Guns In Public Buildings Killed

On Monday, June 19, the Legislature held a Special Session to consider vetoed bills and address funding issues not concluded during the regular session which ended May 3d.

Normally, these trailer sessions have little to do with sportsmen's issues, but lobbyists are wise to be apprehensive and a little
paranoid - presence at the session is mandatory - anything can happen.

Several calls the previous week questioning content of the Emergency Certified bills indicated little, since negotiations between Republican and Democrat leadership were "secret."

On the way to the Capitol, a cell phone call was received from home indicating Rep. Ron San Angelo had called with the message, "Trouble. Get here immediately." At that point it was probable "No Guns in Public Buildings" was a part of some bill (HB 6001, An Act Implementing And Making Technical Revisions to the State Budget..) which was printed that morning. Only Sen. Sullivan as President Pro Tem of the Senate had the power to force inclusion of a gun bill into a budget proposal in special session and this was his "pet" project.

Upon arrival and in discussion with Rep. San Angelo, amendments, were filed, talking points were developed and lobbying commenced.

Debate began and the first amendment called was from the Republican Caucus to eliminate "pork" items. That failed on a party-line vote 53 Y - 88 N - 10A.

Amendment "B", offered by San Angelo, was to strike (delete) the No guns in public buildings (Section 43).  San Angelo asked the first question of Rep. Bill Dyson (D-New Haven, Chairman of Appropriations Committee) if the gun portion had any fiscal impact and should be included in the bill. Dyson responded with integrity and said " It would be a far, far stretch," which answered the question most already knew - the section was inappropriate to
the bill and only included based upon Sullivan's position.

Questions dealing with firearms were then answered by Rep. Mike Lawlor (D-E Haven, Chairman of Judiciary). Lawlor appeared uncomfortable during the entire debate answering questions and uncharacteristically said "I think" innumerable times. Reps Piscipo, Jarjura, O'Neill, Hamzy spoke in favor of the amendment. Some
referred to a person in the Senate pushing his "pet" proposal.

After a few hours debate, a motion was made for a roll-call vote which was denied by the Speaker, because in her opinion the 20% vocal affirmation rule was not met. When the voice vote was taken, the Speaker ruled it was close and called a roll-call. About 25% of Democrats and 99% of Republicans voted in favor of the amendment. The vote was 69Y - 71N - 11A. The Amendment failed.

This close vote did two things: It placed the whole bill in jeopardy, since this type budget bill required a 3/5 (60%) affirmative vote to pass; and the close vote also opened the door to reconsideration.

Amendment "C" was then called by San Angelo to repeal the controversial "Turn in your Neighbor" provision passed in 1999. Debate was particularly emotional with Reps Tulisano, Prelli, Simmons, Diamantis speaking in favor and Lawlor and Godfrey speaking against. It appeared the amendment would pass! In addition, leaders were also aware  that more amendments would be called, including Sunday Hunting by Rep Piscipo (another 2 hour debate).

At this point, the amendment was withdrawn - a deal had been made in the House and reportedly reluctantly concurred with by Senate leadership (Sen. Sullivan)!

Rep. Bob Farr (R-W. Hartford, and not a friend to gunowners), the only Republican to vote against amendment "B" and on the prevailing side, had been convinced to switch his vote and request reconsideration of the vote on "B". After a summary from San Angelo and comments by Lawlor that the issue would be addressed next year, the Speaker ordered the vote taken by voice which passed. Sec. 43 was eliminated from the bill.

The bill was then transmitted to the Senate for concurrence. Sen. Sullivan in comments to the body essentially claimed a sell-out in the House. He was visibly upset and verbally expressed his displeasure. The bill passed the Senate with no amendments.

Rep. San Angelo carried the ball on this issue - his tactics and debate were outstanding, and the outcome superb. He deserves significant credit (Call, e-mail him repron131@hotmail.com now with a well-deserved Thank you). Communicate also with the other legislators mentioned and thank them for supporting our issues. Appreciation IS important!

****
Another Setback For Sullivan
By MATTHEW DALY
The Hartford Courant
June 20, 2000

One of the General Assembly's most powerful leaders got another slap in the face Monday as lawmakers returned to the Capitol in special session.

Senate President Pro Tem Kevin B. Sullivan, under increasing criticism for what many colleagues consider an imperious style, suffered a rare rebuke as lawmakers first approved, then rejected, a gun-control proposal he had made into a pet project.

The vote overturning Sullivan's proposal was especially unusual because the West Hartford Democrat, the highest-ranking senator, had slipped it into a larger budget bill he had negotiated with other top leaders over the weekend. That bill, which funds a variety of programs, was ultimately approved - but without Sullivan's gun-control provision.

The setback on guns was the latest in a series for Sullivan, who many say is growing increasingly isolated - even within his own caucus. Rumors that he will not return as Senate president next year were rampant at the Capitol Monday, although a spokesman for Sullivan denied his position was in any jeopardy.

Sullivan, who is rarely at a loss for words, was unavailable for comment Monday - an uncharacteristic event for one of the Capitol's most quoted denizens. Roy Occhiogrosso, a spokesman for Senate Democrats, said Sullivan was outraged at the defeat of his gun-control plan and appalled that ``Republicans are choosing to place politics and personalities above public safety.''

But critics called the claim of partisanship off base, noting that Democrats were among those opposing Sullivan's proposal - which also was defeated in the regular session that ended May 3. Democrats control both legislative chambers.

The problem was not partisanship, but Sullivan's pitch for a poorly
thought-out, unenforceable bill, critics said. The proposal would make it a crime to carry a loaded gun into any state building - a measure Sullivan called crucial for public safety, but critics called grandstanding.

Rep. Ronald San Angelo, R-Naugatuck, called the bill ``silly'' and noted that it would not prevent someone from carrying an unloaded gun - along with ammunition - into a state building.

``It takes two seconds to load a firearm, so how does that protect
citizens?'' San Angelo asked.

Rep. Michael Jarjura, D-Waterbury, called the proposal ``bizarre'' and said it would do nothing to discourage a disturbed individual from taking a gun into a state building and opening fire, as a disgruntled employee did at Connecticut Lottery headquarters in 1998, killing five people, including himself.

``I don't believe it's well thought-out,'' Jarjura said of Sullivan's
proposal.

A proposal by San Angelo and Jarjura to strip the gun-control measure from the larger budget bill failed by two votes, however, and it appeared as if Sullivan was headed for a victory.

But opponents weren't finished. San Angelo then introduced another amendment that would undo a 1999 gun-control bill allowing police seizures of certain weapons, and he other Republicans vowed to keep introducing amendments all night if necessary.

Finally, after three hours of debate, House Speaker Moira K. Lyons,
D-Stamford, pulled the plug. With Sullivan's assent, Lyons allowed the House to reconsider its earlier defeat of the San Angelo/Jarjura amendment, in exchange for an agreement by Republicans to drop all other amendments. The measure stripping Sullivan's proposal was then approved on a voice vote.

Lyons, who clashed repeatedly with Sullivan during the 12-week session, was conciliatory Monday, noting that as a top leader, Sullivan had the right to insist on the gun ban - just as other leaders insisted on things they believe are important.

Sullivan's deputy, Senate Majority Leader George C. Jepsen, went further, saying Sullivan ``deserves enormous credit'' for agreeing to pull the gun ban rather than throw the legislature into chaos.

But one House Democrat had a less kind interpretation: ``I think Kevin is losing it,'' he said.