cowboybuckle Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:01 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:01 AM According to an article even if it passes house and senate (either you like the bill or not), it sound like the governor is going to veto anyways. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-illinois-gun-control-0524-20130524,0,3277888.story
TheDaveFactor Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:03 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:03 AM According to an article even if it passes house and senate (either you like the bill or not), it sound like the governor is going to veto anyways. http://www.chicagotr...0,3277888.story Won't much matter if Madigan has the votes that he says that he has...
brentm3 Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:03 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:03 AM He can't veto if it passes house with 71 votes.
TyGuy Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:05 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:05 AM *purple* SB2193 is the NRA's dream bill, the Tribune says so! Ate they crazy?
cowboybuckle Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:05 AM Author Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:05 AM Ya i forgot he has no over ride power in a supermajority vote
TyGuy Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:05 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:05 AM He can't veto if it passes house with 71 votes.False. The governor can veto it. Then it would need another vote.
TheDaveFactor Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:07 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:07 AM He can't veto if it passes house with 71 votes.False. The governor can veto it. Then it would need another vote. True, but with 71 votes, the veto means very little.
TyGuy Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:08 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:08 AM He can't veto if it passes house with 71 votes.False. The governor can veto it. Then it would need another vote. True, but with 71 votes, the veto means very little.False, it means exactly what any other veto means. It would require a second vote to override the veto.
TyGuy Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:09 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:09 AM Can Quinn veto it on June 10th?
cowboybuckle Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:09 AM Author Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:09 AM Im not sure but i thought a supermajority he didn't, but anyhow all he as to do it sit on it if it does pass the house and senate untill after the 31 when they are no longer in session then veto and they would not have the chance to come back and revote unless they go into over time....
vezpa Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:14 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:14 AM If he sits on it we go over the cliff and lawsuits can be filed. They wont waste time..
TheDaveFactor Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:14 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:14 AM Which is exactly NOTHING if Madigan can replicate the vote... You seem to be arguing to simply be obtuse now... I think I am done for now.
TheDaveFactor Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:15 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:15 AM Can Quinn veto it on June 10th? Yes, but the veto is only a political show if Madigan has the votes to over ride it.
TyGuy Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:15 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:15 AM June 10th is after the session is over. Could Cullerton sit on SB2193? Is he forced to call a concurrence vote?
brentm3 Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:16 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:16 AM Point is the veto is expected, nobody is going to say "oh gee, it came back, maybe I should chang my vote"
TyGuy Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:17 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:17 AM Point is the veto is expected, nobody is going to say "oh gee, it came back, maybe I should chang my vote"If in the mean time HB183 has been defeated they might.
Duck888 Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:19 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:19 AM If he sits on it we go over the cliff and lawsuits can be filed. They wont waste time..to the cliff then!!!
Jfl0 Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:19 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:19 AM I do think he is going to veto 2193. Obviously because he is opposed to it sure- but I think he has good reason to not sign Phelps' bill, strategically, to try and pin the blame on the Madigans so he can keep his comfy cushion in the mansion. Will Madigan override that veto? perhaps... I have no clue. It's going to be an interesting couple of days....
cm.stites Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:27 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:27 AM Can Quinn veto it on June 10th?not without setting off constitutional carry.
xd9subcompact Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:27 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:27 AM What happens if he does nothing? is that a veto?
TyGuy Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:31 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:31 AM What happens if he does nothing? is that a veto?I believe if a bill isn't signed after 60 days it becomes law.
TheDaveFactor Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:32 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:32 AM Point is the veto is expected, nobody is going to say "oh gee, it came back, maybe I should chang my vote"If in the mean time HB183 has been defeated they might. 183 is done if this passes. Honestly, I think it is done now. In my opinion, 183 was an exercise to show US how bad it really could be. Kill the Madigan-Phelps bill if you want a closer look at Kwameageddon, is essentially what they were saying.
carbinex556 Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:33 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:33 AM What happens if he does nothing? is that a veto? It would become law after 60 or 90? days. He would give us FOID carry in that timeframe.
BShawn Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:56 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 04:56 AM I do think he is going to veto 2193. Obviously because he is opposed to it sure- but I think he has good reason to not sign Phelps' bill, strategically, to try and pin the blame on the Madigans so he can keep his comfy cushion in the mansion. Will Madigan override that veto? perhaps... I have no clue. It's going to be an interesting couple of days.... I keep hearing that he not only expects him to veto it, but that he's "fully prepared" for it...
cls74 Posted May 24, 2013 at 05:08 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 05:08 AM I do think he is going to veto 2193. Obviously because he is opposed to it sure- but I think he has good reason to not sign Phelps' bill, strategically, to try and pin the blame on the Madigans so he can keep his comfy cushion in the mansion. Will Madigan override that veto? perhaps... I have no clue. It's going to be an interesting couple of days.... He'd actually have to stay in the mansion to lose that "comfy seat". But I'm sure he'd like to keep his seat and office in Chicago
BackForward Posted May 24, 2013 at 05:36 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 05:36 AM Quinn has been ready to veto everything, that's why we've needed 71 votes since day one to override it.
martho Posted May 24, 2013 at 05:40 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 05:40 AM I do not want put any bad karma in this deal.... However, for those talking about super majority vote being the end all, look back at WI history on this topic from 2004. One vote
Elderberry Posted May 24, 2013 at 06:03 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 06:03 AM Actually, the 10th of June doesn't mean much. Illinois Constitution Article IV, Sec. 5.…( The Governor may convene the General Assembly or the Senate alone in special session by a proclamation stating the purpose of the session; and only business encompassed by such purpose, together with any impeachments or confirmation of appointments shall be transacted. Special sessions of the General Assembly may also be convened by joint proclamation of the presiding officers of both houses, issued as provided by law. Madigan would have them back in town before the ink on Jello's veto dried.... End of problem...
Illinoiscc Posted May 24, 2013 at 06:35 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 06:35 AM Quinn has been ready to veto everything, that's why we've needed 71 votes since day one to override it.i thought 71 votes are needed because of preemption?
RockerXX Posted May 24, 2013 at 06:45 AM Posted May 24, 2013 at 06:45 AM i thought 71 votes are needed because of preemption? Needed for both, preemption and veto proof override...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.