Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

User avatar
rickt
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 3164
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:35 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by rickt »

Maybe I'm reading too much into this but if the Dems agree to support Householder, will he agree to limit what happens in the House regarding gun bills?
Longtime Rep. David Leland (D-Columbus) said with recent bills on abortion and gun rights, he’s open to options besides backing the current speaker.

“Clearly there’s no difference between Smith and Householder, and if Democrats can impact the speaker’s race, then the question is, what can we do for the people we represent?” Leland said.
http://www.statenews.org/post/democrats ... epublicans
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5751
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by schmieg »

rickt wrote:Maybe I'm reading too much into this but if the Dems agree to support Householder, will he agree to limit what happens in the House regarding gun bills?
Longtime Rep. David Leland (D-Columbus) said with recent bills on abortion and gun rights, he’s open to options besides backing the current speaker.

“Clearly there’s no difference between Smith and Householder, and if Democrats can impact the speaker’s race, then the question is, what can we do for the people we represent?” Leland said.
http://www.statenews.org/post/democrats ... epublicans
One thing that you can always count on from a politician is that he will do what is best for himself.
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
MrMagoo
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 1465
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:54 pm
Location: Delaware County

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by MrMagoo »

Senator Beagle sure showed that to be true in his vote not to override the governor's veto of Sub HB 228. From what I read he voted not to override because Kasich has been good to him.

Gary
"The quality of a person's life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence, regardless of their chosen field of endeavor." Vince Lombardi
qmti
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 664
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 2:18 pm

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by qmti »

MrMagoo wrote:Senator Beagle sure showed that to be true in his vote not to override the governor's veto of Sub HB 228. From what I read he voted not to override because Kasich has been good to him.

Gary
If I'm not mistaken, Beagle voted not to override the abortion bill, not the HB228 bill.
User avatar
rickt
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 3164
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:35 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by rickt »

So Householder is willing to give the Dems more power in the House in order to get their votes. I can't help wondering if this will have a negative effect on gun bills this session.
The price of Dem support: According to the Columbus Dispatch’s Jim Siegel, Democrats say they have “discussed issues with Householder that they hope would bring a more bipartisan nature to the House, such as a bipartisan human-resources office, some committee chairmanships, more input in bills that go to the floor, racial sensitivity training for members, and changes to some rules that are used, at times, to further diminish minority influence.”

Sources told cleveland.com that Householder has specifically agreed to name Democratic and Republican co-chairs for some House subcommittees that deal with energy generation, education funding, and criminal justice reform, among other things. Householder has also reportedly agreed to narrow Republicans’ majority on all standing committees to a roughly 60-40 ratio.
https://www.cleveland.com/open/2019/01/ ... etter.html
williaty
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by williaty »

rickt wrote:So Householder is willing to give the Dems more power in the House in order to get their votes. I can't help wondering if this will have a negative effect on gun bills this session.
Dunno. Not sure I'd be too worried about it. I'm that most hated of all things: A liberal gun rights supporter. You guys hate me because I'm a liberal, coastal liberals hate me because I support the 2A. I gotta say, there's a LOT of Ohio liberal and Democrat gun owners. Most of even the non-gun-owning liberals I know just completely don't care about tightening gun control. In Ohio, it's definitely not a voting issue for most liberals. It's the noisy ones who get the TV time so you'd think they're all raving gun-confiscators but in truth the people who actually go vote (and thus can influence which direction the politicians lean), care much more about civil rights than gun bans. The X-factor is the amount of money Bloomberg is willing to throw at his war against gun owners. Money can definitely buy elections (on either side).
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5751
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by schmieg »

williaty wrote:
rickt wrote:So Householder is willing to give the Dems more power in the House in order to get their votes. I can't help wondering if this will have a negative effect on gun bills this session.
Dunno. Not sure I'd be too worried about it. I'm that most hated of all things: A liberal gun rights supporter. You guys hate me because I'm a liberal, coastal liberals hate me because I support the 2A. I gotta say, there's a LOT of Ohio liberal and Democrat gun owners. Most of even the non-gun-owning liberals I know just completely don't care about tightening gun control. In Ohio, it's definitely not a voting issue for most liberals. It's the noisy ones who get the TV time so you'd think they're all raving gun-confiscators but in truth the people who actually go vote (and thus can influence which direction the politicians lean), care much more about civil rights than gun bans. The X-factor is the amount of money Bloomberg is willing to throw at his war against gun owners. Money can definitely buy elections (on either side).
Just because we disagree with you on many issues does not mean we hate you. We may argue vehemently with you, but, with a very few exceptions, the hate seems to be more concentrated on the other side.
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
williaty
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by williaty »

