Iowa Dems walk out over gun bills

B

baccusboy

New member
As an Iowan, this really angers me. Is this going to be what the Dems do whenever something comes up that they cannot defeat?

http://www.kcci.com/politics/30569393/detail.html

Look at the comments. One woman actually said that Republicans "shouldn't be allowed to do whatever they want."

Got news for you lady... when the people of Iowa vote a 60/40 split of Republicans into office, and a Republican governor, then they have a state mandate to pass whatever they want.
 
do they really have a 60/40 split? That's a legitimate question. I'm unfamiliar with the political situation in your state.

If they do this is just grandstanding. Shouldn't they be fully able then to do whatever they want even IF the Dems walk out?
 
Yep... they can do what they want, as I understand it.

I'm in South Korea, so I don't have updated info on how the day went, but will find out in a few hours when the evening news hits.
 
Well looks like we may have a larger republican split soo as these guys just shot themselves in the foot so to speak.

The House had been scheduled on Wednesday morning to debate the gun-rights measures. One bill would allow someone to use deadly force to protect themselves and the other calls for writing gun rights protections into the Iowa Constitution.

Read more: http://www.kcci.com/politics/30569393/detail.html#ixzz1noTMPvKZ
Click to expand...

Um we really need these laws. Or dont they want to be able to protect themselves?
 
Tom Servo said:
Do you have links to the pending legislation? I'd like to see what all the sturm und drang is about.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I remember similar happenings months ago when a non-firearms-related topic came up for debate in another state.

I wish they could be fired for not doing their jobs... The people elected these officials to conduct business on their behalf in the state legislature. Walking out on their oath and responsibilities to the citizens in their districts is not only a breach of faith, it is a direct violation to the oath they recited when they were sworn into office.

Makes me want to puke that people can't stand there and voice their concerns and debate the issues like a grown adult. Instead, legislators have resulted to pre-school tendencies by effectively "taking their toys and going home"...
 
Spats' Stab in the Dark: I wonder if the walk-off is to prevent a vote at all. I'm entirely ignorant about the laws on how the Iowa legislature works, but if a quorum is required even to hold a vote, and the walkout drops attendance below a quorum, then the departing legislators might prevent the majority from being able to vote on the measures they'd like to pass. In that case, it's not "taking their toys and playing elsewhere," it's successfully blocking legislation. Just a thought.
 
The Wisconsin Dems walked out last year so that there wouldnt' be a quorum and therefore the senate couldn't vote. This was in response to a bill to remove entitlement programs from the State government union personnel if I remember correctly. So the Dems in Iowa are following a pattern that has already been established.
 
Here is a link to one version of the proposed amendment of the Iowa Constitution.

http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Co...&Service=Billbook&frame=1&GA=84&hbill=HJR2009

There are also several proposed pro-gun statutory amendments, e.g., prohibiting county and municipal governments from gun regulations, making a carry permit optional at the choice of the gun owner, and strengthening/replacing the castle doctrine with a stand your ground statute.
 
Last edited:
Are they required by law to go to work and do the state's business, is this gonna be another "where are the state legislators hiding?"
 
Are people who's actions (if not attitudes) essentially boil down do "play my way or I'll take my ball and go home.." really the ones we want in government, let alone the ones ruling us?
 
Mandatory licensing, registration, or special taxation as a condition of the exercise of this right is prohibited, and any other restriction shall be subject to strict scrutiny
Click to expand...
I like what I'm seeing here.

On the IFC site, it mentions "weakening amendments." Did the disgruntled parties walk out because those weren't sticking?
 
Before my retirement I had been intimately involved in the Iowa legislative process off and on for 36 years. Among other tactics, opponents of legislation may offer a myriad of amendments designed to kill a bill. A 60/40 majority is extremely difficult for either party to overcome even with a poison pill amendment. I don't know if the D's walked out because they couldn't get any amendments, but they certainly knew they could not succeed in their efforts to weaken the bill. Walking out may just have been their (perhaps risky) political statement.
 
Gotta watch the local TV 10:00 pm news - its the lead story.:D Not much, but it reported the constitutional amendment got 61 votes - at least one D.
 
Last edited:
They came back late in the afternoon saying they'd made their point about how Republicans handled the bills

LOL. Yeah, the point is just how childish they can be, had to go off and pout for the afternoon. They keep saying that the Republicans sprung this on them at the last minute, but I've been watching these bills for weeks, and everyone knew they were coming to the floor very soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top