TexasCHLforum.com

RHenriksen wrote:

Paragrouper wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:OK, so the version of SB905 from the second committee meeting (at least I think it is from the second meeting) is up, and it includes legislators and statewide elected officials like in the engrossed Senate version. I guess the legislators really want their special treatment.

SB905 has also been recommended for the Local and Uncontested Calendar. Am I correct in my recollection that that precludes attempts to amend the bill on the House floor?

I read through the House Committee Report and page three contains this amendment

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT NO. 1
SECTION ____. Amend S.B. 905 (Engrossed) with the following:
(1)On page 1 line 18 insert "or" after ";".
(2)On page 1 line 20 strike ";"after "States attorney" and replace it with "."
(3)Strike Page 1 line 21 through page 2 line 11.
Aliseda

This amendment removes elected officials and noncommissioned DPS employees. I don't see a second committee report. Am I looking in the wrong place?

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... Bill=SB905

Don't think so; I think it's now waiting its turn in Calendars for a vote on the House floor. Because the Senate's original bill was amended, assuming it passes the House, it'll have to go back to the Senate... right?

hirundo82 wrote:OK, so the version of SB905 from the second committee meeting (at least I think it is from the second meeting) is up, and it includes legislators and statewide elected officials like in the engrossed Senate version. I guess the legislators really want their special treatment.

SB905 has also been recommended for the Local and Uncontested Calendar. Am I correct in my recollection that that precludes attempts to amend the bill on the House floor?

Jasonw560 wrote:

hirundo82 wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:So, if it makes to a vote, will Kleinschmidt still offer his amendment? Or is it gutted to much?

I'm not sure it would be considered germane, judging from what Charles was saying in the SB1581 thread.

Kind of like a smoking ban in a fiscal bill?

Jasonw560 wrote:So, if it makes to a vote, will Kleinschmidt still offer his amendment? Or is it gutted to much?

blue wrote:Having THREE different classes of CHL -- is a improvement -- HOW???????

Complicating the CHL system --- is a improvement --- HOW??????

Certain peoples safety is more important --- WHY????


Goose... Gander
Some Pigs Are more Equal....


-----FLUSH IT NOW.-----


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
One CHL with EQUAL training, benefits, responsibilities. (and soon ,hopefully, EQUAL costs.)PERIOD.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


(OR --How 'bout the "elite" CHL's COST $500 EXTRA like a special license plate.) ( )

Regards,
Blue

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Folks, I am not saying to support SB905; nor am I saying you should tell your Representative to support SB905, if the Kleinschmidt amendment is attached. All I'm saying is ask your Rep. to support the Kleinschmidt amendment. There's a very big difference!

Chas.