Blaster Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:11 AM Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:11 AM The word is that the AWB is most likely not going to come up for a vote because Jones knows he doesn't have enough votes to pass it. However we need to keep the pressure up on SB1471 they may think they have the votes for this one. I believe a good starting place would be the list of Senators we identified as being new or "soft" on gun rights in regard to SB0016. I think our efforts with that have born some fruit. Let's now reproduce those efforts twofold against SB 1471, the .50 Ban. It is not a farfetched possibility that at least a few of these Senators who would love to see their names in the newspaper for getting tough on gun crime might support the .50 ban under the erroneous assumption that we'd be okay with that since they didn't vote for SB0016. .50 cal info Here are the names and contact information. Michael BondM121 Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-7353 1156 E. Washington St.Grayslake, IL 60030(847) 752-7004 Michael Frerichs 118 State HouseSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-2507 45 E. University Ave.Suite 206Champaign, IL 61820(217) 355-5252 Linda HolmesM122 Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-0422 13300 S. Rt. 59# 2B-1Plainfield, IL 60544(815) 609-3711 Randall HultgrenM103A Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-8022 P.O. Box 567Wheaton, IL 60189(630) 682-8100 Mike Jacobs M120 Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-5957 606 19th StreetMoline, IL 61265(309) 797-0001 Matt MurphyM103E Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-4471 Palatine Centre Atrium Offices17 E. Northwest Hwy. - Suite 4Palatine, IL 60067(847) 776-1490 Michael NolandM115 Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-7746 Tower Building100 E. Chicago Street, Ste. 302Elgin, IL 60120(847) 214-8864 Additionally, I think it would behoove us to give the six yellow-rated Senators a reminder. Pamela AlthoffM103C Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-8000 One North Virginia StreetCrystal Lake, IL 60014(815) 455-6330 Dan Cronin309G Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-8107 313 South Main StLombard, IL 60148(630) 792-0040 Carole Pankau105K Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-9463 One Tiffany PointSuite GBloomingdale, IL 60108(630) 582-0390 Sen. HalversonSenator 40th District323 Capitol BuildingSpringfield, IL 62706(217) 782-7419
Ocellairs Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:15 AM Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:15 AM I haven't been over in the AR forum in a few hours. Has anyone got this message about this too them?
45superman Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:05 PM Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:05 PM On today's round of calls about SB 1471, I got a confirmed "No" from Senator Koehler's office. Also, I may have neglected to mention earlier that I have previously gotten a confirmed "No" on SB 1471 from Senator Peterson's office. Everybody else so far has been either voice mail, or a noncommittal "thank you for your call" response.
lockman Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:14 PM Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:14 PM I called Emil Jones office a few minutes ago, when I stated I am opposed to some bills in the Senate she said "SB16?", I said no I had already contacted their office about that. The bills I oppose are SB1471 and sb1095, she said "Oh, SB1471" with a surprised voice. I got the impression that maybe SB1471 is not being hit hard enough. I was also able to get right through on the phone without any delay or voice mail intercept.
Ol'Coach Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:31 PM Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:31 PM Sen Frerichs office can't confirm, but "presumes" because of his stance on SB16, he would also vote NO on SB1471. Need to keep after him.
SmershAgent Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:41 PM Posted March 28, 2007 at 03:41 PM I got the impression that maybe SB1471 is not being hit hard enough. This is an excellent observation and bears repeating. I got the impression that maybe SB1471 is not being hit hard enough. This is exactly what the anti-rights members like to see. If we get stirred into a frenzy about SB0016 and shut that one down at the expense of lobbying hard on other bills, they're going to try and sneak some of the slightly less extreme measures through. The moderate members have a ready made excuse - "What? You didn't like that bill either ? I had no idea...all you mentioned was SB0016" Again: I got the impression that maybe SB1471 is not being hit hard enough.
GarandFan Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:39 AM Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:39 AM I called every one of these senators offices today, re: SB1471. The only office that did, or was willing to, confirm a NO vote was William Peterson. I will hammer them again, tomorrow (all but Peterson and Koehler). During each call, at the end I ask if the senator has come out on a position on the bill. If they have not, or if the sec doesn't know, I promise to call again the next day.
