The House resumes today at 10am. I do not know specifically when H.R. 3808 will be discussed but you can click through to view…
~
Click Through to View
10:28 A.M. –
The Speaker announced that the House do now recess. The next meeting is subject to the call of the Chair.
H. Res. 1720:
providing for the printing of a revised edition of the Rules and Manual of the House of Representatives for the One Hundred Twelfth Congress
10:27 A.M. –
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to without objection.
Mr. Ellison asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker’s table and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent.
S.J. Res. 40:
appointing the day for the convening of the first session of the One Hundred Twelfth Congress
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
10:26 A.M. –
Mr. Ellison asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker’s table and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent.
DEBATE TIME LIMITATION – Mr. Ellison asked unanimous consent that debate on passing H.R. 3808, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding, be limited to 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. Agreed to without objection.
10:03 A.M. –
ONE MINUTE SPEECHES – The House proceeded with one minute speeches, which by direction of the Chair would be limited to 15 per side of the aisle.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – The Chair designated Mr. Quigley to lead the Members in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
10:02 A.M. –
The Speaker announced approval of the Journal. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.
Today’s prayer was offered by the House Chaplain, Rev. Daniel Coughlin.
10:01 A.M. –
The Speaker designated the Honorable Ed Pastor to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
10:00 A.M. –
The House convened, starting a new legislative day.
~
4closureFraud.org
~
__________________________________________________________________________________
Background Info…
Action Alert – It’s Back! H.R. 3808 Interstate Recognition of Notarization Act of 2010
Posted by Foreclosure Fraud on November 16, 2010 ·
Here we go again…
First a recap…
~
LINK – Action Alert – Is Pres Obama’s Pocket Veto on H.R. 3808 Possibly Ineffective?
~
LINK – Action Alert – Please tell President Obama NOT to sign the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act
~
From the LEGISLATIVE DAY OF NOVEMBER 15, 2010 111TH CONGRESS – SECOND SESSION
Start from bottom up at the 2:13 mark…
2:15 P.M. –
ONE MINUTE SPEECHES – The House proceeded with one minute speeches.
H.R. 3808:
to require any Federal or State court to recognize any notarization made by a notary public licensed by a State other than the State where the court is located when such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce
2:14 P.M. –
VETO MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT – The Chair laid before the House the veto message from the President on H.R. 3808. The objections of the President were spread at large upon the Journal, and the veto message was ordered to be printed as a House Document No. 111-152. Pursuant to the order of the House of earlier today, further consideration of the veto message and the bill are postponed until the legislative day of Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2010, and that on that legislative day, the House shall proceed to the constitutional question of reconsideration and dispose of such question without intervening motion.
2:13 P.M. –
The House received a message from the Clerk. Pursuant to the permission granted in Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Clerk transmitted H.R. 3808, the “Interstate Recognition of Notarization Act of 2010,” and a Memorandum of Disapproval thereon received from the White House on October 8, 2010, at 12:55 p.m.
Mr. Scott (VA) asked unanimous consent That, when the House adjourns on Monday, November 15, 2010, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 16, 2010, for Morning-Hour Debate. Agreed to without objection.
Mr. Scott (VA) asked unanimous consent That, when a veto message on H.R. 3808 is laid before the House on the legislative day of today, then after the message is read and the objections of the President are spread at large upon the Journal, further consideration of the veto message and the bill shall be postponed until the legislative day of Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2010; and that on that legislative day, the House shall proceed to the constitutional question of reconsideration and dispose of such question without intervening motion. Agreed to without objection.
Looks like it is time for another crash course on how this works…
Veto Override Procedure in the House and Senate
Summary
A bill or joint resolution that has been vetoed by the President can become law if two-thirds of the Members voting in the House and the Senate each agree to pass it over the President’s objection. The chambers act sequentially on vetoed measures; the House acts first on House-originated measures (H.R. and H.J. Res.) and the Senate acts first on Senate-originated measures (S. and S.J. Res.). If the first-acting chamber fails to override the veto, the measure dies and the other chamber does not consider it. The House typically considers the question of overriding a presidential veto under the hour rule, with time customarily controlled and allocated by the chair and ranking member of the committee with jurisdiction over the bill. The Senate usually considers the question of overriding a veto under the terms of a unanimous consent agreement.
Voting in the House
To override a veto, two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum being present, must agree to repass the bill over the President’s objections. The Constitution requires that the vote be by the “yeas and nays,” which in the modern House means that Members’ votes will be recorded through the electronic voting system. The vote on the veto override is final because, in contrast to votes on most other questions in the House, a motion to reconsider the vote on the question of overriding a veto is not in order.
Full rules below…
Check back for updates…
UPDATE: JUST CONFIRMED WITH THE BILL’S SPONSOR STAFF IN WASHINGTON DC AND THERE WILL BE A VOTE TO OVERRIDE OR UPHOLD THE PRESIDENTS VETO WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 17, 2010.
GET ON THE PHONES AND CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES NOW AND TELL THEM TO UPHOLD THE PRESIDENTS VETO!
Link to Contact Your Representative…
I live in Florida and I sent my represenatives thi e-mail. At least the Senators my house represenative Bill Young web site contact me, did not work, so I called his DC office and told them how I felt.
“This bill would have the effect of TURNING WHAT WAS ILLEGAL INTO LEGAL, POST FACT. A violation of the US CONSTITUTION!
It is sneak voting at its worse. I oppose this law since it is not only a way to grand father the fraud and crimes perpetrated by the Bankers, Lawyers and their entities including MERS making it all legal after the fact.
Before we provide a legal bail out on these criminals we need to clean their companies and close those who have ruined the American economy. I hope you side with reason and justice. The INVESTORS and the home owners were defrauded and now these criminals want our congress and senate to wash their hands of their crimes and to further victimize the American middle class.
Do not let this happen.
Thank you for your service.
John Anderson. ”
How do you find out who voted for this?
I called Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Miami, Florida. Her staff informed me that they cannot tell me how she will be voting on this matter and frankly, acted like he did not know what I was talking about (which he does unless he has been working from the Moon). Anywho, I faxed a shame on you letter to her. I am deeply disappointed in our government. Unfortunately I have come to the conclusion that we are now in a lawless state and I am not sure what we can do about it as there is really nowhere to go for redress. Heartbreaking to say the least.
I called my Congressman Ciro Rodriguez. The woman who took my comments said that she would let him know that I did not want the veto overridden.
Not sure what happened. What does this mean?
“Mr. Ellison asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker’s table and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent.
DEBATE TIME LIMITATION – Mr. Ellison asked unanimous consent that debate on passing H.R. 3808, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding, be limited to 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. Agreed to without objection.”
I called my representative!!!