schmieg wrote:
williaty wrote:
rickt wrote:So Householder is willing to give the Dems more power in the House in order to get their votes. I can't help wondering if this will have a negative effect on gun bills this session.
Dunno. Not sure I'd be too worried about it. I'm that most hated of all things: A liberal gun rights supporter. You guys hate me because I'm a liberal, coastal liberals hate me because I support the 2A. I gotta say, there's a LOT of Ohio liberal and Democrat gun owners. Most of even the non-gun-owning liberals I know just completely don't care about tightening gun control. In Ohio, it's definitely not a voting issue for most liberals. It's the noisy ones who get the TV time so you'd think they're all raving gun-confiscators but in truth the people who actually go vote (and thus can influence which direction the politicians lean), care much more about civil rights than gun bans. The X-factor is the amount of money Bloomberg is willing to throw at his war against gun owners. Money can definitely buy elections (on either side).
Just because we disagree with you on many issues does not mean we hate you. We may argue vehemently with you, but, with a very few exceptions, the hate seems to be more concentrated on the other side.
Sadly, it doesn't play out that way in the real world. Every gun range, gun shop, gun show, etc is chocked full of people who go on constantly about what terrible people liberals are and how "people like that aren't welcome here". The forums here and at most other pro-gun-rights internet sites are frequently full of people who talk about what horrible people liberals are, how liberals can't be good people, and how liberals want to destroy America. Even Buckeye Fireams' own communications consistently paint liberals and Democrats as evil, bad, and untrustworthy.

FWIW, this is why the various gun rights groups in Ohio get my vote when I can vote on something relevant, they get my calls and letters to my state and federal congressmen, and get my signature on any petitions but they don't get any of my money. The pro-rights lobby can't separate disagreeing with the common liberal views on gun ownership from demonizing liberals and Democrats. Even when they're doing something I support, I'm not going to give money to someone who, in their next mailing or email calls me a bad person.
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5751
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by schmieg »

williaty wrote:
schmieg wrote:
williaty wrote: Dunno. Not sure I'd be too worried about it. I'm that most hated of all things: A liberal gun rights supporter. You guys hate me because I'm a liberal, coastal liberals hate me because I support the 2A. I gotta say, there's a LOT of Ohio liberal and Democrat gun owners. Most of even the non-gun-owning liberals I know just completely don't care about tightening gun control. In Ohio, it's definitely not a voting issue for most liberals. It's the noisy ones who get the TV time so you'd think they're all raving gun-confiscators but in truth the people who actually go vote (and thus can influence which direction the politicians lean), care much more about civil rights than gun bans. The X-factor is the amount of money Bloomberg is willing to throw at his war against gun owners. Money can definitely buy elections (on either side).
Just because we disagree with you on many issues does not mean we hate you. We may argue vehemently with you, but, with a very few exceptions, the hate seems to be more concentrated on the other side.
Sadly, it doesn't play out that way in the real world. Every gun range, gun shop, gun show, etc is chocked full of people who go on constantly about what terrible people liberals are and how "people like that aren't welcome here". The forums here and at most other pro-gun-rights internet sites are frequently full of people who talk about what horrible people liberals are, how liberals can't be good people, and how liberals want to destroy America. Even Buckeye Fireams' own communications consistently paint liberals and Democrats as evil, bad, and untrustworthy.

FWIW, this is why the various gun rights groups in Ohio get my vote when I can vote on something relevant, they get my calls and letters to my state and federal congressmen, and get my signature on any petitions but they don't get any of my money. The pro-rights lobby can't separate disagreeing with the common liberal views on gun ownership from demonizing liberals and Democrats. Even when they're doing something I support, I'm not going to give money to someone who, in their next mailing or email calls me a bad person.
Conservatives, me included, sometimes have trouble understanding the thought processes of many liberals. Take the abortion issue for instance. One side believes that life is sacred and begins at conception. Abortion is therefore the destruction of an innocent life and is totally abhorrent. On the other side, they see the fetus as a mere blob of protoplasm which the mother may not want. I've never been able to understand why there can be no compromise at least at the time the fetus becomes viable outside of the womb, but, apparently, that it not acceptable either as it is looked at as part of the slippery slope. It is hard for either side to view it objectively and, as a result, rancor enters the argument. You also have to remember that the conservative view has been subjected to calls of racism, misogyny and other nasty things for the last twenty years. Many of us just shrug that off now and actually have come to view the other side as the real racists and misogynists for playing identity politics while doing little that will truly improve the lot of those they champion (at least in our view). Those attacks over the years have made many conservatives resentful and angry which sometimes results in angry responses. Recently my wife and I were included in a group of toothless, intermarried, morons unable to succeed in life by certain Democrat politicians. The fact that we see the dentist twice a year, that I have a Juris Doctor and my wife a Masters in Nursing just doesn't fit their viewpoint. I don't know if society can recover from the divides that have been created. I do know that the name calling and hateful rhetoric tends to backfire, making the target side angry and more determined.
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
williaty
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by williaty »

