Emails say Deal worked with opponents on Georgia gun bill
by The Associated Press
April 04, 2013 11:33 PM | 1180 views | 1 1 comments | 9 9 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Governor Nathan Deal addresses the Senate in Atlanta on March 28.A pilot program launched a few years ago with federal funds will serve as a roadmap for districts after the General Assembly in recent weeks passed legislation approving the statewide plan. Gov. Nathan Deal is expected to sign the bill into law, and state education officials are working with local districts to prepare for the new system, to be implemented in every district by the 2014-15 school year.
<br>The Associated Press
Governor Nathan Deal addresses the Senate in Atlanta on March 28.A pilot program launched a few years ago with federal funds will serve as a roadmap for districts after the General Assembly in recent weeks passed legislation approving the statewide plan. Gov. Nathan Deal is expected to sign the bill into law, and state education officials are working with local districts to prepare for the new system, to be implemented in every district by the 2014-15 school year.
The Associated Press
slideshow
ATLANTA — Gov. Nathan Deal never publicly criticized legislation that would have allowed students to carry firearms onto Georgia’s college campuses, but emails show that his office worked quietly with opponents to make their concerns known.

Correspondence obtained by The Associated Press shows the Republican governor had given a key lawmaker research about the law developed by its opponents in the university system. Meanwhile, his chief of staff made it clear in a meeting that Deal was not personally backing the proposal. It failed last month on the final day of Georgia’s annual legislative session.

No Republican governor in Georgia would want to publicly oppose or veto a gun rights bill since GOP supporters so adamantly oppose gun restrictions. Deal has courted the gun lobby, winning endorsements from the National Rifle Association and GeorgiaCarry.org in his 2010 race for governor. Even now, Deal will not say whether he supports allowing college students to go armed.

“After the bill signing period, the governor will form an informal working group with leading legislators, the chancellor and members of the Board of Regents to hear out every viewpoint and see if we can find a solution that protects Second Amendment rights and promotes overall safety,” Deal spokesman Brian Robinson said this week.

Gun politics became complicated this year when the gun owners group GeorgiaCarry.Org backed legislation that would have allowed students with a license to carry a firearm to take their weapons onto campuses, though not student housing or sporting events. The National Rifle Association did not press for those changes, which openly challenged the state’s powerful university system.

A political impasse developed in the closing days of the legislative session. GOP lawmakers in the Senate, along with several Democrats, backed an NRA plan to make less-sweeping changes to Georgia’s gun laws. By contrast, House lawmakers backed their plan, which allowed guns on campuses. The same bill would have also allowed school systems to arm their employees and change mental health regulations.

As state lawmakers headed toward the frantic close of their 40-day session, university system officials sent research, including a spreadsheet, to Deal’s office showing very few states effectively allow firearms on campus, according to emails obtained by the AP under Georgia’s open records law. On March 14, university system chancellor Hank Huckaby emailed Deal’s chief of staff, Chris Riley.

“Chris, I would appreciate your advice on when and if we share the spreadsheet with House sponsors of HB 512,” Huckaby said.

In response, Riley told Huckaby that Deal shared the research with Rep. John Meadows, R-Calhoun, one of the highest-ranking lawmakers to support allowing guns on campus.

“I think we should circle up pretty soon on Monday,” Riley said.

Later in the email exchange, Riley noted that one of Deal’s floor leaders in the Senate, Sen. Charlie Bethel, planned to advocate for the firearms legislation backed by House lawmakers. Riley said he had met with Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, who presides over the Senate.

The involvement of one of Deal’s floor leaders created a political problem. Confusion was possible since Deal appoints floor leaders to steer his legislative program in the Legislature. If one of Deal’s floor leaders publicly backed the bill, people could interpret it as a sign that Deal supported it, too. Robinson, Deal’s spokesman, said Riley told the lieutenant governor the bill was not part of the deal administration’s agenda and that Bethel backed it for his own reasons.

“If I’m carrying it as floor leader, it comes with a sort of imprimatur from the governor’s office that this is what the governor wants,” Bethel said in an interview.

Meanwhile, Deal’s office was getting phone calls about the plan, mostly from people upset over language in the legislation potentially restricting people with serious mental health or substance abuse problems from getting a license to carry a weapon. Deal had said he would support tightening background checks to identify people who could a pose a danger.

“We’ve had over 300 folks call in over the past couple days upset about the mental health amendment, and now they’re wanting to know the Governor’s stance,” Benjamin Smith, Deal’s director of constituent services, wrote in an email to a policy staffer. “Apparently folks are stating that their legislators told them the Governor is in favor.”

The legislation ultimately failed. A negotiating team of House and Senate lawmakers reached a compromise shortly before midnight on the final day of the General Assembly’s annual session. It never received a vote, though it could be revisited next year.

Comments
(1)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Myaka
|
September 17, 2013
Explain please:

If the law would allow students to carry guns on campus, but not in housing, just exactly where would their guns be before and after class? (rhetorical and SMH)
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides