Jason Murphey Bobby Cleveland Steve Martin
Jan 22nd House Rules Meeting
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Myself and one other activist showed up on Tuesday to sit in on the Jan 22nd House Rules meeting and boy were there some nervous politicians in the room despite the low turnout. They are used to doing their deeds in the shadows and having citizens there. I would say that we witnessed a mix of anxiety and fear from some of the attendees along with a bit of cluelessness on the part of one of the attendees.
Here is a list of attendees:
Justin Wood, HD 26, Kris Steel’s old district. I spoke with him briefly before the meeting started and he claims to be a conservative. He is a freshman House member so he has no RINO score yet.
Mike Jackson, Pro Tem, 2011 RINO Index score 30 out of 100 points.
Steve Martin, Bartlesville area, 2011 RINO Index score of 10 out of 100 points. One of the worst RINOs in the House, Martin is famous for his opposition to true Open Carry legislation even though he is a concealed carry permit holder.
Tom Newell, Newalla/outside of Shawnee area, 2011 RINO Index score of 65 out of 100 points.
Gary Banz, Midwest City area, 2011 RINO Index score of 30 out of 100 points.
Jon Echols, Charles Key’s old House District, should be a conservative, constitutionally minded legislator. Freshman House member so he has no RINO score yet.
Jason Murphy, Guthrie, 2011 RINO Index score of 90 out of 100 points.
Elise Hall, NW OKC, 2011 RINO Index score of 40 out of 100 points.
Bobby Cleveland, Norman/Moore area, one of the most hated men in Oklahoma politics thanks to his abysmal character and history of disenfranchising conservatives while running the Cleveland County GOP. Plead to a charge of voter fraud then had the audacity to tell the media that it was the election board’s fault he voted twice. Big supporter of Agenda 21 with his work for ACOG all the while he rails against Agenda 21 in an effort to camouflage his actions.
Joe Kintsel, House Parliamentarian, former best man at Kris Steel’s wedding. Once had the reputation of being an honest House staffer until he was lured back to work under Kris Steel for a reported six figure salary.
We recorded the House Rules meeting. The first half can be found here
. Look for the download this file icon and either open it or save it to listen to the audio.
The last half of the audio can be found here
Several interesting things were observed:
Two of the four conservatives in the room, Jason Murphey and Tom Newell, refused to sit at the conference table whether by design or hap stance. Was this them sending a message that they didn’t approve of the proposed House Rules and didn’t want to be closely associated with them? Or were they signaling that they were avoiding any conflict? The other two House members that are alleged to be conservative, Echols and Wood, are both freshmen and might not have the political experience needed to understand the situation.
House Parliamentarian Joel Kintsel dominated the discussion; we certainly called it a few weeks ago when we told the readers of the disproportionate control and command he seems to have assumed.
A good example of the disdain that conservative legislators receive from House leadership popped up during the meeting. At two minutes into the audio they discuss Glen Mulready (2011 RINO Index score of 40) calling in to participate in the meeting. They go so far as to move a telephone to the conference table in preparation but Mulready never calls in. A half hour later, around three minutes and 45 seconds into the second audio file, Representative Mike Reynolds calls in asking to call in to participate but was given the brush off by Pro Tem Mike Jackson.
Around twenty six minutes into the second video I ask Pro Tem Mike Jackson about some of our concerns that weren’t answered in the meeting. The GCCA bills, germane issues, and the Discharge Petitions. Jackson gave his reasons for not addressing the issues but they were weak excuses that didn’t come close to supporting their arguments.
As to the rules themselves, here are some of the high points of the discussion:
One of the issues that we had raised the last few weeks was addressed. The allowing of committee chairmen to waive the fiscal impact statement for a bill was discussed. Their rational was that House staff was overworked so they were deferring to the chairman to bypass the fiscal impact statement.
Legislative intent; an author of a bill now has the right to submit his reasoning for submitting a vill. This is a good thing as potentially a court could compare the intent of a law when deciding a court case. They were unsure at this point if House staff could prepare the intent statements or if it should be limited to House members to protect the integrity of the statements.
The electronic signature process was explained. Basically they go online, enter their user name and password, and then can add their signature to a bill.