SmershAgent Posted March 29, 2007 at 01:51 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 01:51 PM Well done, everybody. Let's keep at it. Here's another short list of Senators (many of whom we already identified on our own), courtesy of the Tribune's ludicrous editorial in today's issue. Yet those who still need convincing on the issue include legislators who should know better: Sens. Kirk Dillard (R-Hinsdale), Dan Cronin (R-Elmhurst), Christine Radogno (R-Lemont), Michael Bond (D-Grayslake), Linda Holmes (D-Aurora), Pamela Althoff (R-McHenry), Debbie Halvorsen (D-Crete) and Matt Murphy (R-Palatine). Of that group, there is one new Senator that we need to include from now on in our calls. Debbie Halverson323 Capitol Building Springfield, IL 62706 (217) 782-7419 241 West Joe Orr Rd. Chicago Heights, IL 60411 (708) 756-0882 Let's remember to be unrelenting on the others as well, particulary the ones the Tribune so kindly pointed out for us. Thanks to Gravyboy77 for spotting those names in the editorial.
GarandFan Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:03 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:03 PM My daily calls on SB1471 have focussed on Blaster's list above, plus Halverson per the Trib editorial today (SIGH). Just this morning, two more senator's offices confirmed their votes on SB1471. They are: Radogno - OpposedMillner - Opposed Keep it up, folks.
SmershAgent Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:07 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:07 PM My daily calls on SB1471 have focussed on Blaster's list above, plus Halverson per the Trib editorial today (SIGH). Just this morning, two more senator's offices confirmed their votes on SB1471. They are: Radogno - OpposedMillner - Opposed Keep it up, folks. Millner doesn't surprise me, but Radogno was a critical one. Thanks for making the time and reporting the good news.
45superman Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:55 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:55 PM My daily calls on SB1471 have focussed on Blaster's list above, plus Halverson per the Trib editorial today (SIGH). Just this morning, two more senator's offices confirmed their votes on SB1471. They are: Radogno - OpposedMillner - Opposed Keep it up, folks. Millner doesn't surprise me, but Radogno was a critical one. Thanks for making the time and reporting the good news.You two are good! I was just about to post Halvorson's contact info, and post that Milner can be added to the list of good guys, but you beat me to it (and provided the good news about Radogno, to boot--I keep getting voice mail for her). Way to go.
Ol'Coach Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:56 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:56 PM This is as close to a "NO" confirmation as I have received from Sen Frerichs office. Received yesterday, it was in the form of a letter on official stationary, not an email: March 12, 2007 (Address) Dear Gene, Thank you for the information on the second amendment and firearms legislation. I appreciate your continued involvement in the political process. I will be a constant vote on the side of gun owners and those that hold the 2nd Amendment close to their hearts. Please don't hesitate to contact my office or stop by at anytime if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Mike (handwritten)Michael FrerichsState Sentator52nd District I realize it's not a confirmed "no" on this bill; therefore I'll keep checkin'.
c-rock Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:56 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 03:56 PM I can make some calls in the afternoon, who is left to call?
SmershAgent Posted March 29, 2007 at 04:02 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 04:02 PM I can make some calls in the afternoon, who is left to call? I'd say hit as many on the list as you can (excluding our confirmed NOs - Frerichs, Milner, Radogno, Peterson, and Koehler). Dillard, Holmes, Murphy, and Noland are priorities, in my opinion.
c-rock Posted March 29, 2007 at 04:07 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 04:07 PM the chair is against the wall, I repeat the chair is againt the wall.
45superman Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:12 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:12 PM Does anyone think it's worth calling the targeted (no pun intended) Senators' district offices, as well as the Springfield ones? I realize that they're all in Springfield, but presumably they have some staff at their districts, or at least voice mail that will be counted and logged. I got the idea from some of the voice mail I was connected to when calling the Springfield offices--some messages suggested calling the district office if the matter was urgent (and this matter would certainly seem to be that).
