Utah Guns Forum banner

Veto override deadline is Friday.

4K views 19 replies 13 participants last post by  Liberty Nut 
#1 ·
The veto override deadline is this Friday. This is our last effort to contact our state legislators and tell them to ask for a veto override session to pass HB 76. A recent Trib article suggest that the State Senate does not yet have the 2/3 vote necessary.

I have had Senators tell me that they don't see their e-mails because they are usually overrun with spam so you will need to call them.

I have worked too hard for a Constitutional Carry bill to watch it die because of one man.
 
#2 ·
The trib is saying that they have confirmed with 10 Senators who are voting to NOT hold an override session which would be enough to block the session from happening.

Senator Valentine being the 10th confirmed NO vote.

I can't find a list of all the No's but hopefully it will come out publicly.

Edit:

Looks like Sen Valentine was swayed by LEO's and instructors trying to preserve their business...(at least that's how I read it) https://twitter.com/RobertGehrke/status ... 8607234048
 
#3 ·
If we do not remove John Valentine and Gary Herbert from public office, we are fools and deserve what we get.

It is critical that we concentrate everything we have state wide on getting rid of these two and then hold press conferences making it very public why they lost!
 
#4 ·
Sen. Valentine has never responded to any of my attempts to Communicate with him as one of his constituents!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#6 ·
Here is the list from the Trib of those opposed to overriding the veto, in addition to Sen. Valentine:

Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo

Sen. Jim Dabakis, D-Salt Lake City

Sen. Gene Davis, D-Salt Lake City

Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan

Sen. Pat Jones, D-Holladay

Sen. Karen Mayne, D-West Valley City

Sen. Ralph Okerlund, R-Monroe

Sen. Luz Robles, D-Salt Lake City

Sen. Brian Shiozawa, R-Cottonwood Heights

Something to remember, and revive, come re-election time...... :disgusted:
 
#7 ·
Liberty Nut said:
Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan
Something to remember, and revive, come re-election time...... :disgusted:
+1 :disgusted:
 
#8 ·
JoeSparky said:
Sen. Valentine has never responded to any of my attempts to Communicate with him as one of his constituents!
I amn't surprised. Sen. Valentine has consistently appeared to me to be one of the most distant legislators during his tenure ... except to LEAs. However, there is one way which I learned about years ago to get his attention. In 1993 and 1994, he sponsored bills to require HIV testing of individuals who significantly exposed other individuals including public-safety officers or emergency-medical service providers to HIV during the performance of their duties. I lobbied successfully each year against the adoption of the bills because they didn't protect medical privacy. In 1995, he asked me if there was anything he could do about the bill to ensure my support. I asked him a third time to include medical-privacy protection in his bill. He agreed and it was adopted.

In other words, he deals only when his only other alternative is failure (not a good trait for a legislator). I suggest finding one of his future bills which can be used as leverage against his LEA-approved anti-gun votes. Teach him that his opposition to a veto-override of H.B. 76 will cost him in the future, and he might see the light.
 
#9 ·
SSSU said:
Teach him that his opposition to a veto-override of H.B. 76 will cost him in the future, and he might see the light.
OK, let him know that the only NRA-EVC in the state will be actively working to replace him unless he fights for this NRA endorsed bill.
 
#10 ·
I emailed Curt Bramble about this yesterday, and he responded with his personal cell phone number. I called and had almost an hour-long conversation with him about his blocking the veto override session, and simply, his argument comes down to process. He argued that the legislature should have been more transparent with HB 76 -- for example, it did not have a public comment session in the Senate, only in the House.

He was swayed -- slightly -- with the "any expansion of freedom is a good thing" argument, but still, he will refuse to vote for the override session. But, if the override session happens, he will vote in favor of overwriting the veto.

Interestingly, he did mention that he's had about 500 emails on the topic, and that he's responded to each one with "here's my number; call me and we can chat" -- however, he said that I was the only person who actually took him up on the deal. He hasn't had a single phone conversation with anyone other than me.
 