schmieg wrote:Conservatives, me included, sometimes have trouble understanding the thought processes of many liberals. Take the abortion issue for instance ... I've never been able to understand why there can be no compromise at least at the time the fetus becomes viable outside of the womb, but, apparently, that it not acceptable either as it is looked at as part of the slippery slope.
A major reason the left won't compromise is that the right treats abortion like Bloomberg and Pelosi treat gun control. You're well familiar with the futility of trying to reach a solution that gives both sides a little to like and a little to hate on gun control when Pelosi and Bloomberg are on record saying that if they get an inch they'll take a mile and the final goal is confiscation. The right has done exactly the same thing with abortion. You guys shout loud and clear that the endgame and only acceptable outcome is a complete abortion ban. Why on earth would anyone want to compromise with you when you've said repeatedly that any compromise is just going to be taken as a way to push to a total ban?

More than that, the belief that every human has the fundamental right to control what happens to his or her own body is every bit as important to liberals as the idea that gun ownership is a fundamental right is to conservatives. No one on here wants to move towards California's model of gun control. Why on earth do you think liberals would like the current laws around abortion which, in most states, are worse than California's laws on guns?
You also have to remember that the conservative view has been subjected to calls of racism, misogyny and other nasty things for the last twenty years.
American conservatives have let their worst elements dominate their voice in the national conversation for the last 30 years. By not shouting down the most extreme elements on the right, your public image has become that of the worst people in your camp. Since Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich, the right has let the homophobes, racists, misogynists, adulterers, and bigots be their representatives on the national stage. When you fail to silence the people who claim to speak for you and speak horrible things, you let yourselves be painted with the same brush. You (the collective you), by failing to object loudly, clearly, and repeatedly when horrible (note that I DON'T mean that they're horrible because they're conservatives, all of them have serious moral failings personally), Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and Mike Pence (and so, so many others) claim to be supported by you, you ensure that the rest of the world views you as supporting the things bad people do. When the president is on tape bragging about sexual assault, every conservative has a moral obligation to stand up and say "That is not a conservative value!" and boot the criminal out of the party. When an advisor to the president is a white supremacist, every conservative has a moral obligation to stand up and say "That is not a conservative value and is not a Christian value." and boot that person out of the party. However, the right has currently decided that party unity and strength is more important than living up to moral values. Until that changes, the rest of the world is going to perceive the average American conservative as part of the problem.

The left has a big problem with this too but I think we're a few years ahead on addressing it. When someone gets on Tumblr or a talking-head TV channel and says something particularly stupid, the left is getting better at shouting down the idiots. The most recent case in point is the idiocy about "Baby It's Cold Outside" this year where some young nutjobs who lacked historical context raised a big fuss about the song but within a few days we had pushback from more moderate liberals by both providing historical context demonstrating that the song didn't mean what the kids thought and also telling the kids to stop acting outraged over something that didn't matter. Within the liberal camp, there's a lot of this happening these days. Some group will get wound up about something stupid and everyone else will throw wads of paper at them and tell them to sit down and stop being stupid.
User avatar
rickt
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 3164
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:35 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by rickt »

Larry Householder has been elected speaker. If a red flag law starts making more movement through the House than one would normally expect from a body controlled by Republicans, we will know what kind of deal he cut with the Dems.
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5751
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by schmieg »

williaty wrote:
schmieg wrote:Conservatives, me included, sometimes have trouble understanding the thought processes of many liberals. Take the abortion issue for instance ... I've never been able to understand why there can be no compromise at least at the time the fetus becomes viable outside of the womb, but, apparently, that it not acceptable either as it is looked at as part of the slippery slope.
A major reason the left won't compromise is that the right treats abortion like Bloomberg and Pelosi treat gun control. You're well familiar with the futility of trying to reach a solution that gives both sides a little to like and a little to hate on gun control when Pelosi and Bloomberg are on record saying that if they get an inch they'll take a mile and the final goal is confiscation. The right has done exactly the same thing with abortion. You guys shout loud and clear that the endgame and only acceptable outcome is a complete abortion ban. Why on earth would anyone want to compromise with you when you've said repeatedly that any compromise is just going to be taken as a way to push to a total ban?

