HR822 is on Third Reading. Voting should proceed shortly. Only one amendment passed, commissioning a study on permit verifiability. There will be some debate before the vote. I’ll fill you in on if any of the bullcrap is different than what we’ve already heard today.
05:17PM: Cicilline (D-RI) is griping on the whole “Terrorists, Child Molesters, and Drug Dealers, oh my!” garbage again.
05:20PM: He’s going on and on, proposing an amendment to prohibit more people based on his overblown hysteria. He makes a motion to recommit.
05:21PM: Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) is opposing Cicilline’s motion to recommit. Apparently it’s chaos in the House. The speaker has to keep demanding order in the House.
05:25PM: No’s took the voice vote. Going to a recorded vote. This is a 15 minute vote. If the motion is approved, the bill would re-open for amendment.
The Motion to Recommit has Failed, Yea: 161, Nay: 263
05:42PM: And now we move on to final passage.
HR822 Has Passed the House!!
Yea: 272, Nay: 154
44 Democrats Voted in Favor
7 Republicans Voted Against
274 in favor-it has passed.
PASSED! 272-154!
Let’s just hope that the Senate doesn’t bury it…
– Alex
I want the names of all the Republicans voting NO. Show no mercy to them at the polls.
Currently not enough to overide a veto though…
Congrats. Even if this gets stalled by some technicality, is there any moral victory or other intangible gain?
I just sat with my daughter watching C-SPAN (she’s 10). What a great opportunity to explain how the legislative process works, and how different Democrats and Republicans are. This essentially fell along party lines, which puzzles me…what is it about the bill which would polarize the debate? I realize my view is tilted towards 2A support, but how do you oppose it? Is it that Democrats stereotypically support the poor, and the poor are generally considered “victims” of gun violence? I was glad to see about 1/4-1/3 of Democrats supporting through the amendments and final vote…
Keep in mind that it would have been far more bi-partisan if a huge chunk of the Blue Dog coalition wasn’t dumped in 2010 to punish Obama & Pelosi. I’m not arguing that voters shouldn’t have done that, it’s just that there are so many Dems who are actually pro-gun, but they aren’t serving in Congress right now because voters needed to send a message to the party leaders.
@Sean
64% of the House voted for this bill without negative amendments bening added; 66%, just 12(?) more would be veto proof. That’s a pretty strong showing.
Plus, we now have an up or down vote to hold Representatives accountable for on a major gun rights issue come re-election.
I assume it’s a good enough showing to make it hard for the Senate to just ignore it, which might give us the same kind of accountability check in that chamber as well.
If we trade some “anti” for some “pro-gun” seats next election we can point to this vote as a factor, emphasizing even more that being anti-gun is a loser of a political position.
Keep in mind, a good reason to push bills like this, is because it helps you sort friend from foe. I don’t like going a Congress without politicians being put to an actual vote. Now we know several individuals we thought were our friends are no such things. That’s worth something even if this never ends up law.
This will be even MORE worthwhile in the Senate, where the last Senate failed to pass a more liberal version of this by one vote. Several ostensibly Yea voters were cleared to vote Yea because the Senate leadership knew it would fail. They will not only have to go on record again on this, but if they want to flop, explain the Yea vote for the previous bill and a Nay vote for this one.
This bill would be lovely to pass, but it’s more important to prep the 2012 election battlespace, and to know where to allocate lobbying and fundraising efforts.
I’m shocked. Pat Meehan voted “yes”.
Good thing he didn’t listen to the local loudmouth police chiefs who think everyone should be disarmed.
http://www.gop.gov/votes/112/1/852
I don’t think it’s shocking he voted for it. It was a little disappointing that he didn’t co-sponsor, but somewhat understandable. If the bill was never going to come up in a vote, then there was no need to co-sponsor to create an issue to use against him in the next campaign. But, since it did come up, he voted with us. It’s a rather odd dance that some of the suburban legislators need to consider. Fitzpatrick can get away with it because a lot of the Democrats in his district are blue collar types who own guns, shoot, & hunt. I don’t know if that’s as much the case in some of the other areas.