#11 ·
UnderratedF00l said:
I emailed Curt Bramble about this yesterday, and he responded with his personal cell phone number. I called and had almost an hour-long conversation with him about his blocking the veto override session, and simply, his argument comes down to process. He argued that the legislature should have been more transparent with HB 76 -- for example, it did not have a public comment session in the Senate, only in the House.

He was swayed -- slightly -- with the "any expansion of freedom is a good thing" argument, but still, he will refuse to vote for the override session. But, if the override session happens, he will vote in favor of overwriting the veto.

Interestingly, he did mention that he's had about 500 emails on the topic, and that he's responded to each one with "here's my number; call me and we can chat" -- however, he said that I was the only person who actually took him up on the deal. He hasn't had a single phone conversation with anyone other than me.
Interesting. Over the weekend one of the folks involved in the leadership of one of the pro-RKBA groups reported to me via email that he had visited with Sen. Bramble for an hour and been told that the reason Bramble opposed the veto override was "lingering emotion" from Newtown...along with But hey, I'm sure what Sen. Bramble meant was that of the 500 emails he sent, only you had responded with a phone call. Yes, that is honest. :disgusted:

Senator Bramble is a master debater. He is very well versed in his art. But I'm reminded why one of my favorite definitions of "lying" is simply, "ANY communication intended to leave a false or inaccurate impression." It is why the oath in court is not merely to tell the truth, but to tell the "whole truth and nothing but the truth."

Let us remember that Senator Bramble was the Senate sponsor of (one of) the only anti-RKBA bill to pass this session, HB50. That bill makes it dramatically easier for a gun owner to lose his RKBA (for 6 months) due to a "protective order". These orders are issued without benefit of any criminal trial, much less conviction; and the person subject to them is not afforded the full rights of the criminally accused. Some gun groups had worked with the sponsor to lesson how bad the effects on RKBA were, and so were more or less obliged not to oppose the final bill once they got some concessions. However, GOUtah! openly and actively opposed the bill and I personally expressed my opposition and concern to Sen. Bramble. He carried the bill to passage anyway.

Then, he turned around and on the last two days of the session, personally killed Paul Ray's disorderly-conduct-fix bill, HB 268 S1. Bramble was the Senate floor sponsor and asked his colleagues to "circle" the bill, delaying action on it. He claimed he did this because he was surprised to learn that there was law enforcement opposition to the bill he was not previously aware of. Never mind that he had had the bill in the Senate for well over a week when he circled it, that no law enforcement groups changed position in that time, and that only one law enforcement group opposed the bill, others had taken a neutral position after having received certain concessions in the House. At the 11th hour, Sen. Mark Madsen took over floor sponsorship of HB 268 so as to try to save the bill, but by then it was too late. Sen. Bramble had, single handedly, killed one of the two most important pro-RKBA bill in the last session.

Notice that the exact reason he gave for killing HB 268 by preventing it from even getting a vote, was insufficient reason for him to even vote against, much less take any significant action to defeat HB 50, or even to amend it further (which admittedly would have killed it). Hmm. Double standard on his part?

Now, he has almost single handedly killed our constitutional carry bill by being one of only 10 Senators (and one of only 5 Republicans to join the Senate Democrat caucus) to go on record as opposing the veto over-ride session.

Then he turns around and claims he'd vote for the bill if the over-ride took place? Cheap words. The vote that matters is the vote to over ride that few voters will ever see. Once the over-ride is in session and the bill is likely to pass, I can easily imagine at least one other person on that list would vote to over-ride just to avoid being so publicly outed as being anti-RKBA. (This is the same situation, in reverse, as those dishonest/gutless US Senators who would vote against certain gun grabbing bills on the final vote where their vote won't affect the outcome, but who refused to support the initial filibuster where their vote did matter. Thank heaven the second filibuster held and the gun grabbing, universal registration scheme didn't come up for an actual vote.)