House Subpoena power: We nailed it last week, they admitted that only The A & B and Admin Rules committee had unfettered power to investigate and issue subpoenas. Every other committee has to jump through hoops to do an investigation. Their concern was individual committees over stepping their bounds or stepping on toes. That is pretty sad when House leadership says that they question their own member’s integrity and common sense. Well, maybe they have a point with Bobby Cleveland…..
Conference Committee process, they claim that a shortage of rooms set up with voting machines is the reason for the changes. They did confirm that the standing committees should be the conference committee on a bill as the committee had the House members with the most experience in particular topics.
They did backtrack more than a bit on the passage of a bill through conference committee using only electronic signatures. They claim that all bills that advance through such a process will have no substantial changes for will there be any substantial discussion on changes without a full hearing before the committee.
They covered the new requirement for a daily published agenda so that legislators know what bills will come up that day.
Assigning special rules to a bill was another area that we had grave concerns. They confirmed our reading of the language that stated that approval of the majority of the House members was needed before adding special rules to hear a bill. There was a good discussion of why special rules were dangerous to representative government but claimed that only two instances had occurred in the last eight years.
At the end of the meeting I grilled Pro Tem Mike Jackson on the issues that weren’t addressed. My read on Jackson was a mix of anxiety mixed with a healthy desire to explain what they were trying to do. Understand that the average news reporter isn’t wired into the issues like the Sooner Tea Party so we can ask the tough questions that require inside knowledge. Politicians don’t like situations like this as they can’t control where the interview might lead. I asked about the GCCA bills, the conference committee process, the Discharge Petition process, and the electronic signature process for passing bills out of a conference committee.
Jackson’s response on the abuse of GCCA bills to include non appropriation bills like the American Indian Cultural Center was a bit garbled. Around 26:45 into the second half audio he is stumbling badly with his response. By 27:00 though he had found a lifeline, blaming the Senate for placing the American Indian Cultural Center in the GCCA process. He uses the germaneness rule as a vehicle to explain saying that he would love to have the Senate held to a germaneness rule but that they can’t because the Senate is an independent body that sets their own rules. When I pointed out that the Joint House/Senate Rules could be changed Jackson says that the Senate would have to agree to the changes. I should have pointed out that there were no Joint House/Senate rules prior to 2005 when the Republicans took control of the legislature.
Jackson’s answers on the Discharge Petition process requiring a super majority to hear a bill when a simple majority would pass the same bill weren’t any better. Jackson admitted that they knew this was going to be an issue and that they had looked at other states and found that action outside the regular legislative leadership actions should have a high threshold. That is a fancy way of saying that they want to restrict control over legislation to those that are in power or that they don’t want to have to be forced to take a stand on an issue that their voters won’t appreciate.
Jackson does point out the other avenues, through the committee process and by a discharge petition at the committee level where 2/3rds of a committee can sign a petition to hear a bill that the committee chairman doesn’t want to hear. The problem if course is that they assign controversial or conservative bills to those committees where they have firm control, making certain that the bill will never receive a fair up or down vote. Jackson tries to use the suspension of House Rules argument as well; where 2/3rds of a legislative body can suspend House Rules to hear a bill over leadership’s objections. But how is that any different?
As the parting gasp on putting lipstick on this pig of an idea, Jackson points out that a simple majority of the committee members can vote to pass a bill without mentioning that the committee chairman controls which bills get a hearing and a vote. A simple majority or even 65% of the legislators on that committee can want to hear a bill to no avail if the chairman blocks the bill.
Jackson did make one good point, that the legislative process was designed to be tough to pass laws, that an idea for legislation should be thoroughly vetted and have wide support to make it into law. However that apparently isn’t the case where RINO pet bills are given the green light by leadership and passed with a one vote margin, so even that argument collapses under reality. Notice the small uneasy laugh from Jackson at 31:25 when I point out the ease of a RINO bill being heard compared to a conservative bill. Suddenly majority rule, consensus, and democracy become the talking points over making the process difficult for bills to be passed!
