2022 Legislative Session Thread

[DataGeek19]

I don't wish to flaunt my ignorance BUT seeing some of the PAC's supporting liz brown like ISP PAC, FOP PAC is there a way to see how much they have funded her, possibly compromising/swaying her vote on certain issues?

Liz Brown’s donors:

BROWN CARTER, ELIZABETH M (LIZ) - FollowTheMoney.org

BROWN CARTER, ELIZABETH M (LIZ) -

www.followthemoney.org

 

[bwframe]

Age Verification - NRA

 

[DataGeek19]

Fallout from yesterday’s hearing:

 

[BigRed]

Contact Information​

200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: 800-382-9467
or 317-232-9400
Email: Senator.Brown@iga.in.gov

I emailed the ***** this afternoon.

I wanted to pass along her contact info in case you would like to as well.

 

[goldtrigger]

Not sure what this means but I went to the action site for the bill on in.gov. it listed today's date and "pursuant to Senate rule 68(b) assigned to committee on rules and legislative procedure"

 

[Random_71]

Not sure what this means but I went to the action site for the bill on in.gov. it listed today's date and "pursuant to Senate rule 68(b) assigned to committee on rules and legislative procedure"

I've been looking to see exactly what that meant as well.

 

[JEBland]

It seems it's been reassigned to that committee:
http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2022/committees/rules_and_legislative_procedure_4700

Is this a state senate mulligan?

 

[goldtrigger]

I've been looking to see exactly what that meant as well.

Perhaps @KellyinAvon or @Bill of Rights might have some insight

 

[JEBland]

It appears that this is a reassignment:
http://iga.in.gov/static-documents/5/d/e/a/5dea498e/senate_standing_rules.pdf

68. (a) After the assignment of, but prior to the filing of, a committee report on a bill or resolution, a committee which has the bill or resolution under consideration may include in the report a recommendation for reassignment of the bill or resolution to another committee.
(b) A bill or resolution may be reassigned at any time by the President Pro Tempore.

Thank goodness. **** Brown. **** Bohacek. **** these lawmakers who literally don't know the current law on this.


Edit: The link to rules for both State House and State Senate and just click on the sidebar for house/Senate specific rules: http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2021/rules/joint_rules/

Edit2: The same 3 Dems as the Judiciary committee, a fourth new one, and Sue Glick who voted for the amendment that gutted it the first time. I don't think this committee is a slam-dunk.

To copy over my comments from the other thread...

I'm all for taking every step we can in the right direction, but I think we have a few lessons to learn from this:
- One is that if we suspect a stacked approach by the chair (e.g. Brown), then we have to be sure that we don't make a mistake when filling out the questionnaire online. It would be just horrible to interrupt the intended stack of testimony with support in the middle of their block of negatives.
- Take note of where the anti's are getting their data and be prepared to refute it. For instance, Kelly came with FBI data, then the one woman from the state came with FBI regional data to manipulate the interpretation. Clever, but ******.
- Share resources. Make sure everyone who is presenting has a copy of the same data rather than redoing all the labor ourselves.
- Take notes of previous hearings. I used testimony from those opposing to help support our arguments. See what the antis are using and prepare for it.
- Take notes during the hearing. If the committee is just going to cry Heller without knowing what it means to presume, then telling them it's unconstitutional will just make them dig in. We have the moral high ground on this issue, let's use all the tools at our disposal.

 

[ditcherman]

Thanks guys for the clear explanation on this, and the encouragement to contact.
Emailed my senator Buck.
First time for everything I guess.

 

[goldtrigger]

Bray is the chair of that committee.

 

[gregr]

This bait-and-switch is why we should be disappointed in the legislative process. I guess we're an inch closer, for all that's worth.

I'm out for the night. Have a good night, all.

Closer? No, we still don`t have constitutional carry in Indiana. That`s the bottom line. That`s all that needs to be said. We STILL must beg permission from the state to freely exercise our Second Amendment rights.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Thanks for the clarification on this being assigned to another committee. It was confusing the heck out of me too

 

[gregr]

I am... disgusted.

The degree of deceipt evident in what occurred yesterday is truly astounding. I meant what I wrote earlier, with "friends" such as the R's on the Senate Judiciary committee, we do not need enemies.

I will retain some hope, though fading, that the amended Bill can be corrected in conference. Frankly however; I suspect the Indiana Senate is so filled with RINOs on this subject that a Bill corrected back to the original text might well fail in the full Senate.

It is terribly obvious that Gov. Holcomb should NEVER be elected to office under any banner which purports to respect the Constitution of Indiana or these United States. He might as well be a D on this issue, and many others, as we have witnessed over the last two years.

I was not able to watch Superintendent Carter's testimony. I may go back and watch it however; in an effort to understand on what basis he believes the current permitting system provides such value that it must be retained.

I am convinced though, that my position on direct election of ALL law enforcement heads, is a valid position. The stark contrast of our elected Constitutional Sheriffs, versus the appointed Police Chiefs is quite telling. Those who control the enforcement of the State's laws need to be directly accountable to we the people.

Superintendent Carter is NOT your friend. Just the opposite, he is a snake.

In fact, I just found this...

ISP superintendent blasts GOP on 'Constitutional Carry' bill

Indiana currently requires people to obtain a license to carry a loaded handgun outside their own homes, businesses and cars.

www.wthr.com

Here is a quote from the interview with Carter:

“It’s often so easy to talk about your support for public safety,” Carter said. “But if you choose to support this bill, you will not be supporting us.”

Public memo to Carter, I do not support you, because I just will not support despotic, anti-Constitution goons who believe their badge gives them any authority to infringe upon Natural Rights. Eat ****, you *******.

 

[JEBland]

Closer? No, we still don`t have constitutional carry in Indiana. That`s the bottom line. That`s all that needs to be said. We STILL must beg permission from the state to freely exercise our Second Amendment rights.

I agree, but my argument is moot since it's been reassigned. Let's focus on the task now.

Thanks for the clarification on this being assigned to another committee. It was confusing the heck out of me too

Yeah. I also reached out to the 2A project FB page. They confirmed it.

If you're on FB, follow the 2A project and give them high priority in your FB feed: https://www.facebook.com/The2AProject/

 

[KellyinAvon]

I agree, but my argument is moot since it's been reassigned. Let's focus on the task now.


Yeah. I also reached out to the 2A project FB page. They confirmed it.

If you're on FB, follow the 2A project and give them high priority in your FB feed: https://www.facebook.com/The2AProject/

I lurk Guy’s page and The 2A Project page

 

[goldtrigger]

Seemed like a weird committee to send it to. They haven't met this year.
How much time do they have to hear this bill?

 

[El Conquistador]

The rules committee doesn’t take public testimony I believe. Bills get assigned there near the end of session sometimes.

 

[MCgrease08]

Closer? No, we still don`t have constitutional carry in Indiana. That`s the bottom line. That`s all that needs to be said. We STILL must beg permission from the state to freely exercise our Second Amendment rights.

You do realize that even if the original bill had passed unanimously out of committee last night we still wouldn't have Constitutional Carry today, right?

I get your frustration and fully share it, but there is a process. I'm not confident we'll have CC at the end of the process, but we are still in the fight for now. So yes, it is closer.

 

[looper]

Liz Brown’s donors:

BROWN CARTER, ELIZABETH M (LIZ) - FollowTheMoney.org

BROWN CARTER, ELIZABETH M (LIZ) -

www.followthemoney.org

Thank You, I can't get anything to come up. Thanks anyway