North Dakota Fishing and Hunting Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
843 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was wondering what happens now. Here's what I found:

If the bill passes, it is messaged (delivered) to the other house, where a similar procedure is followed. If the bill is amended in the other house, it is returned to the house of origin for concurrence. If the house of origin does not concur, the presiding officer of each house appoints three members to a six-member conference committee to resolve differences. The house of origin votes on the conference committee report first, then the other house votes on the conference committee report.
Once a bill has passed both houses in exactly the same form, it is enrolled (retyped with all amendments in place) by the Legislative Council staff, signed by the presiding officer of each house, and delivered to the Governor for approval.
The Governor may sign a bill and forward it to the Secretary of State, forward a bill to the Secretary of State without signature, or veto a bill or items in a bill. While the Legislative Assembly is in session, a bill becomes law if the Governor neither signs nor vetoes it within three legislative days after its delivery to the Governor. If the Legislative Assembly is not in session, a bill becomes law if the Governor neither signs nor vetoes it within 15 days, Saturdays and Sundays excepted, after its delivery to the Governor. If the Governor vetoes a bill while the Legislative Assembly is in session, the Governor must return the bill to the house of origin for a vote on whether to sustain (agree with) the veto. If the house of origin passes the bill by a two-thirds vote of the members-elect, the bill is sent to the other house and if that house passes the bill by a two-thirds vote of the members-elect, the veto is overridden and the bill is delivered to the Secretary of State.
Needless to say all sorts of mischief can still happen if we don't keep a watchful eye on the situation.

M.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,949 Posts
Rap good to see someone from your area interested in this issue. I have sent my Reps e-mails and had all of them repond favorably. We need to remeber that if this gets riddled with amendments and other issues that it may not shine as bright the next time it reaches the senate if it reaches the senate.The committee route may be a very dangerous place for this to end up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
The lastest I 've heard was that there is no support in the house...our local rep is against it and has said the support isn't there based on the 1307 vote....he had said it will be modified.

I hope 1307 went down because it was a bad bill, not due to an anti-cap feeling in the house.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
Dan....the only real support cited was that they rejected 1307....so the house is against caps
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,506 Posts
The NO's to 1307 fall into two camps - those that prefer 2048 and those this will also vote against 2048. I think the former outweigh the latter, but there's a good chunck of the latter too. 2048 will boil down to the YES's from 1307. Some of the YES's were only 1307 backers and will not support 2048, but another bunch of the YES's are looking for a resolution of this issue, and could get behind 2048.

Offerings for a substantial bill blend have been made, but unnaccepted. Doesn't leave much choice, does it? It ought not be a win/loose where there's opportunities for compromise as is the case here, but you can't compromise with those who's compromise position is no compromise.

Don't get me wrong, 2048 is going to be nip and tuck in the House too. If we stay responsible, respectful and diligent, I think we can get 2048 through as-is if we have to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
I've even heard something as ridiculous as exempting the lake region from any caps...so we can have a big free-for-all on all this open land up here!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,645 Posts
Dan has the right take on what is coming for 2048. Nip and tuck but it can be won. Remember when the Alliance brought the first bill, (1269?), two years ago. It passed the house but failed the senate. This time we are by the senate and have compromised already. Some people have no idea of a compromise.

From the start it has been a rollercoaster, the advisory meetings on HPC-passed. The Judicary B hearing for HPC-passed. The Senate NRC hearing for HPC-passed, and now the sentate passed it. Stay involved and it can get through the house too. When folks went up to testify at the SNR-HNRC hearings we had a fair turnout. Rest assured next time the opposition will be there with bells on. We need to be there too.

What the opposition fails to realize is 2048 can be win-win. The alternative is an initiated measure, voted on during hunting season, early Nov., that would be far more restrictive for non-resident slash outfitter issues.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
NDJ...There was a movement to make the northern zone with no caps.I heard it from my Reps.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,506 Posts
Amen to Dick's observation about the effort necessary on 2048. Anyone who is concerned about the future of waterfowling in ND should plan to take a day off from work/school in the next two-three weeks for the 2048 hearing in the HNRC. That might cost you a day of hunting this fall, but is an investment to assure days of hunting in the future. As soon as the HNRC 2048 date is announced, it'll get passed along. But, we'll need bodies by the hundreds there for the strong showing it will take on 2048.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
843 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I tend to believe the political winds are starting to back sportsmen. The economic issue has been overwhelmingly in the sportsmen's favor. The preservation (public trust) of natural resources thhat belong to everyone argument is getting louder. The outfitter arguments based on greed and virulence have been effectively countered by sportsmen 's insistence for compromise and balance. Even legislators are saying we're not closeing the borders, only steming an unbridled explosion.

Only the "we must encourage tourism" argument has substantial life to it, and even I'll sign on when they start promoting Duck Hunting Photo Safaris, where you trade your Browning for a Nikon, no licenses, no limits, and you can keep your bag forever. No need to use the dumpster. It's almost funny that the tourism forces in the most backward third world countries are far ahead of the tourism forces in ND.

They could use the slogan "Shoot them with a Cannon" - probably appeal to a much larger crowd than just murderous hunters... The guides and outfitters might even make more $$$ taking soccer-moms and Banana-Republic Journalist-Vest wearing dads out for photo safaris. Now that's some serious tourism money, and they could do it more months of the year. Isn't bird watching and bird feeding a much larger industry than hunting already? Where is ND's share of that???

M.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,481 Posts
Your right Dan...hundreds will be needed.I hope I can get there.One of the arguments during the debate on the Senate floor was that this is something pushed by a SMALL group of discontented hunters.Another Senator stood up and said if that were true they must all be from his district.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
533 Posts
I agree with Dan--those of us who can need to walk the walk and show up to show our support. I recommend a Nodakoutdoors.com get together the night before in Bismarck--get together to drink a few lemonades and talk hunting and then show up en masse the next day. It could be fun.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top