He claims he votes against the over-ride because the bill didn't get a senate hearing? But he would vote for the final bill if the over-ride is held? Why? On what logic? Anyone who knows legislative procedure knows that the vote on the session is as material to passing the bill as the vote on the bill itself. Not to mention, how many other bills did Senator Bramble support in the final days of the session that did not have a hearing in both houses? For that matter, did he not vote for the bill in the Senate on the floor even though it didn't have a senate hearing? Would he have us believe that a veto somehow means that retroactively a bill must have been through hearings in both houses to be legitimate?

He is very artful in his craft.

And sadly, he can afford to be on this issue because we have failed to ever inflict any real political consequences on him for his past actions that have been, in some cases, shall we say, less than helpful to our cause.

If we don't find someone credible to challenge and replace him, we deserve to have him continue stabbing us in the back--or even front--whenever he wants...all while claiming to be very "pro-gun".

If anyone lives in his district and would be open to running against him, let me know. If anyone knows someone who lives in his district that might be drafted to run against him, let me know. The only place a challenge has any hope of being effective is in the GOP convention. But you can't beat somebody with nobody. So until we have a warm body willing to run, phone calls and emails mean nothing anymore. Political pressure can only be applied if there is some credible threat of actual political consequences at the ballot box.

Charles Hardy
GOUtah!
 
#12 ·
I emailed my legislator a few times about this and received no response. But they voted no for the bill the first time around so i don't expect them to vote for a veto override.
 
#13 ·
Sam Fidler said:
OK, let him know that the only NRA-EVC in the state will be actively working to replace him unless he fights for this NRA endorsed bill.
With all due respect, if someone has to tell him that he is being opposed, the opposition is pretty empty.

He has cast his vote on the over-ride session. With 10 Senators opposed, the session doesn't happen and the bill is dead.

The only thing we can do now is to work to make sure that there are political consequences for those who opposed passage of this bill. The only consequence that really matters just happens to be the only one we can materially affect and that is re-election bids. But one of the fundamental rules of politics is that you can't beat somebody with nobody.

So NOW is the time to start reaching out to those who live in his district to find someone to challenge him.

This person need not be a gun nut. Heck, they need not even be very good on our issue at all (though someone who is solidly pro-RKBA/pro-self-defense is certainly nicer to have than someone who isn't). The person simply needs to be willing to challenge Valentine. He has proven he will vote against us when it really counts. So even someone who slightly opposed to RKBA and would vote against us most all of the time would not be materially worse.

But we need someone to challenge him and in many cases, a person whose main reason for being unhappy with the incumbent is something over than guns can actually be a better candidate as he is likely to reach out to more voters. Imagine a guy is neutral to moderately good on RKBA but who is really unhappy with how the incumbent has voted on some very broad issue like taxes, or education. He can reach out directly to all those who are also unhappy with the incumbent's votes on those issues, while the RKBA community works "behind the scenes" as it were, to rally support among gun owners.

So start looking for those you know--regardless of whether they are super strong on RKBA--who live in his district and might be willing to run against him. A GOP convention challenge can be quite doable. But we need a candidate. And regardless of where that candidate stands on RKBA, he will need to run on a platform that is wider than just RKBA.

We expect the current crop of democrats in the legislature to vote against RKBA every chance they get. The five republicans who voted against the veto-over-ride, and Gov. Herbert need to be the ones to feel some political ramifications. I have no doubt that there will be many GOP challengers to Herbert. And running a credible race for governor, even in convention, is at least 30 times more difficult than running a credible race for State Senate just based on number of delegates. Consider the level of competition, and it is probably closer to 100 time more difficult. But put the other way, it is about 100 times easier to run a credible race for State Senate than for governor.

As "leadership" (or at least senior members) Bramble, and Valentine should be the highest priorities.

