SB93 As it sits on Walker's desk?

[CalicoJack10]

I am wondering if anyone out there knows the link to the amended version of SB93 with the training provisions and all of that. Basically the bill as it sits on Walker's desk.

I had a good friend that is looking to start something great for WCI members. And before I can get it worked out I need a complete copy of the bill as it is now. Thanks for any help.

 

[Teej]

I am wondering if anyone out there knows the link to the amended version of SB93 with the training provisions and all of that. Basically the bill as it sits on Walker's desk.

I had a good friend that is looking to start something great for WCI members. And before I can get it worked out I need a complete copy of the bill as it is now. Thanks for any help.

Here's the version as enrolled:

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/enrolled/sb93

 

[CalicoJack10]

Thanks, I really appreciate it.

 

[Teej]

Side note...they're using some goofy dhtml or something so that it doesn't load all the way. Gotta scroll to the bottom about 30 times before you cut & paste if that's what you're intending.

Loading the page and doing a 'select all' won't do it. Can't even 'search' the whole document until you scroll all the way down.

Also available as PDF

 

[CalicoJack10]

I got what I was looking for, I only needed a section out of it. And it took me a few, but I got it. I appreciate the help.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

I am wondering if anyone out there knows the link to the amended version of SB93 with the training provisions and all of that. Basically the bill as it sits on Walker's desk.

I had a good friend that is looking to start something great for WCI members. And before I can get it worked out I need a complete copy of the bill as it is now. Thanks for any help.

Here is a PDF https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/enrolled/sb93.pdf and a slight correction. It is NOT on Walkers desk. It is still in the Senate. The way it works is that the Clerk of the Senate will send it over to the Governor either when Walker asks for it or August 4, whichever is earlier. That is when the 6 day timer starts.

 

[MKEgal]

a slight correction. It is NOT on Walkers desk. It is still in the Senate. The way it works is that the Clerk of the Senate will send it over to the Governor either when Walker asks for it or August 4, whichever is earlier. That is when the 6 day timer starts.

WHAT?? :shocker:
I thought the Assembly voted to send it to Walker?
So we need to be emailing him to get him to "ask for it", so it can be signed, so it can wait the full 10 days to be published, & still be in July, so it takes effect 01NOV.
:cuss:

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

WHAT?? :shocker:
I thought the Assembly voted to send it to Walker?
So we need to be emailing him to get him to "ask for it", so it can be signed, so it can wait the full 10 days to be published, & still be in July, so it takes effect 01NOV.
:cuss:

I believe as long as he signs it by July 16th we are good. The interview I heard with him, he said 'after the 4th', I read it as 'shortly after the 4th'.

 

[XD40-OD]

I believe as long as he signs it by July 16th we are good. The interview I heard with him, he said 'after the 4th', I read it as 'shortly after the 4th'.

Signing it on the 4th, if he's in his office, would be epic if you ask me.

Patriotism at its finest

 

[Teej]

WHAT?? :shocker:
I thought the Assembly voted to send it to Walker?
So we need to be emailing him to get him to "ask for it", so it can be signed, so it can wait the full 10 days to be published, & still be in July, so it takes effect 01NOV.
:cuss:

I've posted on this repeatedly. It wasn't in the Assembly's jurisdiction to send it to Walker. It was a Senate bill.

It was messaged back to the Senate as concurred, and "enrolled" in the list of passed legislation. It is not "On Walker's desk" until they formally submit it, which hasn't happened. That will happen either when he asks for it or on August 4th, whichever comes first. (and it certainly looks like it'll be in the next few days so that he can sign it "shortly after 7/4".)

The "6 days" doesn't start until the Senate submits it to him.

 

[CalicoJack10]

I think he is playing games. It would not take that much to get his signature on it like he promised. This has been more than 16 years in the making, and making us wait 4 months is insulting enough, not to mention having to wait until he gets around to it. He doesn't seem to realize that this is the primary issue that got him elected, and now he is pandering to the ones that would see this bill die. I think that we need to send a clear message to him that says he is in the same boat as those we demanded actions of during the creation and voting on this bill.

