Virginia Members -- Action needed.

[DaveH]

From a VA-ALERT.

VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.

[First person singular pronouns (I, my, mine, etc) reference Philip Van Cleave, President VCDL]

According to public statements in the newspaper, the Senate Courts of
Justices "special" committee will "take care" of some gun bills that
some Democratic Senators don't want to vote on for political reasons.

If anti-gun Senator Marsh is hoping that the full committee can avoid
a vote on bills from the subcommittee, he has a problem: the Senate
Rules require that subcommittees report bills to the full committee:

"20 (h). The Chair of any Committee may appoint subcommittees to
consider a particular bill or resolution or to consider matters
relative to a portion of the work of the Committee. Such subcommittees
***shall*** make recommendations to the Committee. The Chair of the
full Committee shall be an ex officio member of all subcommittees and
entitled to vote, but shall not be counted as a member for purposes of
a quorum. All subcommittees shall be governed by the Rules of the
Senate. "

The House does allow subcommittees to kill bills, but the House Rules
grants them that discretionary power:

"Rule 18. The several standing committees shall consider and report on
matters specially referred to them and, whenever practicable, suggest
such legislation as may be germane to the duties of the committee. The
chairman shall have discretion to determine when, and if, legislation
shall be heard before the committee. The chairman, at his discretion,
may refer legislation for consideration to a subcommittee. If referred
to a subcommittee, the legislation shall be considered by the
subcommittee. ***If the subcommittee does not recommend such
legislation by a majority vote, the chairman need not consider the
legislation in the full committee.*** It shall be the duty of each
committee to inquire into the condition and administration of the laws
relating to the subjects which it has in its charge; to investigate
the conduct and look to the responsibility of all public officers and
agents concerned; and to suggest such measures as will correct abuses,
protect the public interests, and promote the public welfare."

So, now the question we will soon have the answer to: will the Senate
Courts of Justice committee and its Special subcommittee obey the
Rules of the Senate or violate them?

-

Here are the links to the Senate and House Rules:

Senate

http://hodcap.state.va.us/publications/SenateRules.pdf

House

http://hodcap.state.va.us/publicatio...eRulesText.pdf


------

ACTION ITEM

Let's all contact the members of the Senate Courts of Justice
Committee and urge them to make sure that the Senate's Rules are obeyed:

Email address for the whole committee:

scojc@vcdl.org


Subject: Obey Senate Rules!


Message:

Senator Marsh stated in the Roanoke Times on Monday, March 1, that the
Senate Courts of Justice Special Subcommittee could kill bills without
the full committee taking a vote. The Senate's own rules are clear -
20(h) states, "...Such subcommittees SHALL make recommendations to the
Committee." (emphasis added)

I urge the full committee to follow its own rules and its own history
and vote on all the bills that are under consideration by the Special
(or any other) Subcommittee.

Ignoring the Senate's Rules will make a mockery out of the Senate and
the Committee.

--

Let's Roll!

As always feel free to personalize the message. dave

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[GWRedDragon]

Whoa, that's a really good catch. I wonder if anyone even noticed that part of the rules before now....probably not.

[DaveH]

Senator Marsh stated in the Roanoke Times on Monday, March 1, that the Senate
Courts of Justice Special Subcommittee could kill bills without the full
committee taking a vote.

However, the Senate's own rules are clear:

20(h) states, "...Such subcommittees SHALL make recommendations to the
Committee." (emphasis added)

I urge the full committee to follow your own rules and your own history and
vote on all the bills that are under consideration by the Special (or any
other) Subcommittee.

Ignoring the Senate's Rules will make a mockery out of the Senate and the
Committee. It will also, open all members up to the "they violate their own
rule and adopted the rule-of-men not the rule-of-law, in order to avoid
representing their true position in their district's news coverage."

Even newspaper, which support gun control have taken an Editorial position
against the practice, in the House.
See: No stacked committees - Roanoke.com

"Editorial: No stacked committees

[SNIP]
Committees that reflect the composition of the House serve representative
democracy far better than the old Democratic system.
[SNIP]"

Individual pro-gun control commentators have gone on record that it is wrong
to use a personal "black hole" to avoid the democratic process in this way.
Dan Casey, an ardent gun control advocate, did a relatively factual post on his
blog with the penultimate paragraph actually supports our position and against
this action.
See:
Guns-in-bars bill looks safe - other gun bills are in doubt | Dan Casey's blog: Roanoke Times metro columnist writes what's on his mind - Roanoke.com


>>>
"Guns-in-bars bill looks safe - other gun bills are in doubt

Okay folks, I've moved off the bathroom beat (see Tuesday's column) and had a
bit of time to analyze what happened Monday with the gun bills in the Senate's
Courts of Justice Committee.
It looks like the Senate is playing a bit of payback after similar actions by
the House of Delegates, and that a bunch of the House gun bills are caught in
that crossfire.

