Rep Tom Coburn ( Oklahoma) adds ammedment to restore Right to Carry

**son of the revolution** · May 12th, 2009, 07:53 PM

Just annouced , Rep Tom Coburn ( R) from Oklahoma , added an ammendment to the Credit Card Owners Protection Act Bill , to restore the Bush Admins rule on allowing carry of firearms in National Parks . The ammendment was added at literally the last minute to the existing bill . The bill PASSED the Senate , When asked Chris Dodd ( CT ) stated it was more important to get the Credit Card Bill passed , then to argue about Coburns ammendment .

I tried to find more information , but since it happened just a couple hours ago , I havent found anything . Either way its a good thing for sure .

Heres one link

http://www.fox4kc.com/news/nationwor...,4176461.story

**Curmudgeon** · May 12th, 2009, 08:12 PM

Now... if it can just make it through the gauntlet.

**ChamberedRound** · May 12th, 2009, 08:22 PM

FWIW, I absolutely abhor this tactic. Legislators shouldn't be allowed to amend a bill with something completely unrelated to the bill. As just one example, this procedure is how we got stuck with RealID.

Just because the amendment is one we like this time doesn't mean the way it's been served up is any less disgusting.

Just my $0.02. I guess I'll take it, but I don't like it.

**son of the revolution** · May 12th, 2009, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

FWIW, I absolutely abhor this tactic. Legislators shouldn't be allowed to amend a bill with something completely unrelated to the bill. As just one example, this procedure is how we got stuck with RealID.

Just because the amendment is one we like this time doesn't mean the way it's been served up is any less disgusting.

Just my $0.02. I guess I'll take it, but I don't like it.

I concur . I honestly dont know when this type of amendment policy first came into widespread usage. I'd like to see the practice outlawed as well , however there have also been two instances in the last few months when its benefited 2A issues . This instance and the one last month about DC getting a rep in Congress

**MikeB0** · May 12th, 2009, 08:47 PM

Faehner's group sent a letter to senators Tuesday stating that Coburn's amendment would allow individuals to openly carry rifles, shotguns, and semiautomatic weapons in national parks. "As a result, individuals could attend ranger-led hikes and campfire programs with their rifles at Yellowstone National Park and other national park treasures across the country," the letter said.

The Horror!

**dc dalton** · May 12th, 2009, 08:52 PM

Personally I think this type of tactic is utter bullshit and should be outlawed, I don't care if I like the amendment or not. We need to get back to one bill / one topic. These god damn things have been the cause of more 'backdoor screwings' than I can count.

**MikeB0** · May 12th, 2009, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by dc dalton

Personally I think this type of tactic is utter bullshit and should be outlawed, I don't care if I like the amendment or not. We need to get back to one bill / one topic. These god damn things have been the cause of more 'backdoor screwings' than I can count.

Completely agree. The slapping on of an unrelated law is a big problem with the way the legislature works today.

That said. As this law actually removes other rules/laws I kinda like it. I actually think there needs to be a remove BS/outdated/ridiculous laws committee with more clout that the senate intelligence, or finance, or judicial committees in the legislature.

**dc dalton** · May 12th, 2009, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by MikeB0

That said. As this law actually removes other rules/laws I kinda like it. I actually think there needs to be a remove BS/outdated/ridiculous laws committee with more clout that the senate intelligence, or finance, or judicial committees in the legislature.

Sorry bud, can't have it both ways .... if it sucks when some liberal sneaks some BS into a bill right before it's voted on the same has to work the other way.

**Himni** · May 12th, 2009, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

FWIW, I absolutely abhor this tactic. Legislators shouldn't be allowed to amend a bill with something completely unrelated to the bill. As just one example, this procedure is how we got stuck with RealID.

Just because the amendment is one we like this time doesn't mean the way it's been served up is any less disgusting.

Just my $0.02. I guess I'll take it, but I don't like it.

You know I completely agree and DC need a kick in the rear for doing it for so long. How many bills pass with just things in them that apply only to the purpose of the bill? I would be willing to bet ZERO do. It is a terrible way to get something passed but if the liberals want to play hardball then what can be done?

**Lazydog** · May 12th, 2009, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

FWIW, I absolutely abhor this tactic. Legislators shouldn't be allowed to amend a bill with something completely unrelated to the bill. As just one example, this procedure is how we got stuck with RealID.

Just because the amendment is one we like this time doesn't mean the way it's been served up is any less disgusting.

Just my $0.02. I guess I'll take it, but I don't like it.

Originally Posted by dc dalton

Personally I think this type of tactic is utter bullshit and should be outlawed, I don't care if I like the amendment or not. We need to get back to one bill / one topic. These god damn things have been the cause of more 'backdoor screwings' than I can count.

Agree with both of you on this. I have been saying this for a long time now. This tactics is used to get things passed that otherwise might not pass and since they are attached to must pass bills they pass right along with them.