I came away thinking that Mike Jackson is a decent enough fellow and it is obvious that he is concerned that we are concerned about major portions of the proposed House Rules and that he did his best to defend House leadership’s positions. The problem wasn’t that Jackson wasn’t prepared or lacking in skill in laying out their reasoning; the problem is that they have indefensible positions on the GCCA bills, the germaneness problem, and the disproportionate ease that RINO bills enjoy in passing into law. They carefully constructed the rules to advance their agenda by controlling which bills are heard, it is no accident and in their opinion nothing needs fixed. This is kind of like gun control; people that are all in favor of taking guns from everyone are assuming that they will still have their guns.
The bottom line is this; these proposed House Rules are easily changed by amendment before they are put into use. As I don’t believe that there is another organizational day before the opening day of the legislature that leaves the vote on the House Rules for opening day. If a coalition of conservative Republicans and conservative Democrats will make a stand the rules can be changed to restore representative government and to restore Oklahoma to a Republic where the rights of the minority are protected from direct democracy. Never forget the difference between democracy and a republic; in a democracy 51% of the people can take away the rights of the other 49%.
A Better Idea Is To Ban Pet Owners, Not Dog Breeds
By Ms PM
Senator Patrick Anderson, R-Enid, came up with a bill that would allow cities to ban certain breeds
if they thought they would be a threat to people. He goes on to say that “If they don’t want poodles, I guess they can bring it before the city council and vote not to have poodles.”
Not only is the Central Oklahoma Humane Society against the bill but riled citizens signed a petition to the tune of over 4,700 signatures.
Anderson’s bill isn’t breed specific but it isn’t a far cry to think others akin to his thinking would want a bill like this because of pit bull terriers. He states, “Pit bulls make me nervous, I wouldn’t want them around my children.” His personal feeling is he would not own one.
In 2006 there was an attempt to ban pit bulls which failed. A law was passed that defines dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs and owners of these dogs have a set punishment if they fail to restrain them.
Anderson has hopped on the “bandwagon of justification” saying we have an obligation to protect citizens. Is there anyone sick of politicians protecting us from us?
The problem with pit bulls or any other breeds deemed to have an appetite for humans are the humans themselves. Unfortunately there will never be laws banning idiots from owning them. Most people want these so called dangerous dogs because of the “bad ass” stigma that will be attached to their coat tails. They want these animals to show people how cool and important they are. Their self-worth is nil so they surround themselves with their trinkets of choice because they can.
Most of the population is clueless as to raising any dog. They are the ones that teach their pets all the nasty habits and then take them to the pound because they believe the animal is unfit for human companionship. If you can’t grasp that concept just look at the way they raise their kids to be the intrusive little brats that no one can stand to be around. The nut never falls far from the tree.
A truth that most people will never agree to or grasp, is a dog will always tell you what they are going to do; all that is required is for the owner to understand their language. Rarely do owners know what they are doing therefore they acquire the strong breeds; have no concept about what it takes to be the leader, and society suffers. The breed suffers because people never acknowledge they are a dog in the eyes of their own pet.
In this second article about the bill being dropped
, the Senator got more than an earful when he stated; I certainly didn’t anticipate there would be as many people as vocal about it as they have been.”
He goes on to say; “We’ve got more important issues to deal with at the Capitol than that, and I don’t want it to be a distraction.”
That dear readers, is “political language” for the fact that the citizens “whipped his butt.” And that’s… the end of this story.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
By The Watchman
Why has it taken a Freshman Senator to introduce legislation to protect our 2nd Amendment Rights in the Senate?? Will these States Rights bills pass the RINO majority held in the Senate?
I next went to www.followthemoney.org
to look at his campaign finances. There were very few interest group donations to his campaign. Those that did were primarily Conservative in nature. His campaign was run from a vast majority of private individual donations.
Senator Dahm has filed three bills covering 2nd
Amendment Rights during the next session of the legislature. The first is Senate Bill 401 which you can read here
. This bill provides for the licensure and verification for certain purposes of firearms. It is a simple one page bill designed to protect the rights of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in the state of Oklahoma.
The second bill is Senate Bill 548 the 2nd
Amendment Preservation Act. You can read the bill here
. This bill is a little more substantive in nature. It actually calls for the Legislature of the State of Oklahoma to declare invalid any and all regulations from the federal government that infringe upon your rights under the 2nd
Amendment to keep and bear arms. It goes on to say that any federal employee, agent or official or corporation who attempts to enforce a federal rule or regulation shall be guilty of a felony punishable by up to 5 yrs. in prison and a $5,000.00 fine. Any state employee or official shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by up to 2 yrs. In prison and a $2,000.00 fine.
