TexasCHLforum.com

Amendment 5:
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84 ... 011H25.PDF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Amendment 6:
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84 ... 011H26.PDF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Wall wrote:

Ruark wrote:Will somebody please state, in plain language, what "engrossment" means?

I think it means as a whole or in it's entirety. Bill plus amendments.

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/gtli/legproc ... ction.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


I think it just means passed to third reading.

safety1 wrote:Can anyone explain what happened??? I froze up on the feed right at the big moment.
How did that happen? it was like the Dems just rolled over. What the what???

They used a rule where 25 members can vote/sign/something and end all debate and amendments and force a vote immediately.

sig-sog wrote:What good is this bill with the opt out?

If I understand correctly, 2/3 of the Regents of the university have to vote to "opt out." So campus carry is on the premises unless they take action. Right now, universities and colleges have to "opt in" for campus carry (on premises) to be legal, and none of them have done this.

I'm still confused over amendments 5 & 6. I was watching the whole thing and thought everything except amendment 1 was voted down.

Ruark wrote:Will somebody please state, in plain language, what "engrossment" means?

Here is a link that has some good info. My understanding of engrossment means the bill typed up with the amendments included. It then goes to the 3rd reading. I think it can still have new amendments but they have to have 3/4 vote at that point.
I'm not sure what kind of clock comes into play there. Once it passes 3rd reading, then it's back to the Senate.

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/gtli/legproc ... ction.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

safety1 wrote:Can anyone explain what happened??? I froze up on the feed right at the big moment.
How did that happen? it was like the Dems just rolled over. What the what???

They used a rule where 25 members can vote/sign/something and end all debate and amendments and force a vote immediately.

WOW!!!!! Thank you baby Jesus..........I just "blacked out on freedom"

ELB wrote:

sig-sog wrote:What good is this bill with the opt out?

If I understand correctly, 2/3 of the Regents of the university have to vote to "opt out." So campus carry is on the premises unless they take action. Right now, universities and colleges have to "opt in" for campus carry (on premises) to be legal, and none of them have done this.

I think you made my point. Now they will just opt out.

Okay, now I can say a little more about the Rep. Zerwas amendment. Even with the Amendment, it decriminalizes campus-carry. While it is a version of opt-out, it does require a 2/3 vote of the Board of Regents and it cannot be the entire campus. I can't get into why at this point.

Now to the Senate, after 3rd reading, where the addition of private institutions is a problem.

Chas.

v7a wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:Changes effective date to 9/1/2016? http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84 ... 011H21.PDF" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just noticed that

Was this even mentioned during the debate? I don't remember them stating 2016 as the effective date...

How did they stop the debate and call the vote?

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Okay, now I can say a little more about the Rep. Zerwas amendment. Even with the Amendment, it decriminalizes campus-carry. While it is a version of opt-out, it does require a 2/3 vote of the Board of Regents and it cannot be the entire campus. I can't get into why at this point.

Now to the Senate, after 3rd reading, where the addition of private institutions is a problem.

Chas.

They can get this hammered out in conference. Just do it.

They also have to give reason for restrictions in certain areas. It's not an opt out per say from the way I read the amendment. Read the amendment.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:They used a rule where 25 members can vote/sign/something and end all debate and amendments and force a vote immediately.

Huh? Why wasn't this rule taken advantage of earlier in the day?

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

safety1 wrote:Can anyone explain what happened??? I froze up on the feed right at the big moment.
How did that happen? it was like the Dems just rolled over. What the what???

They used a rule where 25 members can vote/sign/something and end all debate and amendments and force a vote immediately.

Talk about pulling a rabbit out of a hat.