Will Missouri legislature override Governor Nixon's veto of SB 656?

http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/yael-t-abouhalkah/article728828.html

&

http://www.kansascity.com/news/state/missouri/article727249.html

SNIP

"The Missouri legislation [SB 656] also lowered the minimum age required to get a concealed weapons permit to 19 from 21 and allows permit holders to carry guns openly, even in cities that ban open carry. In addition, health care professionals could not be required to ask whether a patient has access to guns, and public housing authorities could not ban tenants from possessing firearms.

The bill passed the Missouri House in May by a 111-28 vote, two more than would be required for a veto override. The Senate's 21-7 vote fell two votes shy of that threshold, but three Republicans were absent."

My comment - I think we have the votes to override!

Hopefully the Missouri legislature will do exactly that!

I hope they do. The legislature don't have a good record doing that though, and there's some other oddities going on in the Senate. But, we'll find out in early September, which should be close enough to election day to have some possibility of a vague memory in the voters' minds.

kcgunfan said:

I hope they do. The legislature don't have a good record doing that though, and there's some other oddities going on in the Senate. But, we'll find out in early September, which should be close enough to election day to have some possibility of a vague memory in the voters' minds.

Click to expand...

Pefect opportunity for neoconservative republicans to appear pro freedom and pro gun while knowing full well it won't become law. No doubt they would have even passed constitutional carry because they know the governor will veto, and overrides are difficult

77zach said:

Pefect opportunity for neoconservative republicans to appear pro freedom and pro gun while knowing full well it won't become law. No doubt they would have even passed constitutional carry because they know the governor will veto, and overrides are difficult

Click to expand...

Even if they do not have the votes to override a veto, it will attract more attention and that is good for bringing it to the attention of more people.

Go for it!

I really hope they override. I'm not very optimistic though. But maybe that is just my general pessimism with political creatures at this point.

Don't hold your breath on the over ride unless you have an enormous amount of oxygen on hand.

The Senate will be the issue. Contact Senator Dempsey's office and Tim Jones asking if there is an planned override session and their thoughts on SB656. There may not be enough votes in the Senate. :cuss: :banghead:

With two vacant seats in the senate the odds are slim to none...and I'm leaning more to the none than the slim. The senate is not very liberty minded these past several years. They have not announced that they will work to override the veto at this point which confirms for me that they are not liberty minded.

OC for ME said:

With two vacant seats in the senate the odds are slim to none...and I'm leaning more to the none than the slim. The senate is not very liberty minded these past several years. They have not announced that they will work to override the veto at this point which confirms for me that they are not liberty minded.

Click to expand...

I would concur; but since this bill was originally a Senate Bill, they may want it to pass.

I'm trying to figure out if the two vacant seats will have a numerical issues, meaning what are the # of votes needed for the overide; some I have spoken to say they won't have an effect.

Redbaron007 said:

I would concur; but since this bill was originally a Senate Bill, they may want it to pass.

I'm trying to figure out if the two vacant seats will have a numerical issues, meaning what are the # of votes needed for the override; some I have spoken to say they won't have an effect.

Click to expand...

It only took one republican vote to not override a veto last go-around, by a senator that voted for it, before he voted against it.

By my math, every republican must vote to override with two vacancies.

34R, 9D in the senate.

34 - 2= 32R - 9D = 23. 23 is the minimum to override a veto in the senate.

OC for ME said:

It only took one republican vote to not override a veto last go-around, by a senator that voted for it, before he voted against it.

By my math, every republican must vote to override with two vacancies.

25 [strike]34R[/strike], 9D in the senate.

34 - 2= 32 - 9D = 23. 23 is the minimum to override a veto in the senate.

Click to expand...

Sorry

OC for ME said:

It only took one republican vote to not override a veto last go-around, by a senator that voted for it, before he voted against it.

By my math, every republican must vote to override with two vacancies.

34R, 9D in the senate.

34 - 2= 32R - 9D = 23. 23 is the minimum to override a veto in the senate.

Click to expand...

This is one reason Nixon hasn't allowed appointments to these seats. It works to his advantage.

Surely a couple of conservative Dems will roll over....there were only 3 Dems that didn't vote for it initially....a total 28 Senators voted in favor.

If the override was a horse I wouldn't bet on it. Too much behind the scenes skulduggery for this to become law.

Not gonna happen.

Instead of risking the wrath of last year, a couple will just be absent thus allowing a straight party line vote to fail without a nay in the bunch.

We need some brass in the house and senate, some serious brass.

LMTD said:

Not gonna happen.

Instead of risking the wrath of last year, a couple will just be absent thus allowing a straight party line vote to fail without a nay in the bunch.

We need some brass in the house and senate, some serious brass.

Click to expand...

Maybe you need to kick the brass out and reload

LMTD said:

Not gonna happen.

Instead of risking the wrath of last year, a couple will just be absent thus allowing a straight party line vote to fail without a nay in the bunch.

We need some brass in the house and senate, some serious brass.

Click to expand...

Would that be the same 2 that voted no on the over ride last year and put out all the bovine feces about how they would introduce a bill that would be the first to be placed on the floor this year to be voted on but it dragged out to the last week of the session?

9026543 said:

Would that be the same 2 that voted no on the over ride last year and put out all the bovine feces about how they would introduce a bill that would be the first to be placed on the floor this year to be voted on but it dragged out to the last week of the session?

Click to expand...

I am really not in tune with it this year, I suspect they will pick alternate kicking boys this round. Once the other org got fired up and involved we again became an easy trade within the OC ranks.

Just my own speculation is all, they do not want any more direct descent from party line so not showing up gets the goal without the heat and it can be handed off for another round next year in exchange for preferred org agendas...

Might be really bent about it if it were the revision and preempted but this one is kinda odd and the debate over the direction the step takes has merit.

You may want to keep in mind, last year's bill had the nullification portion in it; this year's doesn't. There was apprehension about the nullification portion of the bill last year; hence why two broke ranks and left. Another difference is many more Dems in the Senate and House voted for this bill than last years. Only 3 Senate Dems voted against it this year; last year it was a party line vote initially; except one Dem (IIRC). The House had overwhelming support. If the veto session comes down to only party line votes, then 'NASA we have a problem'.

Now I say all this to say; it is a different bill, however, the outcome could be the same.

This is an election year; so if any of the Senate Dems are under pressure and they need to garner some conservative support, they 'may' jump ship and vote for it again. But on the same side, if they are in a very liberal district and need the liberal vote to overcome another liberal candidate, they may go hardcore. Since I am not educated on all the different districts, especially around St Louis, I'm at a loss on how this will go.

Let's hope there is an override session and this bill is brought up then passed.

It would be nice to have another Rally on the day it is brought up at the Capitol.

Now that Amendment 5 looks safely in the bag, I would humbly recommend that we wait until it's certified, then check out county's BoE for the votes for it, and provide a count to our sitting Senators and Representatives, along with a reminder that the voters' will certainly looks to be clear when it comes to firearm regulation, and if everything in politics was this easy, their jobs would be a lot simpler.