But when we do, we have to do it peacefully and without backing down. It is our state, not the politicians. Though we thought we had made it clear to them that we have the power to take their position from them, odviously there are some that didn't get the message. I said the fight was not over, and I was rite. Don't give up yet.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

.....He doesn't seem to realize that this is the primary issue that got him elected, ....

Really? I would of voted for him over Barrett even if he said he would veto ANY carry bill. Having him say he would sign ANY concealed carry bill that hit is desk was just a bonus.

 

[Brass Magnet]

I've been reading through the bill again and man that thing is a mess. Of course it's mostly a mess because the statutes it's "fixing" are a mess too. I just don't understand why they couldn't have their silly permit and still repeal most of that crap. Ugh...

 

[HandyHamlet]

Really? Having him say he would sign ANY concealed carry bill that hit is desk was just a bonus.

It wasn't a "bonus" in my book. Where I come from that is called a lie. A big fat one too considering how important this bill is to the voters. And him gloating about it on TV is totally gauche. He is supposed to look directly at the camera and say " I had NOTHING to do with the changes to the bill" with a straight face. At least that's how a REAL politician would do it. My hardline opinion.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

It wasn't a "bonus" in my book. Where I come from that is called a lie. A big fat one too considering how important this bill is to the voters.

I believe you misunderstood my statement. I meant from day one, not if he changed his tune. If, for example, he vetoes it or changes it in any detrimental way, I will consider it a lie as well.

 

[jpm84092]

Beware the line-veto!

 

[Gunslinger]

I think he is playing games. It would not take that much to get his signature on it like he promised. This has been more than 16 years in the making, and making us wait 4 months is insulting enough, not to mention having to wait until he gets around to it. He doesn't seem to realize that this is the primary issue that got him elected, and now he is pandering to the ones that would see this bill die. I think that we need to send a clear message to him that says he is in the same boat as those we demanded actions of during the creation and voting on this bill.

But when we do, we have to do it peacefully and without backing down. It is our state, not the politicians. Though we thought we had made it clear to them that we have the power to take their position from them, odviously there are some that didn't get the message. I said the fight was not over, and I was rite. Don't give up yet.

He will sign the bill. That's the bottom line. You waited 16 years to get a governor who believes in the Constitution and individuals' liberties. Kind of dumb to knock him three days after the bill was enrolled. It's probably not even printed in final format yet. Would you have preferred the pos democrap be governor? Or the ******* you had before? I suggest you count your blessings, not carp about nit nois when you finally have someone who treats you like citizens, not subjects. Take a look south. That seem better?

 

[Teej]

Beware the line-veto!

This isn't an appropriations bill.

Appropriations means spending bill. Budget bill. not just a bill that has a fiscal component.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

OK folks, we all seem to be in a frenzy. We need to calm down.

Here is an example of a bill that was passed by both houses and then line item vetoed by the governor. This is the budget bill. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/proposals/ab40

Notice, it has a line that says "Presented to the Governor on 6-24-2011"

Look at SB93. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/proposals/sb93

The last line so far says "Report correctly enrolled on 6-23-2011", so, it hasn't been presented. As people keep saying, the way things work in WI is that it isn't sent to the Governor unless the Governor asks for it or hits the scheduled date for bills to be sent. In this case, according to http://legis.wisconsin.gov/leginfo/session.htm the next time stuff is scheduled to be sent is August 4, 2011. I would ASSuME Walker will ask for it before then. When it gets sent, that is when the 6 day counter starts.

Reading a vast conspiracy into this is counter productive and makes us look like loons. While I wanted it signed the day he took office, government is generally slow.

 

[davegran]

....

The last line so far says "Report correctly enrolled on 6-23-2011", so, it hasn't been presented. As people keep saying, the way things work in WI is that it isn't sent to the Governor unless the Governor asks for it or hits the scheduled date for bills to be sent. In this case, according to http://legis.wisconsin.gov/leginfo/session.htm the next time stuff is scheduled to be sent is August 4, 2011. I would ASSuME Walker will ask for it before then. When it gets sent, that is when the 6 day counter starts.

....

I understood him to say that he would sign it shortly after July 4th. Is that a false quote?