Bitter is dead right! I called and e mailed 6 times to get him to co sponsor. All I got was the standard e mail response back, blah, blah, blah, see where it goes, blah, blah..
But I called him, in the Springfield office, and had 5 other people call also to vote YES on reciprocity. I followed up with a thank you card, hand written and e mail to tell him I appreciate it. I always mention I am a NRA member.
Unfortunately 5 of the 7 NOT VOTING were Republicans.
Bachmann (R, MN)
Gardner (R, CO)
Giffords (D, AZ)
Kaptur (D, OH)
Paul (R, TX)
Schmidt (R, OH)
Shimkus (R, IL)
Several of those are running for President, which means their schedules just didn’t allow them to be there, in all likelihood.
Bachmann has 0% chance of becoming President. Ron Paul has a 1% chance.
This was an extremely important vote. If they still call themselves Congressmen and take a salary they sure as hell should have been there for THIS vote.
The only one I will excuse is Gabby Giffords.
If it passes the Senate. I’ll promise to vote for Obama in 2012 if he doesn’t veto this.
Seriously…as frightening as that sounds. I’d make that devilish deal.
I will vote for Obama if he signs this as well. He has everything to gain and nothing to lose. He has virtually 100% of the black vote, and almost all of the leftist white people will vote for him no matter what anyway. It’s only the independents he has to court, many of whom are blue-collar gun nuts – exactly the sort of people who would vote Democratic if not for their support of gun control.
WTF? So then he gets re-elected and appoints more anti-2ndA SCOTUS justices and they rule CCW is not constitutional…shees!
I might add that Obama has said that he does *not* support the idea that the NRA is a “special interest” group. He made this very clear in Audacity of Hope.
Most of the Republican candidates are imbeciles anyway.
I think it’s interesting (and telling) that a much greater number of Dems voted for HR822 than Repubs voted against (both in raw numbers and as percentages).
I’d like to know how many Dems that voted ‘no’ have NRA ratings of C or B that might be flipped in case of a veto, and what the NRA plans to do about the senate.
I saw a video a few years ago of Obama siding with DC in Heller v. DC. If you think he’s going to sign this as a stand alone bill, you are kidding yourself. He’s anti-gun to the core, and thinks a total ban on handguns is a “reasonable compromise.”
Maybe if it was packaged with something else he may sign. But I don’t think he will ever be faced with the possibility.
Rep Leonard Lance (R NJ-7) voted Yea. Apparently he has felt some heat from the pro-freedom side as he found it necessary to flaunt his pro-2A-credentials in an email today to me, among others.
This is wonderful news, but does anybody think it has even a slim chance of making it to a vote in the senate? I hope it does, but getting 60 votes to allow a vote is going to be tough, especially with Schumer, Feinstein, and a couple others committed to blocking it.
Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-AZ) will be hard pressed to defend not allowing it to come to a vote considering his re-election will likely hinge on continuing to have the NRA’s backing.
He’ll also have to explain why he believes his constituents are trustworthy enough to carry without a permit at home but somehow become as dangerous as Schumer and Pelosi say they’ll be when they cross state lines.
Sen Reid needs to explain why last Congress considered a similar bill and a majority voted yes.
Anyone have inside info when the Senate might pick this up?
Not at the moment. But, since we have Bob Casey up for election next year, this would be a great chance to ask him to step up on the issue. He owes us for flipflopping on it last time. He won’t do anything, but giving his office a bit of a headache over it isn’t a terrible idea. :)
Thanks Bitter,
I am contacting him immediately!!
I thought maybe John Thune would jump right back in with a Senate bill again. OK, sending Casey some correspondence, Thanks again!
Danny
Bob Casey and Pat Toomey were just delivered E mails!
I so hate those e mail forms, I get why they have them, but it is tedious! I always have to copy and paste what I write to keep a copy in another file folder. Serious PITA!!