Senator Conrad - Dist 46

[RobertH]

here is my State Legislators response to a couple of emails i sent to her about LB 352 and LB 451.

"Dear XXXXXXXXXX-
Thank you for contacting my office and sharing your perspective on these issues (LB 352 and LB 451 respectively).
It is my understanding that each of the bills related to firearms will be heard by the Judiciary Committee.  I do not serve on this committee.
Here is a link if you would like to contact their membership directly.
http://news.legislature.ne.gov/jud/

I will make sure to keep your thoughts and those of other Nebraskans on my mind if these bills are advanced to the floor for debate by the full legislature.

Best,
Senator Danielle Conrad"


well duh i know she doesn't serve on that committee, i just wanted her to know my position.  what should my reply be?

[Dan W]

Tell her to read it again when she sobers up

[Phantom]

I got about the same almost form letter reply from Sara howard


Thank you for your e-mail concerning LB 451 and LB 602 which would prohibit any possible future Federal law on firearms from being enforced in Nebraska.

This bill has been sent to the Judiciary Committee which I am not a member.  I have read the bill and I believe that if this legislation were passed by the Legislature in its current form, it would most likely be ruled unconstitutional by the Federal courts.  The bill states Federal law "shall not be enforceable" which is a clear violation of the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI, Clause II) which states:
 
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

Under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, the final power to declare federal laws unconstitutional rests with the Federal Courts and the United State Supreme Court so states do not have the power to nullify any federal law which is what LB 451 appears to do.  The issue of state nullification was settled in 1832 and 1865.

I will certainly look at the testimony at the Judiciary Committee hearing should this bill be reported out of the committee.

I appreciate your writing.

Sincerely,

Sara Howard
State Senator

[CitizenClark]

.

[bkoenig]

Unfortunately people like her view the Constitution as a buffet line.  Take what you want and leave the rest.

[AAllen]

Unfortunately people like her view the Constitution as a buffet line.  Take what you want and leave the rest.

This^

[Husker_Fan]

It is also the most commonly understood meaning of the Supremacy Clause.

[A-FIXER]

I think its great that ALL replies are put for all to see, Dan I think you should create a new permanent running place in our forum that all can place replies from elected officials as this firearm rights will not go away soon and though is seems elected officials will only do what they think and not the people they are to represent... like our good deals thread. And put our voting pressure to those who think on there own and not the people, VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE

[depserv]

I'd write back and ask this: Will you support this bill or will you not support it?  And by the way, when the subject of Constitutional law is brought up in a discussion regarding gun rights, Article 2 of the Bill or rights should be the dominant part of the discussion; do you agree?  This raises a question: do you support that right?  And do you believe it means what its words and authors say it means?  And one more: in your opinion, are the gun proposals being made by Obama consistent with or a violation of that law?  And of course you always want to end with something like this: Please let me know.  Thank you.

[A-FIXER]

I'd write back and ask this: Will you support this bill or will you not support it?  And by the way, when the subject of Constitutional law is brought up in a discussion regarding gun rights, Article 2 of the Bill or rights should be the dominant part of the discussion; do you agree?  This raises a question: do you support that right?  And do you believe it means what its words and authors say it means?  And one more: in your opinion, are the gun proposals being made by Obama consistent with or a violation of that law?  And of course you always want to end with something like this: Please let me know.  Thank you.

THIS^

[Husker_Fan]

The first response was basically, "I don't sit on the committee so I won't make my feelings known unless it comes to the floor. That way I don't have to risk making anyone upset." Yep, that's a politician.

[RedDot]

I love to see how we waste time, funding, and effort to go through an election process to put forward Nebraskans to positions as representatives, (as in spokesmen for the people of their districts), turn and dump their responsibilities on the Judiciary Committee.  I must have missed the Judiciary Committee elections, but I fail to see how it got filled with individuals whose fears of infringing on federal power override their sworn duties to the people of THIS state.