Calling my senator telling him not to override Taft's veto of the "concealed carry" bill

[Kolesar]

This is timely, as the lame duck GOP legislature is trying to put their last mark on Ohio before Strickland takes over. Cle public radio has been playing this story. The bill is HB 347. The House overrode Taft's veto yesterday. The bill is sponsored by all the usual a-holes from Grendell to Padgett. Ohio's government is being run by rural hayseed legislators who don't give a sh-t if the cities have crime problems that the cities are trying to solve through their own methods. This stomps all over the "home rule" ideal that the gopsters so promoted when they wanted to run the government.

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/BillText126/126_HB_347_PS_N.html


http://www.cleveland.com/open/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1165571200326570.xml&coll=2 :

"This vast prohibition of local control is unwarranted and fails to consider the differing challenges and circumstances faced by different communities and regions of the state," Taft said.

He noted that local statutes stronger than current law -- such as bans on assault weapons in Cleveland, Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus and Toledo -- would be gone.

Find your legislator using this link:
http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/

[geiger]

1. they already did, I'm pretty sure

[Kolesar]

2. The PD article today says they are still rounding up votes

The Senate could make the legislature's end-run around Taft official next week and turn the bill into law without him.

But Senate President Bill Harris on Thursday wasn't certain he had enough votes.

"I am in the process of talking to other senators who support this legislation so that I can determine the Senate's next step," said Harris, an Ashland Republican who backs the bill.

[geiger]

3. They are pathetic, being led around by the nose by money-slathering lobbyists

don't any of them have any brains anymore?

[Kolesar]

4. That's not good government. It's spiteful, lame-duck mischief, and it ought to be soundly rejected.

Brent Larkin's editorial page manages to express some wisdom (despite Brent):

http://www.cleveland.com/editorials/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1165484696147350.xml&coll=2

A bill recently introduced would strengthen the hand of an obscure legislative committee called the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review. And it would do so at the expense of the new administration.

Supporters say it would merely require all state agencies to prepare a fiscal analysis for all new proposed administrative rules to determine the effect they would have on Ohio businesses. The committee would also be given expanded authority to table proposed rules.

It's claptrap. A fiscal analysis is already required when agencies formulate new rules, and this bill would lead only to needless duplication and expanded red tape.

That's not good government. It's spiteful, lame-duck mischief, and it ought to be soundly rejected.

[mosin]

33. Money-slathering lobbyists

They are pathetic, being led around by the nose by money-slathering lobbyists

don't any of them have any brains anymore?

I didn't know I was supposed to be a "money-slathering" lobbyist? As a card-carrying member of the gun-lobby, I must be doing something wrong! Where do I get my slathering money? ;)

But to be serious, the influence of the gun lobby doesn't come from money. The Buckeye Firearms Association (BFA) has very little money to dole out. (And don't be misled by the media's obsession with the NRA, the BFA is the driving force in Ohio. We had 8 people there yesterday meeting with senators.) Our influence comes from our vocal supporters who flood senate offices with phone calls and who volunteer in campaigns.

Regardless, I am proud that our BFA-endorsed Democratic attorney general elect Marc Dann and BFA-endorsed Democratic congressman elect Charlie Wilson returned to the Ohio Senate to support the veto override.

And you know what? I already have my wish list ready for the next legislative session, a session in which we will have the support of the governor for the first time in decades. I can't wait.

[benEzra]

5. Strickland will sign it next session...

Strickland is very much a supporter of responsible gun ownership, and has promised to sign the legislation once he's in office, if I am not mistaken. Taft never missed a chance to bash lawful gun owners, and Strickland ran on a pro-gun-owner platform, just like Webb in Virginia.

[Kolesar]

6. You only show up in the Ohio forum to argue about guns

Do you have some sort of thrice-daily search routine plugged in to go seek out these threads and hence inject yourself into that forum? Do you do this on other message boards?

I note that you live in North Carolina. I have been following the campaigns you cite and you are off base. You are "mistaken" on your claim that Strickland is going to sign the lame duck session legislation. That will be in another legislative session and this bill will have ceased to exist.

