pushed for that I agree with. I am extremely glad that the National Parks carry permission was tacked on, but even moreso because it wasn't some huge tax and/or spend bill that it was attached to. I am a capitalist through and through, but the credit card industry has royally screwed its card-holders over and over. And sadly the worse victims are those who can least afford the rate change from 12% to 29% at the whim of the CC companies.
On a side note, I've skimmed through the legislation, but didn't see how this would affect those facilities maintained by the Army Corp of Engineers. Anyone able to shed some light on this? |
May 20, 2009, 02:12 PM | #22 | |
Member
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Posts: 30
|
Quote:
|
|
May 20, 2009, 02:25 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
I'm sure the NY Times and other groups are off having a drink with Justice CKK over having their legislative posterior handed to them.
|
May 20, 2009, 02:51 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 24, 2008
Location: PA
Posts: 625
|
The House agreed to the Senate Amendment in two votes. The first vote was all but Sec. 512. The second vote (Roll Call 277), on agreeing to Sec. 512, passed with a lesser Democratic margin than the rest of the Amd. As the House agreed to the Amd, the bill is final and goes to the President.
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 277 (Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined) H R 627 YEA-AND-NAY 20-May-2009 2:24 PM QUESTION: Concur In Sec. 512 of Sen Amdt. BILL TITLE: Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2009 Yeas Nays PRES NV Democratic 105 145 5 Republican 174 2 2 Independent TOTALS 279 147 7 ---- YEAS 279 --- Aderholt Adler (NJ) Akin Alexander Altmire Arcuri Austria Baca Bachus Barrow Bartlett Barton (TX) Bean Berkley Berry Biggert Bilbray Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (UT) Blackburn Blunt Boccieri Boehner Bonner Bono Mack Boozman Boren Boswell Boucher Boustany Boyd Brady (TX) Bright Broun (GA) Brown (SC) Brown-Waite, Ginny Buchanan Burgess Burton (IN) Buyer Calvert Camp Campbell Cantor Cao Capito Cardoza Carney Carter Cassidy Chaffetz Chandler Childers Coble Coffman (CO) Cole Conaway Costa Costello Courtney Crenshaw Cuellar Culberson Dahlkemper Davis (AL) Davis (KY) Davis (TN) Deal (GA) DeFazio DeGette Dent Diaz-Balart, L. Diaz-Balart, M. Dingell Donnelly (IN) Dreier Driehaus Duncan Edwards (TX) Ehlers Ellsworth Emerson Etheridge Fallin Flake Fleming Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Gallegly Garrett (NJ) Gerlach Giffords Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Goodlatte Gordon (TN) Granger Graves Grayson Green, Gene Griffith Guthrie Hall (TX) Halvorson Harper Hastings (WA) Heinrich Heller Hensarling Herger Herseth Sandlin Higgins Hill Hinchey Hodes Hoekstra Holden Hunter Inglis Issa Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (IL) Johnson, Sam Jones Jordan (OH) Kagen Kanjorski Kennedy Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kirkpatrick (AZ) Kissell Kline (MN) Kratovil Lamborn Lance Latham LaTourette Latta Lee (NY) Lewis (CA) Linder LoBiondo Lucas Luetkemeyer Lummis Lungren, Daniel E. Mack Maffei Manzullo Marchant Markey (CO) Marshall Massa Matheson McCarthy (CA) McCaul McClintock McCotter McHenry McHugh McIntyre McKeon McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meek (FL) Meeks (NY) Melancon Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, Gary Minnick Mitchell Mollohan Moran (KS) Murphy (NY) Murphy, Patrick Murphy, Tim Murtha Myrick Neugebauer Nunes Nye Oberstar Obey Olson Ortiz Pallone Paul Paulsen Pence Perlmutter Perriello Peterson Petri Pitts Platts Poe (TX) Pomeroy Posey Price (GA) Putnam Radanovich Rahall Rehberg Reichert Reyes Rodriguez Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Royce Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salazar Scalise Schauer Schmidt Schock Schrader Sensenbrenner Sessions Shadegg Shimkus Shuler Shuster Simpson Sires Skelton Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Souder Space Spratt Stearns Stupak Sullivan Tanner Taylor Teague Terry Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiahrt Tiberi Titus Turner Upton Walden Walz Wamp Welch Westmoreland Whitfield Wilson (OH) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Young (AK) Young (FL) ---- NAYS 147 --- Abercrombie Ackerman Andrews Baird Baldwin Becerra Berman Bishop (NY) Blumenauer Brady (PA) Brown, Corrine Butterfield Capps Capuano Carnahan Carson (IN) Castle Castor (FL) Clarke Clay Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly (VA) Conyers Cooper Crowley Cummings Davis (CA) Davis (IL) Delahunt DeLauro Dicks Doggett Doyle Edwards (MD) Ellison Engel Eshoo Farr Fattah Filner Frank (MA) Fudge Gonzalez Green, Al Grijalva Gutierrez Hall (NY) Hare Harman Hastings (FL) Himes Hinojosa Hirono Holt Honda Hoyer Inslee Israel Jackson (IL) Jackson-Lee (TX) Johnson, E. B. Kaptur Kildee Kilpatrick (MI) Kilroy Kirk Klein (FL) Kosmas Kucinich Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lee (CA) Levin Lewis (GA) Lipinski Loebsack Lofgren, Zoe Lowey Luján Lynch Maloney Markey (MA) Matsui McCarthy (NY) McCollum McDermott McGovern McMahon Miller (NC) Miller, George Moore (KS) Moore (WI) Moran (VA) Murphy (CT) Nadler (NY) Napolitano Neal (MA) Olver Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Payne Peters Pingree (ME) Price (NC) Quigley Rangel Richardson Rothman (NJ) Roybal-Allard Ruppersberger Rush Sanchez, Loretta Sarbanes Schakowsky Schiff Schwartz Scott (GA) Scott (VA) Serrano Sestak Shea-Porter Sherman Slaughter Snyder Sutton Tauscher Thompson (CA) Tierney Tonko Towns Tsongas Van Hollen Velázquez Visclosky Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Wexler Woolsey Wu Yarmuth ---- NOT VOTING 7 --- Bachmann Barrett (SC) Braley (IA) Polis (CO) Sánchez, Linda T. Speier Stark |
May 20, 2009, 04:06 PM | #25 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|