The third proposed law is Senate Bill 552, or the Firearms in Vehicles Act as I’ll call it. This bill may prove to be a bit more controversial and harder to get approved. You can read the entire bill here
. This bill proposes to change the rules of the game for everyone except convicted felons. We’ll go into more detail on this bill.
Section 1. Amendatory 21 O. S. 2011, Section 1289.7 as amended by Section 12, Chapter 259, O. S. L. 2012 (21 O. S. Supp. 2012, Section 1289.7), is amended to read as follows:
A. Any person, except a convicted felon, may transport in a motor vehicle a rifle or shotgun open and unloaded at anytime.
B. Any citizen twenty-one (21)years of age or older, except a convicted felon, may transport a pistol open, loaded or unloaded, in a motor vehicle for the purpose of self-defense without a valid handgun license issued pursuant to the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, provided the person is not involved in a crime. A person may leave a concealed, loaded pistol in a parked or unattended, locked vehicle provided the person in legal control of the pistol is at a location other than his or her personal residence or business.
This does go to the core of the 2nd Amendment. No government may restrict ones right to bear arms.
When, in the absence of reasonable and articulable suspicion of other criminal activity, a person carrying an unconcealed weapon in a vehicle, as provided in this section, shall not be disarmed or physically restrained by any law enforcement officer.
To many times the Police are too quick to disarm and handcuff a law abiding legal hand gun carrying citizen when they see a gun in a vehicle. This happens even though the person has a valid permit to carry. There is even a provision in there to protect citizens with legal carry permits from other states. Senator Dahm is on the right track here and we will be using these bills in our 2013 RINO Index.
Common Core Or Rotten To The Core?
By Ms PM
Ronald Regan’s wisdom and tenacity is sorely missed:
”Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
In his California Gubernatorial speech in January of 1967, he said that “Those who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again.”
How better to change the course of freedom than to indoctrinate the next generation via the public school system. It’s like the frog in the pot, before long it’s too late to jump out of the boiling water.
The Common Core mission statement in this article
did nothing less than send a chill down my back as I got into reading about the implementation of this program. The teaching standards are to be “relevant to the real world.” It will reflect the knowledge and skills that school kids must have for success in college and career. This implementation provides for success in the global economy and all schools will have the same standard for success.
One of the first things that came to mind was a picture of a bunch of robots, reacting and thinking the right way, saying the right things, and being judged as following the rules. This education standard is set up by many people that think their way is best and those involved implement a behavior under the guise of learning standards.
In the FAQ section of the article the answers flowed easily as if this program was the greatest thing since sliced bread…until the question that asked about; does the federal government play a role in standards implementation? And their answer; “The federal government had no role in the development of the Common Core State Standards and will not have a role in their implementation. The Common Core State Standards initiative is a state-led effort that is not part of No Child Left Behind and adoption of the standards is in no way mandatory.” That is a tricky answer and true. It all came out of the U.N., so to say the federal government played no role is correct, other than the deceit that our government is pushing these standards as if they were driving the heavy equipment to make this road happen. The end result will be the same, they pick away, piece by piece, until the massive indoctrination is complete.
It seems President Obama wants the U.S. to pay for the education of the world. It’s “A global Fund for Education: Achieving Education for All.” Hilary Clinton is also a player in all of this. There is a United Nations program, “Education For All” that involves the same ideas and people as Common Core. That in itself should raise a few eyebrows. Add the whipped cream to this nasty pie, the “Education, Public Awareness, and Training” chapter in none other than the U.N.’s Agenda 21 goals.
Agenda 21’s plan is a “comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally. As long as our president is willing to turn over power to the U.N., America’s sovereignty is at stake. If Common Core is run locally then why is it so popular with the U.N and our President? In Chapter 36.2 the plan is to “reorient” worldwide education and push the sustainable development. Formal education talked about in Chapter 36.3 states that “both formal and non-formal education is indispensable to changing people’s attitudes.” This concept is a stealth creeper to give everyone an attitude adjustment.