[geiger]

7. another DU'er clued me into this practice the other day; it's called KeyWord surfing

some people make a profession of it these days, I understand.

[Kolesar]

8. I will search on words like climate or coal at DU,

...but what I don't do is go to forums and introduce projection or misinformation.

[benEzra]

9. I have been following Strickland with some interest...

since Strickland is representative of a movement within the Democratic party that I strongly identify with. I also followed the Webb-Macacawitz race in Virginia, for the same reasons.

And yes, Strickland has promised to sign CCW reform into law if it doesn't make it through this session, and he explicitly mentioned HB347. Yes, I know it won't have the same bill number next year, and I'm sure he does as well. From a letter to an Ohio gun owner, from Ted Strickland himself:



And yes, I believe that Strickland is one of the good guys, and that Taft is not.

[Kolesar]

10. You ought to take your right-wing-message-framing back to the savannah

...where flogging a decade-old wedge issue is apparently still in vogue. We in Ohio have important things to work on.

Taft never missed a chance to bash lawful gun owners

[benEzra]

11. Taft is a repub, don't forget...

and Strickland is NOT.

Did you even read Strickland's letter?

What encourages me about Strickland, Webb, Feingold, and others is that they are getting the gun issue OFF THE TABLE. Which is why I think the party's return to its roots on the issue is a Good Thing for the party at large, nationally.

[Deep13]

12. Good. Laws should be uniform.

The fact that a poster has particular subjects of interest is irrelevent to the merits of the argument.

[Kolesar]

13. The peeper from the piedmont needs to get a life

[Deep13]

14. We all do. Laws still should be uniform.

[Kolesar]

15. Speak for yourself...eom

[adeshell]

17. I think Strickland will face an avalanche of people...

asking him to veto it, or he will insist they change it. Wiping away local firearms laws such as that in Columbus is another example of 'big government' going crazy.

[Kolesar]

16. Loaded guns at the local rec center, dealers selling weapons within a given proximity of a school

I see some provisions here that Ohio's gangsters would like very much---TBA

A message from State Senator Eric Fingerhut

December 11, 2006 Action Alert!

Friends,

I am writing to ask your assistance in protecting the important public safety laws enacted by 80 Ohio municipalities. HB 347 precludes cities and municipalities from regulating the possession, sale, purchase, transfer, or acquisition of firearms.If it becomes law, the State of Ohio would prevent local communities from deciding what is in the best interests of their citizens, families and children related to firearms.

For example:

• If a city doesn’t want people carrying hidden, and has a rule against carrying these concealed weapons on public property, the General Assembly will wipe that law off the books.

• If a city has a law against kitchen table gun dealers selling weapons at homes within a given proximity of a school, the General Assembly will wipe that law off the books.

• If a city chooses to ban the sale and carrying of assault weapons on the streets of its community, the General Assembly will wipe that law off the books. The list goes on.

Recently the Ohio General Assembly passed HB 347 and sent it to the Governor’s desk, where Governor Taft promptly vetoed the legislation. It went back to the Ohio House, where state representatives---Democrats and Republicans alike---voted overwhelmingly to overrule Taft’s veto. The bill is back in the Ohio Senate where the gun lobby and lawmakers are seeing if they have enough votes to issue an override---thus, effectively destroying all firearms protection laws across the state. If they’re successful, this will be the FIRST OVERRIDE of a Taft veto during his entire service as Governor.

As for what to do? Plain Dealer writer Tom Suddes does a good job of recapping the process in his column yesterday, Lobbyists Alone Hit Their Targets. He mentions by name those Ohio Senators whose “yeas” or “nays” will make the difference in determining whether the gun lobby and its General Assembly counterparts will successfully destroy local firearms protection rules across the state.