Charles
 
#14 ·
Wrong I emailed Senator Bramble he never replied to my email.

Second I spoke with him on the last day of the session right before he killed the bill sb268s1 he told me what I wanted to hear. Then he killed the bill no respect for the man.

questions comments problems call anytime 8014487574
 
#15 ·
Utah_patriot said:
Wrong I emailed Senator Bramble he never replied to my email.

Second I spoke with him on the last day of the session right before he killed the bill sb268s1 he told me what I wanted to hear. Then he killed the bill no respect for the man.
Might be fun for 5 or 6 from the forumn to attend Bramble's next town hall meeting, or cottage meetings next election cycle. They would need to be very careful to neither take the bait to get offensive, nor to back down in the face of fairly aggressive language and posture. Bramble is from Chicago and is very good at politics and political debate. He can make the other guy look like the crazy aggressor, or flip to be aggressive and intimidating when the nice touch isn't working.

But for the right few guys, could be fun to show up at a few of his campaign events with some uncomfortable questions.

Charles
 
#16 ·
My wife and I crew for hot air balloons and he is in Provo every year for the 4th of July celebration. Just look for the Alexanders print shop balloon. Btw, he is a (insert any derogatory comment) :shock: . The balloon community hates him with a passion.
 
#17 ·
bagpiper said:
Might be fun for 5 or 6 from the forumn to attend Bramble's next town hall meeting, or cottage meetings next election cycle. They would need to be very careful to neither take the bait to get offensive, nor to back down in the face of fairly aggressive language and posture. Bramble is from Chicago and is very good at politics and political debate. He can make the other guy look like the crazy aggressor, or flip to be aggressive and intimidating when the nice touch isn't working.

But for the right few guys, could be fun to show up at a few of his campaign events with some uncomfortable questions.
I would love to be a member of that group. Last year I was represented by Senator Dayton (who introduced Utah's FFA), then with the re-districting I'm in Senator Bramble's district. Even though I know very little of his history, I'm extremely displeased by his behavior on HB76. So if some of you who have some more history with him will give me some good info, I would love to politely ask him some pointed questions.
 
#18 ·
manithree said:
bagpiper said:
Might be fun for 5 or 6 from the forumn to attend Bramble's next town hall meeting, or cottage meetings next election cycle. They would need to be very careful to neither take the bait to get offensive, nor to back down in the face of fairly aggressive language and posture. Bramble is from Chicago and is very good at politics and political debate. He can make the other guy look like the crazy aggressor, or flip to be aggressive and intimidating when the nice touch isn't working.

But for the right few guys, could be fun to show up at a few of his campaign events with some uncomfortable questions.
I would love to be a member of that group.
Count me in. Especially so, now that you've given me some back story -- I appreciate that, Charles.
 
#19 ·
manithree said:
I would love to be a member of that group. Last year I was represented by Senator Dayton (who introduced Utah's FFA), then with the re-districting I'm in Senator Bramble's district. Even though I know very little of his history, I'm extremely displeased by his behavior on HB76. So if some of you who have some more history with him will give me some good info, I would love to politely ask him some pointed questions.
The real question is would you make a half-way credible GOP challenger to Bramble next time he is up for re-election?

If not, who do you know in the district who would?

Charles
 
#20 ·
bagpiper said:
manithree said:
I would love to be a member of that group. Last year I was represented by Senator Dayton (who introduced Utah's FFA), then with the re-districting I'm in Senator Bramble's district. Even though I know very little of his history, I'm extremely displeased by his behavior on HB76. So if some of you who have some more history with him will give me some good info, I would love to politely ask him some pointed questions.
The real question is would you make a half-way credible GOP challenger to Bramble next time he is up for re-election?

If not, who do you know in the district who would?

Charles
Couldn't that work into a poetic kick-off event? Under the right circumstances, we could possibly make it down from Cache valley just for some "spontaneous" enthusiastic support...... :raiseflag:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top