SmershAgent Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:13 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:13 PM Does anyone think it's worth calling the targeted (no pun intended) Senators' district offices, as well as the Springfield ones? I realize that they're all in Springfield, but presumably they have some staff at their districts, or at least voice mail that will be counted and logged. I got the idea from some of the voice mail I was connected to when calling the Springfield offices--some messages suggested calling the district office if the matter was urgent (and this matter would certainly seem to be that). If you've got the time, I'd say do it. There's nothing to lose, and possbily a bit to gain.
dorvinion Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:22 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:22 PM Does anyone think it's worth calling the targeted (no pun intended) Senators' district offices, as well as the Springfield ones? I realize that they're all in Springfield, but presumably they have some staff at their districts, or at least voice mail that will be counted and logged. I got the idea from some of the voice mail I was connected to when calling the Springfield offices--some messages suggested calling the district office if the matter was urgent (and this matter would certainly seem to be that). Today is the travel day. Tonight they should be going home so I'd think calling a district office today would be prudent.
Ocellairs Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:43 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:43 PM I have found in the past that even though the legislators are in Springfield, they still have staff at their district offices at the same time. In general practice here, the wife and I call these offices as well as the Springfield numbers.
junglebob Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:58 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 06:58 PM Just to let folks know, I called my senator, David Luectefeld's office and was told he votes NO on all gun ban legislation.
45superman Posted March 29, 2007 at 07:47 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 07:47 PM Today is the travel day. Tonight they should be going home so I'd think calling a district office today would be prudent.Unlike most Fridays, there is a session tomorrow, so I was thinking that today wouldn't be a travel day. Still, of the 5 district offices I've called so far, I've spoken to a staffer at 4.
dorvinion Posted March 29, 2007 at 07:59 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 07:59 PM Odd Several Reps today indicated that it was a travel day
45superman Posted March 29, 2007 at 08:03 PM Posted March 29, 2007 at 08:03 PM Odd Several Reps today indicated that it was a travel dayAhh--Reps. After another look at the schedule, it looks as if the House is indeed off tomorrow, but the Senate is in session. That explains it, I think.
45superman Posted March 30, 2007 at 12:39 AM Posted March 30, 2007 at 12:39 AM I see it has four new cosponsors (Cullerton, Silverstein, Trotter, and Viverito). None of 'em are particularly surprising--they're all rated "orange" in our rating system (and even though Cullerton is "orange" by the numbers, I think of him as "pink")--but it's not exactly welcome news, of course. They definitely want this obscenity. KEEP THE CALLS COMING--AND START EARLY IF YOU CAN!!!
45superman Posted March 30, 2007 at 01:37 AM Posted March 30, 2007 at 01:37 AM By the way, I just noticed that Halvorsen is someone we've been counting on all along (she is rated "green")--I don't know if the Trib has some reason to believe she might be wavering from her usual pro-freedom persona, or if they simply figure a legislator in Chicago Heights ought to hate freedom.
Molly B. Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:10 AM Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:10 AM SB1471 just passed Second Reading. Molly B.
45superman Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:38 AM Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:38 AM SB1471 just passed Second Reading. Molly B.When did that happen? Are they still in session tonight? I see that DeLeo has signed on as cosponsor, for a total of 5 (so far!) tonight. Man--the fascists want this one.
Molly B. Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:45 AM Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:45 AM It happened just before I posted. They ran long tonight - recessed - came back - got it done. I think that means they can do third reading and vote tomorrow? SB 16 came up, they kept repeating "last time" but was eventually read "out of record". Molly B.
Ocellairs Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:48 AM Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:48 AM I just check about an hour ago to see what status the bill was at, and at that time it was not at third reading. So I'm going out on a limb here and say they have been in session today but not streaming it over the internet. I tried several times today to get a stream, both video and audio and it was no dice.
SmershAgent Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:49 AM Posted March 30, 2007 at 02:49 AM It happened just before I posted. They ran long tonight - recessed - came back - got it done. I think that means they can do third reading and vote tomorrow? SB 16 came up, they kept repeating "last time" but was eventually read "out of record". Molly B. I dare them to try it. While they've been holding ridiculous press conferences and begging people for money, we've been securing votes against it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.