If you’re as outraged as I am and want to at the very least let your voice be known, I encourage you to make the following phone calls:

1) First, call the key legislators in the Ohio Senate whose votes will make the difference. There are some who will automatically vote to override the veto. There are a few who automatically will not. However, there are others who may be undecided on the veto override vote and need to hear from you today. They are:

• Senator Marc Dann – (was not present for vote on HB 347) 614-466-7182, [e-mail]
• Senator Robert Spada – (voted no on HB 347) 614-466-8056, [e-mail]
• Senator David Goodman – (voted no on HB 347) 614-466-8064, [e-mail]
• Senator Steve Stivers – (voted no on HB 347), 614/466-5981, [e-mail]

2) Second, call your mayor and express your outrage that the Ohio General Assembly is poised to take away your community’s right to make its own regulations regarding firearms protection.

Good luck and best regards. I will keep you updated if/when there will be an Ohio Senate vote to override the governor’s veto.

Eric

email: [e-mail]
web: http://www.senatorfingerhut.com

[Kolesar]

18. The Plain Dealer: Taft's veto should stand

Tuesday, December 12, 2006 Action Alert
VETO OVERRIDE VOTE LIKELY TO TAKE PLACE TODAY

Call to Support Governor's Veto

I am writing to let you know that a vote in an attempt to override Governor Taft's veto of HB 347 will likely take place on the floor of the Ohio Senate today. As I mentioned in yesterday's action alert, if the gun lobby and Ohio General Assembly are successful in the override, the State of Ohio will hereby prevent local communities from deciding what is in the best interests of their citizens, families and children related to firearms. Important public safety laws in municipalities across Ohio will be wiped off the books. (See The Columbus Dispatch: 80 Local Gun Laws Imperiled by Bill)

A copy of The Plain Dealer editorial today "Taft's veto should stand" is pasted below, along with contact information for members of the Ohio Senate. Session begins at 1:30 p.m. and can be watched live, online at www.ohiochannel.org.

Taft's veto should stand
The Plain Dealer - Tuesday, December 12, 2006

The legislature's obsession with deadly weapons and its assault on the concept of home rule continues today when the Ohio Senate votes on overriding Gov. Bob Taft's veto of the legislature's latest gun bill.

Last week, the governor rightly vetoed a bill that loosens restrictions on carrying concealed weapons and strips local governments of any meaningful ability to regulate the sale or possession of guns. Hours later, the House overwhelmingly overrode the veto.

A key vote in today's drama will be Sen. Marc Dann, the state's attorney general-elect. He should resist the temptation to support his friends in the gun lobby and should side instead with the principle of giving voters in Ohio's cities, villages and townships the right to self-government.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OHIO SENATE

• Sen. Amstutz 614-466-7505 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Armbruster 614-644-7613 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Austria 614-466-3780 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Carey 614-466-8156 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Cates 614-466-8072 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Clancy 614-466-8068 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Coughlin 614-466-4823 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Dann 614-466-7182 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Fedor 614-466-5204 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Fingerhut 614-466-4583 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Gardner 614-466-8060 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Goodman 614-466-8064 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Grendell 614-644-7718 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Hagan 614-466-8285 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Harris 614-466-8086 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Hottinger 614-466-5838 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Jacobson 614-466-4538 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Jordan 614-466-7584 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Kearney 614-466-5980 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. D. Miller 614-466-5123 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. R. Miller 614-466-5131 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Mumper 614-466-8049 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Niehaus 614-466-8082 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Padgett 614-466-8076 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Prentiss 614-466-4857 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Schuler 614-466-9737 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Schuring 614-466-0626 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Spada 614-466-8056 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Stivers 614-466-5981 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Roberts 614-466-6247 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Wachtmann 614-466-8150 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Wilson 614-466-6508 Email: [e-mail]
• Sen. Zurz 614-466-7041 Email: [e-mail]

Thank you,

Eric Fingerhut

[geiger]

19. thanks. i like using emails rather than the phone. done.

[Kolesar]

20. thanks

I decided to email Marc Dann since the PD called him out. He "sort of" represents me as AG 2B.

