Alexander mistaken?

Thank you for contacting me to express support for the House amendment to Senate Bill 1335, legislation related to concealed handgun permits.

Today, I voted in favor of shielding the identity of concealed handgun permit holders. More importantly, Senate Bill 1335 passed in the full Senate, and will receive further deliberation by Gov. McDonnell.

Again, thank you for your correspondence. For additional legislative information or to follow the progress of legislation, you may visit the Virginia General Assembly website at http://virginiageneralassembly.gov. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely, Kenneth Cooper Alexander Member, Senate of Virginia

He may have INTENDED to vote yea, but he did NOT

floor: 02/14/13 Senate: House substitute agreed to by Senate (31-Y 9-N)

---

YEAS--Black, Blevins, Carrico, Colgan, Deeds, Ebbin, Edwards, Favola, Garrett, Hanger, Marsden, Marsh, Martin, McDougle, McWaters, Miller, Newman, Norment, Northam, Obenshain, Petersen, Puckett, Reeves, Ruff, Smith, Stanley, Stosch, Stuart, Vogel, Wagner, Watkins--31.
NAYS--Alexander, Barker, Herring, Howell, Locke, Lucas, McEachin, Puller, Saslaw--9.
RULE 36--0.
NOT VOTING--0.

Senator Alexander stated that he voted nay on the question of agreeing to the substitute proposed by the House of Delegates to S.B. 1335, whereas he intended to vote yea.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?131+vot+SV0527SB1335+SB1335

So the question is, if the vote was close, and this one vote mattered, could he call for a re-vote?

This doesn't really bother me too much. I can't really see him getting any mileage one way or the other out of doing this intentionally. What would be the point?

TFred

TFred said:

So the question is, if the vote was close, and this one vote mattered, could he call for a re-vote?

This doesn't really bother me too much. I can't really see him getting any mileage one way or the other out of doing this intentionally. What would be the point?

TFred

Click to expand...

IIRC, Robert's Rules say that someone who voted in the affirmative (the winning side) can request a re-vote. Someone who did not cast a prevailing vote (in this case voted against it but it passed in spite of them) cannot request a re-vote. The only other possibility would be a procedural error such as the lack of a quorum to be able to cast votes in the first place.

What does it matter that he wants to say he meant to vote FOR but goofed and voted AGAINST? Really, does it need to be spelled out?

stay safe.

I received the same reply from Senator Alexander.

So, I sent him an e-mail in reply thanking him for his vote.

Guess he played me ...

skidmark said:

IIRC, Robert's Rules say that someone who voted in the affirmative (the winning side) can request a re-vote. Someone who did not cast a prevailing vote (in this case voted against it but it passed in spite of them) cannot request a re-vote. The only other possibility would be a procedural error such as the lack of a quorum to be able to cast votes in the first place.

What does it matter that he wants to say he meant to vote FOR but goofed and voted AGAINST? Really, does it need to be spelled out?

stay safe.

Click to expand...

Well, like I said, I don't know the guy at all, or how he leans. But in a case where the vote has absolutely no bearing on the outcome, then yes, what does it matter if he goofed? If his goof changed the outcome, then that calls a motive into question. In this case, no difference, so why bother to vote one way and then lie about it? Since the vote didn't matter, all you can do is take him at his word. If he really wanted to vote NO, then you have to assume more of his constituents would support that vote, and he would hurt himself by saying he meant to vote YES.

The things that irritate me are when the Republican chair of a committee crosses the aisle and votes with the Democrats, ON PURPOSE, and thus kills a bill that would have otherwise passed, and then laughs it off in the elevator. THAT is what I get angry about... when the votes COUNT!

TFred

No worries either way....just good for dialogue. Im opposed to the laws regarding CHPs to begin with so as i told all my gun friendly friends....its an anti anti gun bill!

TFred said:

The things that irritate me are when the Republican chair of a committee crosses the aisle and votes with the Democrats, ON PURPOSE, and thus kills a bill that would have otherwise passed, and then laughs it off in the elevator. THAT is what I get angry about... when the votes COUNT!

TFred

Click to expand...

OTOH, I'd much rather see a politician vote his conscience (on the off chance s/he has one) than his political party. No party has the monopoly on right answers.

Tess said:

OTOH, I'd much rather see a politician vote his conscience (on the off chance s/he has one) than his political party. No party has the monopoly on right answers.

Click to expand...

This was not that case. When asked why the particular vote, the reply was, and this is an exact quote, "I go back and forth on that one."



TFred