More than that, the belief that every human has the fundamental right to control what happens to his or her own body is every bit as important to liberals as the idea that gun ownership is a fundamental right is to conservatives. No one on here wants to move towards California's model of gun control. Why on earth do you think liberals would like the current laws around abortion which, in most states, are worse than California's laws on guns?
You also have to remember that the conservative view has been subjected to calls of racism, misogyny and other nasty things for the last twenty years.
American conservatives have let their worst elements dominate their voice in the national conversation for the last 30 years. By not shouting down the most extreme elements on the right, your public image has become that of the worst people in your camp. Since Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich, the right has let the homophobes, racists, misogynists, adulterers, and bigots be their representatives on the national stage. When you fail to silence the people who claim to speak for you and speak horrible things, you let yourselves be painted with the same brush. You (the collective you), by failing to object loudly, clearly, and repeatedly when horrible (note that I DON'T mean that they're horrible because they're conservatives, all of them have serious moral failings personally), Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and Mike Pence (and so, so many others) claim to be supported by you, you ensure that the rest of the world views you as supporting the things bad people do. When the president is on tape bragging about sexual assault, every conservative has a moral obligation to stand up and say "That is not a conservative value!" and boot the criminal out of the party. When an advisor to the president is a white supremacist, every conservative has a moral obligation to stand up and say "That is not a conservative value and is not a Christian value." and boot that person out of the party. However, the right has currently decided that party unity and strength is more important than living up to moral values. Until that changes, the rest of the world is going to perceive the average American conservative as part of the problem.

The left has a big problem with this too but I think we're a few years ahead on addressing it. When someone gets on Tumblr or a talking-head TV channel and says something particularly stupid, the left is getting better at shouting down the idiots. The most recent case in point is the idiocy about "Baby It's Cold Outside" this year where some young nutjobs who lacked historical context raised a big fuss about the song but within a few days we had pushback from more moderate liberals by both providing historical context demonstrating that the song didn't mean what the kids thought and also telling the kids to stop acting outraged over something that didn't matter. Within the liberal camp, there's a lot of this happening these days. Some group will get wound up about something stupid and everyone else will throw wads of paper at them and tell them to sit down and stop being stupid.
Not all conservatives are absolutists on abortion and I would bet that a majority of the country, both Dems and Repubs, would favor a reasonable compromise on that. The problem is that moderates are drowned out by both sides on that and many other issues.

The current socialist drive on the left totally demonstrates that lack of historical context.
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by Chuck »

williaty wrote:
rickt wrote:So Householder is willing to give the Dems more power in the House in order to get their votes. I can't help wondering if this will have a negative effect on gun bills this session.
Dunno. Not sure I'd be too worried about it. I'm that most hated of all things: A liberal gun rights supporter.
I have several friends who fit into that category, farmers, gays, teachers, accountants, you know, friends!
Personally, I hate labeling people.

On another note, I want to make a prediction:
I predict that Larry Householder will preside over the passage of Constitutional Carry.
It might now happen this session, where he had to make concessions to the other party.
But it will happen before he is term limited out, or someone else beats him for Speaker.
I base this on conversations I've had with him over the last year or so
You heard it here first
Ain't activism fun?

"Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. " - George Washington

"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something.
And because I can not do everything, I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of GOD, I will do."
- Edward Everett Hale (descendant of Nathan Hale)
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by JustaShooter »

Chuck wrote:On another note, I want to make a prediction:
I predict that Larry Householder will preside over the passage of Constitutional Carry.
It might now happen this session, where he had to make concessions to the other party.
But it will happen before he is term limited out, or someone else beats him for Speaker.
I base this on conversations I've had with him over the last year or so
You heard it here first
Any thoughts on whether it would be true constitutional carry - repeal of gun laws prohibiting possession or carry by LACs - or "unlicensed carry" where existing gun laws remain intact and language is added to the law to treat LACs as "licensed"?
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: Will Dems cut deal to tilt Speaker's race?

Post by Chuck »

I can only prognosticate that the longer it takes the better the bill will be, due to whatever concessions the other party got

I could also be wrong as heck too
Ain't activism fun?

"Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. " - George Washington

"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something.
And because I can not do everything, I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of GOD, I will do."
- Edward Everett Hale (descendant of Nathan Hale)
Post Reply