TexasCHLforum.com

Scott Farkus wrote:

v7a wrote:That vote count is wrong, btw. Apparently Ellis got recorded as voting YES on final passage but he's going to correct with the clerk to NO.

Why did Ellis (and most of the Dems) vote yes on the second reading but no on final 3rd reading? Is that common?

he said he was going to vote yes on the final reading.

timtheteacher wrote:

v7a wrote:That vote count is wrong, btw. Apparently Ellis got recorded as voting YES on final passage but he's going to correct with the clerk to NO.

He did vote YES for the bill. He indicated why and also posted on his website....http://www.rodneyellis.com/2015/05/22/s ... amendment/

No, he voted for the amendment. Not the bill.

@chucklindell tweet

@RodneyEllis confirms. "I voted no on final passage." Ellis voted yes on 2nd reading to reflect his support for Huffines amdmt. #txlege

Scott Farkus wrote:

v7a wrote:That vote count is wrong, btw. Apparently Ellis got recorded as voting YES on final passage but he's going to correct with the clerk to NO.

Why did Ellis (and most of the Dems) vote yes on the second reading but no on final 3rd reading? Is that common?

Politics!

He voted for the amendment because he knew the bill would pass and he didn't want any profiling of blacks by law enforcement.

The Wall wrote:He voted for the amendment because he knew the bill would pass and he didn't want any profiling of blacks by law enforcement.

No, he made a big to-do directly to Estes about how he was proud of his F rating from the NRA but that he was going to vote for the bill, and he did, as did several other Dems, on the 2nd reading. But they voted no on third reading.

I can understand why he'd vote yes on the amendment but no on the bill, but that's not what he did, at least not on the 2nd reading.

I guess it's all irrelevant now unless you have to vote for him and need to consider his record.

Jasonw560 wrote:I read it's over one word.

I mean, honestly, do our legislators not have access to or have they never heard of Ctrl-C & Ctrl-V? The fact that its allllllllllmost there but not quite is just maddening

dru wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:I read it's over one word.

I mean, honestly, do our legislators not have access to or have they never heard of Ctrl-C & Ctrl-V? The fact that its allllllllllmost there but not quite is just maddening

All you had to do was watch Huffines tonight to get the answer to your question.

Right2Carry wrote:

dru wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:I read it's over one word.

I mean, honestly, do our legislators not have access to or have they never heard of Ctrl-C & Ctrl-V? The fact that its allllllllllmost there but not quite is just maddening

All you had to do was watch Huffines tonight to get the answer to your question.

It might not be all the way there, but because of Senator Huffines, it's a lot closer than it was before his amendment.

TXBO wrote:

Right2Carry wrote:

dru wrote:

Jasonw560 wrote:I read it's over one word.

I mean, honestly, do our legislators not have access to or have they never heard of Ctrl-C & Ctrl-V? The fact that its allllllllllmost there but not quite is just maddening

All you had to do was watch Huffines tonight to get the answer to your question.

It might not be all the way there, but because of Senator Huffines, it's a lot closer that it was before his amendment.

K.Mooneyham wrote:So if it goes back to the House, is it de facto dead because they won't get it done?

I do believe that one day is dedicated to concurrence votes on both side.
They are up or down votes, no amendments

safety1 wrote:

K.Mooneyham wrote:So if it goes back to the House, is it de facto dead because they won't get it done?

I do believe that one day is dedicated to concurrence votes on both side.
They are up or down votes, no amendments

That's my understanding as well. Simple yea or nay, with no floor debate.

@MarkW_KVUE tweet

Final housekeeping on gun fight: #campuscarry #SB11 must be placed on House calendar by 10pm Sunday to stay alive. Must clear 2nd reading Tuesday #txlege

Can someone post up the difference in the two amendments? Is it a significant change or just a minor change?