Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

* UPDATED x1 - 85 votes * House takes up concealed carry today

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

*** UPDATE *** SB2193 passed with 85 votes. Some of the more interesting “Yes” votes were Democrats from the Chicago area. Black Caucus members in bold…

Toni Berrios, Dan Burke, Monique Davis, John D’Amico, Anthony Deluca, Mary Flowers, LaShawn Ford, Fran Hurley, Thaddeus Jones, Rob Martwick, Rita Mayfield, Al Riley, Bob Rita, Silvana Tabares, André Thapedi, Mike Zalewski.

Discuss.

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* As of this writing (10:34 am), the House’s concealed carry bill is up for floor debate. Check the live blog for constant updates. You can also listen or watch here.

* The proposal came under intense fire yesterday from several of the state’s top Democrats, despite its strong support by House Speaker Michael Madigan…

“This legislation as written is a massive overreach that goes far beyond the conceal carry issue,” said Quinn spokeswoman Brooke Anderson. “The measure would repeal Chicago’s assault weapons ban and put public safety at risk. We oppose this.”

After lawmakers had gone home for the day, Emanuel’s office issued a statement opposing Madigan’s plan, saying the mayor is “committed to working with the leaders” on legislation to combat gun crimes and keep illegal guns off the street. […]

Even before a House committee advanced the bill on a 13-3 vote, Senate President Cullerton released a stinging statement that contended the National Rifle Association’s “fingerprints” can be found “all over” the bill. Cullerton criticized the House bill as an “NRA dream” because it gives state government “exclusive authority to regulate any matter related to firearms” beyond just concealed carry. […]

Raoul’s bill stalled in the Senate last week when Madigan made it clear to lawmakers, including senators, that the House was working on what he indicated may be a better bill.

That’s not all Madigan did last week. Subscribers know more.

* Opponents have said that the NRA’s silence is quite telling…

Those with reservations about the bill say that even though the NRA is neutral, they can see the group’s influence in the proposal. They note that the group rarely, if ever, sits quietly and allows legislation it does not favor to pass. No one representing the NRA or the Illinois Rifle Association testified during the committee hearing today. Before the hearing, the usually talkative NRA lobbyist Todd Vandermyde declined to comment on the bill.

“That speaks volumes to me,” Daley said. Ronald Homes, spokesperson for Senate President John Cullerton, also noted the association’s silence. “This is still the template that the NRA wanted to get done. … The NRA is often loud about bills that they don’t like.”

* But the ISRA did talk to Illinois Issues…

Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, said there are things that his group does not like about the bill. “We feel that the fees are too high and the training is too long.” The steep license fee and cost of training could make the constitutional right of carry inaccessible for some. But he says there are components of the proposal that he supports. “It also has some good things in the bill. It’s got [home rule powers] preemption in the bill, which is very very important.” […]

Pearson said his group is not trying to sway House members. “We’re not saying it’s OK to vote for the bill; we’re not saying it’s not OK. We’re saying we’re neutral.” He added, “I’m sure the representatives will be more than able to make up their minds.”

* And while Chicago’s mayor is opposed, not all mayors feel that way…

Hoffman Estates Mayor Bill McLeod backed a statewide set of restrictions, saying suburban town boundaries can be especially confusing.

“With the borders we have, if you’re not a politician, you have no idea whether you’re in Hoffman Estates,” McLeod said.

* Madigan…

Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said, “It was thought that you wanted to have one law for one state.” He noted that weekly votes earlier this year in the House on separate gun issues showed tougher restrictions would be difficult to get through the House and that the legislation was an attempt to “fashion a commonsense approach.”

* Also, this is bogus…

A quickly drafted House concealed-carry measure backed by House Speaker Michael Madigan passed a preliminary panel Thursday but was deemed an “overreach” by Gov. Pat Quinn and the Senate’s top Democrat, citing key ideological differences.

They’ve been working on that bill for weeks. The final draft emerged Thursday morning.

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:34 am

Comments

This link leads to a more sturdy feed than that of the ILGA. It’s a few seconds behind but more reliable: http://new.livestream.com/blueroomstream/events/2122784/videos/19626801

Comment by Namaste Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:37 am
Must be a good bill; everyone is mad about something in it.

Comment by RNUG Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:38 am
I honestly don’t understand spin like that.

Who, exactly, is supposed to believe that the ISRA would be “neutral” about any gun bill? Or that the NRA would be silent if they were opposed?

Just who do they think is that stupid? I can’t think of anyone.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:43 am
Wait, the NRA negotiated it?

Then gosh darn it, we MUST oppose it!

Great logic you got there, Senator.

Comment by HenryVK Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:43 am
HenryVK

Heck that’s been his logic all along hasn’t it?

Comment by Mason born Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:46 am
{They’ve been working on that bill for weeks. The final draft emerged Thursday morning.}

Well beyond the limited attention span of the Governor; as well as his ability to multi-task.

I’m not certain he can recall what he had for breakfast this morning.

Comment by Quinn T. Sential Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:52 am
Mr. Mayor and Quinn, you guys had a decade to have this debate when you had leverage. You refused to even allow an up or down vote in the legislature and have held the rest of us hostage to your failures. The NRA took your bill to court and kicked your tail. They get to be involved now. Get over it.

Every other state and City in the Nation has figured it out. If you can’t figure out how to make this work in your city or state, resign.

