Tuor,
Actually 15 is not a few, but quite a few pieces of testimony. If you were at the hearing or watched on Olelo, you would have seen the other bills that ALL had less than that. Most of them had only one or two pieces.
But as HiCarry said before, the best testimony you can provide is in-person testimony. I noticed that most in-person testimony people just read what they had submitted via online/email submissions.

You are correct....most "non-controversial" bills see little testimony submitted....but certain ones tend to garner more than others, like domestic violence. The point I hope to make in soliciting larger amounts of testimony for gun bills, is that we need to make it appear that we have a very large base of support for whatever bill is being heard. I made an analogy in another post to the domestic partnership bill....that was very controversial and the amount of testimony, both submitted and delivered in person was substantial. Now, I don't realistically think we'll get those types of numbers, but the tactic is to make the politicians really consider their chances of re-election if they support our bills. If we can get, for example, concealed carry on the table next year, it will take a tremendous effort to get it heard and passed. 20+ pieces of submitted testimony simply won't get the job done. Imagine for a moment that we've done our homework and next year a CCW bill actually makes it to a hearing and not only is there hundreds of pieces of testimony submitted, but we have a large contingent of folks testifying in person....now, when the Chair of whatever committee "reads" all the submitted testimony (think "Joe Citizen, supports..." a hundred + times...) AND then a long stream of in-person testimony. Can you imagine what kind of message those types of numbers can convey to nervous politicians?
So, yeah we had a good number of folks submit testimony, and yeah, in this case it worked. But, for CCW, or repealing the onerous registration and pemitting process, there will be opposition, and most likely from agencies like HPD, the AG's office, and others who the lawmakers tend to place a higher degree of "trust" in terms of "believing" their facts or positions on bills, and we'll need to counter that with tons of testimony.
So, let's start thinking about what we can do next year (there's still some stuff we may need to dod this year, but we need to think and plan strategically....) to really boost our numbers....it is the only way we'll ever get the chances we want.
Thanks again for everyones help!

so is it all done or is there another voting that needs to happen? 

so is it all done or is there another voting that needs to happen? 

From here it goes to the conference committe. If it passes then to the floor for a vote.

I need another favor:
 
How many folks submitted testimony via the web and just hit the "support" option without adding any comments or testimony? Did you get a confirmation e-mail noting your testimony was received?  I ask because I know of at least one individual that did this and I do not see that testimony listed on the web. Can I ask that everyone who submitted testimony via the web, whether you added any comments or not, please go to the site and check to see if your testimony is there? The link is below, click on testimony and then the 3/25/10 option. Let me know if your stuff didn't get thru.
Thanks!
 
 http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2010/lists/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=358

I submitted my testimony through email and it got through.

I submitted my testimony through email and it got through.

me too.

Thanks guys...I now have confirmation that at least two individuals submitted testimony, and received the e-mail confirmation of such, but their testimony doesn't show up on the web, nor did I hear those individual's names mentioned at the hearing when they read the testimony. So, it looks like at least two pieces of testimony, and who knows how many others, did get "heard."
I have the legislative office looking itto it, so if anyone else discovers that their testimony didn't make it in despite being submitted, please let me know.

Wow, this is definitely something we need to know. It's really good that someone caught it.

Hey guys just saw this...http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2010/lists/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=358

do we need to post more testimony?

thanks!

oh, and my testimony was posted

I don't think there is testimony for this part. But I could be wrong.

When I checked the hearing notices (where there are links to provide testimony) there aren't any for the Tuesday reading.

Just wondering why is this part put back into the HD2 bill?

(5)  Registration and blood typing.  Provide for:

         (A)  Compulsory registration and identification to the extent that voluntary registration and identification has not been accomplished under chapter 846, part II; and

         (B)  Compulsory RHo blood typing on females of child bearing age or younger, and such other compulsory blood typing as may be approved by competent medical authority[.];

When in the earlier bill HD1 the (B) section was crossed out?

(5)  Registration and blood typing.  Provide for[:             (A)  Compulsory] compulsory  registration and identification to the extent that voluntary   registration and  identification has not been accomplished under chapter 846, part II[;   and
         (B)  Compulsory RHo blood   typing on  females of child bearing age or younger, and such other compulsory blood   typing  as may be approved by competent medical authority.];

Just wondering what happened?

That part was put back in so it could pass. Well, actually, someone added that section that strikes part of the HRS in SD1 and it had nothing to do with seizure of firearms. The house took that change out in HD2.

Looks like I missed this opportunity to participate.  If I am understanding the process correctly, this still has to go through the Senate and Governor?

No worries, there will be plenty more chances to participate.

It is currently in the Senate and according to the most recent status update, the Senate didn't agree with the changes that the House made to the bill. I am not quite sure what this means and hopefully someone will be able to answer that question. The Legislature puts out a nifty little citizen's guide that gives some basics on the whole process, but I'm still fuzzy on some of the details.

Here is an image showing the journey of a bill. You can just swap the word "House" for "Senate" and vice versa to show the process for a Senate Bill like SB358.


[attachment deleted by admin]

Okay, after a tiny bit of research, it looks like the bill will have to go through some more work in the Senate to try and get them to agree to the amendments. SB 420 had to go through a similar process and reveals quite a bit about the process.

Well, it looks like the Senate and House committee members will convene tomorrow but there isn't any public testimony allowed. We are just going to have to sit back and wait.

Well, it looks like the Senate and House committee members will convene tomorrow but there isn't any public testimony allowed. We are just going to have to sit back and wait.

2A - Yep, conference committe is tomorrow. And, as usual, little notice is given so folks can attend if they wanted. However, while there is no testimony allowed at the conference, I would suggest that folks call the Chairs/Co-Chairs of the committe and let them know you support the intent of the bill. And, if any of those who want to participate are in Reps. Pine or Luke's district, I would suggest calling them as well.

The hearing got deferred to tomorrow morning....there may be an NRA alert to call the legislators asking them to pass this on for a floor vote.

Wow, this bill just hit HawaiiNewsNow they are reporting it passed 21-0.