Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
STOP EXTREME GUN CONTROL BILL H.R. 127
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatRobGuy" data-source="post: 75735484" data-attributes="member: 123415"><p>The current composition of the various branches is something Skopos Labs takes into account...they still gave it only a 3% chance. That's not what I would call a good chance.</p><p></p><p>In fact, as I noted, most bills don't have a good chance. Only 4% of proposed bills turn into law, and only 6% make to phase of getting a vote.</p><p></p><p>If they were that anxious to pass it, why is it not passed already given they have the majority in the house, the tie-breaker in the senate, and a democratic president?</p><p></p><p>A bill lasting longer than a few days in a sub-committee is basically the graveyard for the overwhelming majority of bills.</p><p></p><p>It's worth looking at the usual turn around time for the process for bills that do end up becoming law. For the ones that do, it's typically a somewhat quick turn around time. It doesn't get referred to a committee, and sit there with no action whatsoever for over a month.</p><p></p><p>As a good comparable example (referring to the same subject matter)</p><p></p><p>Let's look at the Clinton-Era assault weapons ban (a piece of legislation that did actually pass), under the similar circumstance of Democrats having control of the presidency, house, and senate and consider the differences...</p><p></p><p>HR 127 (2021).</p><p>A rehash of an old failed legislative attempt, by a single house rep, with no cosponsors.</p><p>Gets Immediately referred to a sub-committee (like the last time), absolutely no movement on it for over a month.</p><p></p><p>HR 4296 (April 25th, 1994)</p><p>Chuck Schumer (at that time a house rep) introduces it on 4/25, with a list of 61 bipartisan cosponsors.</p><p></p><p>Get's referred to the same subcommittee (house judiciary). They held a hearing on it that the very next day. Within two days, they had the recommended amendments and changes to it agreed upon. The changes were made that day, and the next day it was put up for a vote, passes, and shipped off to the senate 3 days later.</p><p></p><p>Or, to put a visual element to it...</p><p></p><p>This is how legislation that's going to pass looks when the parties involved know the numbers are in their favor:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]294756[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p></p><p>Not this:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]294757[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>A bill they're anxious to push through (when they have their numbers in their favor and could easily force it through if they wanted to) doesn't sit in a subcommittee for a month with no movement.</p><p></p><p>Another example would be the Affordable Care Act. It was introduced in the house on 9/17/09, made it through the subcommittees, all agreed upon amendments were made, returned for a vote, and received in the senate by 10/8/2009.</p><p></p><p>If they can get something that sweeping and big through all of the house processes and to the senate in just over 2 weeks... Why is it that if they're so anxious for a gun grab, that they'd be procrastinating for over a month on a bill that's so short, that it could be read in 10 minutes?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatRobGuy, post: 75735484, member: 123415"] The current composition of the various branches is something Skopos Labs takes into account...they still gave it only a 3% chance. That's not what I would call a good chance. In fact, as I noted, most bills don't have a good chance. Only 4% of proposed bills turn into law, and only 6% make to phase of getting a vote. If they were that anxious to pass it, why is it not passed already given they have the majority in the house, the tie-breaker in the senate, and a democratic president? A bill lasting longer than a few days in a sub-committee is basically the graveyard for the overwhelming majority of bills. It's worth looking at the usual turn around time for the process for bills that do end up becoming law. For the ones that do, it's typically a somewhat quick turn around time. It doesn't get referred to a committee, and sit there with no action whatsoever for over a month. As a good comparable example (referring to the same subject matter) Let's look at the Clinton-Era assault weapons ban (a piece of legislation that did actually pass), under the similar circumstance of Democrats having control of the presidency, house, and senate and consider the differences... HR 127 (2021). A rehash of an old failed legislative attempt, by a single house rep, with no cosponsors. Gets Immediately referred to a sub-committee (like the last time), absolutely no movement on it for over a month. HR 4296 (April 25th, 1994) Chuck Schumer (at that time a house rep) introduces it on 4/25, with a list of 61 bipartisan cosponsors. Get's referred to the same subcommittee (house judiciary). They held a hearing on it that the very next day. Within two days, they had the recommended amendments and changes to it agreed upon. The changes were made that day, and the next day it was put up for a vote, passes, and shipped off to the senate 3 days later. Or, to put a visual element to it... This is how legislation that's going to pass looks when the parties involved know the numbers are in their favor: [ATTACH=full]294756[/ATTACH] Not this: [ATTACH=full]294757[/ATTACH] A bill they're anxious to push through (when they have their numbers in their favor and could easily force it through if they wanted to) doesn't sit in a subcommittee for a month with no movement. Another example would be the Affordable Care Act. It was introduced in the house on 9/17/09, made it through the subcommittees, all agreed upon amendments were made, returned for a vote, and received in the senate by 10/8/2009. If they can get something that sweeping and big through all of the house processes and to the senate in just over 2 weeks... Why is it that if they're so anxious for a gun grab, that they'd be procrastinating for over a month on a bill that's so short, that it could be read in 10 minutes? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
STOP EXTREME GUN CONTROL BILL H.R. 127
Top
Bottom