Barry Schwartz wrote:
>
> > Mmmm, that confuses me. In the Union Tribune last week,
> >Wilson wrote a letter stating the reasons why he refused to sign SB500
> >(the "Saturday Night Special" handgun control bill). He did not
> >mention veto, only that he would not sign the bill. As a result,
> >SB500 is no more
> ************************************
> The following is an excerpt direct from the Calif Gov. web page at
> http://www.sen.ca.gov/www/leginfo/bill2law.htm
>
> < snip >
> The Governor has 12 days to sign, approve without signing, or veto a bill.
> A letter or phone call to the Governor's Office is appropriate to state
> your position on the bill.
>
> If the bill is signed or approved without a signature, it goes to the
> Secretary of State to be chaptered. If the governor vetoes the bill, a
> two-thirds vote in each house is needed to override the veto. The
> Governor's office releases veto messages which explain the veto; these
> messages are available from the Governor's Office and on the Internet.
> < snip >
> *************************
> That's what I was going by, and I hope it's true. Unless I'm missing
> something (entirely possible), it would mean that whether he signs it or
> not, it's law unless he vetoes it -
Come on you guys enough with the California Government lesson!
That's more information than I can process...
Seriously, doesn't California have the "pocket Veto" ???
|