Here's the background: For some time, going back years, the House has referred
Senate bills to subcommittees where they have died in the waning days of the
session, and the Senate has NOT done that until this year.

Now the Senate is following the House's lead with subcommittees, and they're
holding a bunch of House gun bills hostage on a subcommittee stacked with four
anti-gun Democrats and a lone Republican senator.

The likely result is that, absent some Richmond horse trading (the House puts
Senate bills through in return for the Senate putting House bills through)
some of the most sought-after legislation by the pro-gunners is going to go
down to defeat.

The subcommittee Democrats have safe seats that the gun crowd probably cannot
successfully attack. So the move might also protect some other senators on the
full committee from having to vote on the bills at all, and having to defend
those votes next year in Senate elections.

In other words, they are playing a big old game of legislative chess.

BUT: concealed carry in bars is NOT one of the bills in that could die in this
game. The Senate already has passed their own version of that. All the House
needs to do is pass the Senate version unamended and send it to the governor,
who will sign it.

Here are some of the House gun bills that are looking increasingly doubtful:

a.. HB 49, which repeals the one-gun a month handgun purchase limitation.
Torpedoing this one is a biggie in the gun-control crowd.
b.. HB 79, which bars Circuit Court clerks from releasing information as to
whether someone holds a concealed carry permit -- even if they're a homicidal
maniac multiple killer.
c.. HB 236, which would bar localities from prohibiting hunting within a
half-mile of a subdivision (which they can do now).
d.. HB 69, which says firearms (such as machine guns) and ammo manufactured
in Virginia would not be subject to federal law. I call this one the "Virginia
is for Terrorists Act."
And a bunch of others, which you can find here, although this list is not a
complete one. Here is a complete, though harder to understand list.

Now, there are some loud whines of "unfair" coming from the gun movement right
now.

Those are justified because disproportionately stacked subcommittees are
wrong. But remember, the House bills may end up passing if the House gets
serious about some Senate-bill hostage trading.

You know what they say about law-making and sausage-making, right?"

Please do the right thing and follow your rules.
<<<

Feel free to cut and paste or adapt any part.

[DaveH]

*****
UPDATE
*****

From a VA-ALERT.

[First person singular pronouns (I, my, mine, etc) reference Philip Van Cleave, President VCDL]

I had missed one letter in the email address. :-(

Here is the email information again, with corrected email address
(sorry):


ACTION ITEM

Let's all contact the members of the Senate Courts of Justice
Committee and urge them to make sure that the Senate's Rules are obeyed:

Email address for the whole committee:

scojc@vcdl.org
SNIP

[paramedic70002]

Here are the 2 replies I have gotten so far. Notice they are radically different:

1:

Thank you for writing me about the creation of a special subcommittee
within the Senate Committee on Courts of Justice to hear gun-related
legislation from the House, along with a few other miscellaneous
bills. Like you, I was dismayed by the decision of the chair to create
a special subcommittee to hear these bills with the understanding that
bills not receiving a favorable report from the subcommittee will not
be heard in full committee.

In the past, the Senate has always taken up bills in full committee
regardless of the vote in subcommittee, and I believe that these
bills, too, deserve a full hearing in committee. A number of the bills
relegated to the special subcommittee have Senate companion bills that
have already passed; a few others certainly would report out of
committee with a favorable recommendation were they put to a vote.

As a strong proponent of the constitutional right to bear arms, I have
voted consistently in favor of pro-gun legislation. I am proud of my
record on the Second Amendment, and looked forward to supporting many
of the bills now languishing in the special subcommittee.
Unfortunately, I may not have that opportunity, but I appreciate your
email, and will certainly continue to advocate for a fair hearing for
these bills.

With best regards,
Mark D. Obenshain
Virginia State Senator

2.

Thank you so much for your e-mail. We appreciate your correspondence.
Legislative Assistant
District 34
Senate of Virginia

[Tom357]

I would expect nothing less from Senator Obenshain. I would expect nothing more from Senator Petersen.