Senate Bill 89, also Genarlow Wilson Amendment

Senate Bill 89 is scheduled for floor debate in the Senate today. For those of you not in Georgia, this is the mutated form of the original Senate Bill 43. Bill 43 would have prevented employers from banning their employees from carrying guns onto company property. It is strongly supported by the national N.R.A. but opposed by the Georgia affililate of the N.R.A. and the Georgia Chamber of Commerce. The national N.R.A. even went so far as to try to subvert the age old legal principle of vicarious liability.

Some say the new bill removes the vicarious liability sacrifice. The N.R.A claims it got everything it wants. After a full day of analysis by the wonks, I'm not sure anyone knows for sure. Perhaps today's debate can elucidate. But given the tragedy in Virginia yesterday, I doubt even such a serene body as the Senate can temper the emotions.

Via the live feed, I plan to live blog the debate. Prepare for the snark.


If they ever get to it.

UPDATE: Georgia Political Digest is reporting the vote may be delayed. Given the length of time spent on the appropriations bill and the sensitivity of the day, I'm predicitng GPD is going to be right.

UPDATE II: Session still not reconvened, but here's an interesting tidbit from the Political Insider.

We’re told that a handful of GOP senators are insisting on a vote — and that Cagle has promised the NRA that the revised bill will come to the floor. Another 10 to 11 senators adamantly oppose moving the bill today or any other day this session.

I can certainly imagine the angst this is causing the Republican leadership but to me the more interesting tidbit is the next paragraph.

The NRA has made the bill a scorecard issue, and promised an ‘F’ to any senator voting against it.

And there you have it. The N.R.A. scorecards are not based on a broad view of a legislator's history for or against gun ownership. It's based solely on whether said legislator is willing to drop trou and grab ankles over the latest piece of looniness dreamed up in a lobbyist think tank. Remember that the next time you consider being influenced by one of these "scorecards".

UPDATE III: Still no SB 89 but the Genarlow Wilson amendment is being presented.

UPDATE IV: I'm really disgusted by the whole thing. Sen. Jones tried to tailor his amendment as narrowly as possible in order to address the abomination that is the Genarlow Wilson case and now he is being pounded that it is too narrow. I hope you are proud Republicans. Smarmy doesn't even begin to describe this.

UPDATE V: Sen. Preston Smith. If you are so damned concerned about the constitutionality of the amendment based on the exclusion of those that pled guilty instead of asking for a jury trial than proffer a damned amendment. Based on the questions this thing is not going to pass. If I were a Republican in this state I would do some deep soul searching over the next year about the antics of your leadership on this matter.

UPDATE VI: Sen. Michael Meyer von Bremen (D-12) rescued Jones on the constitutionality question pointing out exclusions already exist in the current code as amended by this Senate last year. I have a new politician to admire.

UPDATE VII: Instead of Smith proffering an amendment to address the exclusion of pled sentences, David Adelman (D-Decatur) is offering the amendment. By God some Democrats are actually fighting! I'm wandering outside to see if pigs are flying.

UPDATE VIII: HERE'S JOHNSON! The gloves now really come off.

UPDATE IX: Johnson: "Wilson has an offer on the table to plead to a reduced sentence". BECAUSE HE WOULD STILL BE ON THE SEXUAL PREDATOR LIST. Johnson points out that he could conveniently wait the ten years to apply to be removed. Of course he doesn't mention how often that request is denied. Here we go with the second guessing again. Johnson: "We didn't listen to the evidence". But you got to Senator Johnson. For God knows what reason, the prosecutor in the Wilson case gave you the tape. And you and your cohorts have chosen to act as judge, jury and executioner while simultaneously asking others to not.

UPDATE X: Jones is trying to get Johnson to clarify some of his statements. Jones: "Doesn't the amendment simply require the case be reviewed by original judge". Johnson: "Judge could be dead". Can someone find out how much hay they grow in Savannah since Johnson seems so adept at constructing strawmen?

UPDATE XI: Smith is now up again stating the amendment would allow a reduction of the sentence of a conviction of a serious violent felony. THE AMENDMENT SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDES THOSE PARTICIPATING IN VIOLENCE. I am so mad now I could spit nails. Sen. Johnson and Sen. Smith you are not only liars but you are bullies. This is the chamber of reason and decorum? Today it is a sty. With hogs grinning as they roll in their own feces, self-satisfied that there is no world beyond their fence.

UPDATE XII: Two democrats, one who goofily used a Star Trek analogy, have stepped up to explain what this is really about. Redress for those convicted under "Romeo and Juliet" circumstances prior to this very legislative body changing that very law. The two Democrats certainly got sidetracked on some weird stuff but my God, at least they stated what the thing is really about.

UPDATE XIII: Smith is back in the well speaking of the continuing constititutional problems. Just prior to this he talked about how worked so hard with Jones on the amendment. As chair of the Judiciary committee if he worked so damned hard on the amendment, why is he just bringing up all these deadly problems now.

UPDATE XIV: Sen. Weber (R-40) is questioning Smith's position on the constitutionality. A Republican! Might he get some credit from Dekalb Democrats?

UPDATE XV: Amendment 1a fails 30-22. Amendment 1 fails 32-19. It should be noted Weber voted yea on both amendments. I'll look for a full rundown later. I want to say something here. I do not hate Republicans. I enjoy interacting with Republicans. I also attempt to abstain from painting with a broad brush. But right now I don't want to see or hear from any Republicans. I am just too damned disgusted.

UPDATE XVI: Now they are debating Peach care. I just don't have the energy left for this. They aren't going to get to SB89 and I need a drink.