The NRA can be neutral. They can think it is a better deal for everyone than no bill at all, but not good enough to sign onto. Lobby groups do it all the time. The fact they may know their non position affects the view of the bill is part of the legislative process. It happens everyday.

Comment by the Patriot Friday, May 24, 13 @ 10:56 am
Wordslinger

I think the opinion of the NRA and ISRA on this one is it is not what they want. Yet it is worlds better than Raouls bill. In short i think they are aware this is the best that can be reached at this time. The NRA is a pretty patient organization. I think they are aware that once most IL residents who are on the fence about CCW see that it isn’t the end of the world then coming back for changes to restricted places will be more palatable. It will be a lot harder for a legislator to argue allowing moms to carry a gun to their kids park is going to be the end of the world. I don’t like quite a few things in the bill however at the moment this is a good start. BTW doesn’t it make sense to see what the outcome of this is and then revisit?

Comment by Mason born Friday, May 24, 13 @ 11:02 am
Quinn spokeswoman Brooke Anderson. “ We oppose this.”

Brooke: This is EXACTLY what the leadership thread was about yesterday. You have stated the items in the bill that you are against. OK-we got that, and its no surprise to anyone on either side.

Now, What is your boss for? Does he have a bill? What is his solution? Was he involved in the talks? Does he simply support the deadline passing, or is there some other compromise he can support?

Is it too much to ask the Gov to have his spokesperson say something like, “We oppose this measure, but we do support Senator So-and-so’s bill to allow X while at the same time protecting Y”

That is why people have questions about Gov. Quinn’s leadership ability.

Comment by low level Friday, May 24, 13 @ 11:07 am
Mr. Governor, if this passes both houses then go right on ahead and veto it. Let’s see how that works out.

Comment by The unknown poster Friday, May 24, 13 @ 11:08 am
Mason, I think the more plausible explanation is that they think there’s a better chance of passing the Senate if they’re not seen pushing it.

C’mon man. They’re going to go on the milk carton on May 24 regarding their No. 1 issue?

I get why they’re doing it, I just don’t think anyone buys it.

– You refused to even allow an up or down vote in the legislature… –

Patriot, where do you get this stuff? Are you just not paying attention?

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 24, 13 @ 11:21 am
Wordslinger

I have no doubt that not cheer leading for the bill helps it in the Senate especially. It would probably help even more if they came out against it in some circles. Of course if someone didn’t get the message that it was a wink wink opposition they’d probably kill it.

My point was i don’t know that they could come out and cheer lead it a lot of the concessions in there are things that were supposedly make or break. such as Training that is Commercially available, Public transit, etc.

I think Cullerton needs to take the advise people were giving the NRA after Raouls bill was introduced. “Take it it’s the best your gonna get.”

Comment by Mason born Friday, May 24, 13 @ 11:28 am
–My point was i don’t know that they could come out and cheer lead it a lot of the concessions in there are things that were supposedly make or break. such as Training that is Commercially available, Public transit, etc.–

We disagree. If it goes down, I think they’ll be extraordinarily happy to get the base statewide law. That would be a huge win, the biggest one they’ve ever had. That’s why I don’t buy the spin.

You can come back and nibble away at the other stuff in years to come. Little bites go down easier. One statewide conceal-carry law is the Big Enchilada.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 24, 13 @ 11:40 am
Word

I don’t know that we disagree. I think the NRA and Especially the ISRA oversold members on what they were going to get. It is member backlash is why i don’t think they can cheer lead.

A state wide Shall-Issue is a huge deal. Getting a bill here in IL that isn’t May-issue is an accomplishment. Which is why i called my Senator and asked him to vote for it when it hit the Senate.

Comment by Mason born Friday, May 24, 13 @ 12:27 pm
85 yes votes is a surprise!

Comment by Mongo Friday, May 24, 13 @ 12:54 pm
===85 yes votes is a surprise! ===

Not really. We figured it would get at least 80.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 24, 13 @ 12:57 pm
Rich

I wonder was this a shot, no pun intended, across Cullerton’s bow?

“Madigan: the shall carry plan got 64 votes EVEN after I had worked against the bill…that’s very telling.”

Something like take my bill or I will quit working against the original.

Comment by Mason born Friday, May 24, 13 @ 12:59 pm
Whoof. I don’t know if a resolution honoring Mother Theresa would get 85 votes.

Maybe the ISRA should have been neutral and the NRA silent years ago, lol.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 24, 13 @ 1:10 pm
Rich

A friend of mine and myself were moving through the tunnel between the Dome and whatever the building is on the west of it. We were clustered together with a Lady Legislator who was quite pleasant. She helped us find our reps and when she left to go to her office told us she was looking forward to voting for CCW stating it was time. Uncharitably of me i assumed she was spinning us. I think i owe her an apology. I do not know her name but she could have been a member of the Black Caucus.

Comment by Mason born Friday, May 24, 13 @ 1:15 pm
That was on IGOLD and We were both in Yellow.

Comment by Mason born Friday, May 24, 13 @ 1:16 pm
The senate is as dysfunctional as the house. This should be interesting?

Comment by Bill K Friday, May 24, 13 @ 1:22 pm
Given that the illegally carried gun violence problem in the Chicago area highly disproportionately impacts the poorer and minority communities, maybe a few of the caucus legislators thought allowing the good guys to be armed (if they so choose) is appropriate.

Comment by titan Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:05 pm
victory in one word “preemption”

Comment by railrat Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:15 pm