[Deep13]

21. A dissenting view for anyone interested.

Dear Sen. Dann,

My wife an I are major Democratic Party contributors. We hope you will stand up for the citizens of Ohio by overriding the governor's veto and allowing a predictable, uniform standard for firearm regulations across Ohio. There is no factual or logical reason why a person who is acting lawfully should become a criminal simply by stepping across a city line. There is also very little evidence that the harsh controls imposed by some large cities actually do anything to stop violence. As an asst. prosecutor, I see violence all the time, but it is usually from bare hands or objects not designed to be weapons. Further, this bill will help citizens carry firearms for personal protection where they most require it, in their cars. Ultimately, I am not afraid of my fellow citizens, most of whom will never commit a felony, as much as I am of committing some local offense without knowing it.

Before the election, I thought Montgomery was going to defeat you. Sometime after I received a post card from the NRA urging me to support you, I saw your poll numbers spike. That may not have been the sole cause, but I'm sure it helped.

As a side note, my wife and I fully support the new Smoke Free law. Unlike firearms which account for relatively few fatalities every year; smoking kills roughly half a million Americans annually. (CDC will confirm that if you doubt it.) It is very pleasant to walk into any restaurant, bar or shooting range without choking on that disgusting smell. Remember, the voters specifically rejected the watered-down version of the new law. The voters want this and they want it enforced. The voters know best, as they did when you were elected AG.

Very truly yours,
(Deep13)
(Gizmonic)

[Kolesar]

27. "become a criminal simply by stepping across a city line"==RW, "big gummit" messaging

And I don't know what bare hand, objects or cigarettes have to do with this.

[Deep13]

32. That is not the same as saying it is false.

[friendly_iconoclast]

22. Local "interpretations" of constitutions?

I would ask the OP if they would be comfortable with 'nullification by local statute' of other parts of the Ohio or US constitutions, and if so, which ones?

I am not suprised about the Taft veto. After all, haven't the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments been 'nullified' by the 'challenges and circumstances'
of the WOT?

Much of the South used to regard the Fourteenth Amendment as "locally
variable", and such interpretations were popular with the -then- majority
of voters. Thankfully, most of this nonsense ended with the Voting Rights Act
of 1965.

Apparently enough Ohioans felt that their state constitution applies -statewide-
that a decisive majority of legislators felt safe in passing HB347

[geiger]

23. you are not making your point at all clear, esp with acronyms, get a life

[Kolesar]

28. Right wingers are always argueing for local control...

...but given the opportunity, they will use the levers of government to take control themselves. How is that for an answer?

[adeshell]

31. They'll be up in arms if the 'big bad federal government'

comes in and overrides the state law. Hypocrites

[Deep13]

24. Override passes senate 21-12.

Just found out.

[geiger]

25. that is so depressing; what are they thinking

oh, never mind, they are not.

[Deep13]

26. see post 21

It's a bit arrogant to think they were not thinking just because they do not agree.

[Kolesar]

29. The small-town hayseed conservatives running the legislature are out of touch with Ohio

A majority of respondents to an Ohio survey said overriding local gun laws was a bad idea, according to a poll released today by the Hamden, Conn.-Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061212/DEVELOPINGNEWS/61212022

For a more scathing verbiage, see my post : http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2650172&mesg_id=2650250

[friendly_iconoclast]

30. My bad

"OP"= Original Poster
"WOT"= 'War On Terror' (or 'War On Terra')

My point was that it was not suprising that Taft regarded
constitutional
rights as fungible, being as the Republican-in-Chief regards
the First,
Fourth, Fifth and other amendments to the US Constitution as
pesky obstacles.
I guess Taft figured that a little 'triangulation' would play
well in the
Buckeye State.

As wiser minds than mine have said, Constitutional rights
apply
to all, whether they be exercised by Noam Chomsky, David Duke,
Jon Stewart or
Fred Phelps.

I used the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as an example. Southern
states regarded
the 'circumstances faced by different communities and regions'
as an excuse
to trample on 14A rights of African-Americans.