The little robots will no longer be equipped to think for themselves, a global attitude will be a benchmark. The environmental education will be integrated into what is taught. Is it really so farfetched that a U.S. President will circumvent Congress and the states’ right to educate? So much for Common Core being a local issue. There is no doubt that the tides are changing, parents are unaware, unplugged or offered Common Core as a wonderful tool to help their children learn. It’s a bad dream and American families will live out this nightmare through osmosis of what their school kids are taught.
Anytime you hear the name George Soros you can bet that what is in store will do nothing other than advance a whacked out agenda. This man has already taken down the economies of a few countries. He funds ACORN, SEIU, MoveOn.org and the ACLU. His list of funding doesn’t stop with these four, there are over a hundred others.
Soros’ “Open Society Institute has joined with the Department of Education pushing this global education scam. This is similar to the Gates Foundation’s agreement with the United Nations organization that insists a global education system is what all schools need to teach. Gates donated millions to the National Governor’s Association and the CCSSO (Council of Chief State Superintendents Organization) which created Common Core.
Obama’s secretary of education, Arne Duncan, supports Soros with his Open Education movement. Anyone still believe the federal government has nothing to do with it? Soros dumped $400 million into his project. When Duncan talks frequently about his favorite buzz word, “sustainability,” his agenda is always associated with the United Nations Agenda 21 movement.
“Sustainability is meant to be the carefully couched word that means everyone needs to recognize we have limited resources and someone a lot smarter (and more powerful) than you should be in control of determining how you live, eat, and breathe.” This is all a part of the U.N. and the Soros funded Agenda 21 that blueprints “global communism by control of populations and property.” You can bet that anything “green” is tucked into this plan.
Arne Duncan’s speech at the Sustainability Summit in 2010…
- ”We must advance the sustainability movement through education.”
- “Demonstrate environmental literacy before they earn their diploma.
- “I’m especially excited to hear that this fall the coalition will be reaching out to groups beyond education in the private and public sector. There’s a federal role in supporting this work.
- “The department recently issued grants to five states to develop career pathways that will support the green economy.”
- “But our commitment has to be about even more than career pathways. It also has to prepare all students with the knowledge they need to be green citizens. In our Blueprint for Reform, the Obama administration is making an unprecedented commitment to promote a well-rounded education for our children. AND for the first time, we are proposing that environmental education be part of that well-rounded education.
- “The blueprint is our proposal to reauthorize and fix the No Child Left Behind Act.
This is interesting due to Common Core’s FAQ when they stated that it was not connected with No Child Left Behind, but they also say the federal government has nothing to do with it either.
This article touches on John Goodlad and his connection to all of this. He is a national educator, promotes social justice in the classroom and had the terrorist Bill Ayres as a keynote speaker at one of his conferences a few years back.
Charlotte Iserbyt was the senior policy advisor for Regan in the Department of Education. She called Goodlad “America’s premier change agent.” She believed Goodlad’s agenda is to “fundamentally transform” America through the education system. Where have we heard these words? If memory is correct, wasn’t it before the 2008 election?
John Goodlad quotes:
- “Educators must resist the quest for certainty. If there were certainty there would be no scientific advancement. So it is with morals and patriotism.”
- ·“Most youth still hold the same values of their parents…if we do not alter this pattern, if we don’t resocialize, our system will decay.”
- ·“(Schools) should liberate students from the ways of thinking imposed by religions and other traditions of thought.”
- “Public education has served as a check on the power of parents, and this is another powerful reason for maintaining it.”
- “Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now…Parents and the general public must be reached also, otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.”
If anyone still has doubts as to what this Common Core agenda is really about, it may be time to go back to the ballot box and vote for Obama again. This is creeping into our schools and parents are told this is the best way to teach. Some believe it is a “conspiracy theory.” Others have never heard of Common Core. Parents worry about their children being abducted by perverts and in this age of keeping your child safe, it should not mean having to be concerned with schools taking over their brains.
This article explains that the Oklahoma State Board of Education adopted Common Core standards in June, 2010 and the Governor confirmed that adoption in July, 2010.
Yong Zhao, presidential chair and associate dean for global education, has a very thoughtful response to the arguments and makes a lot of sense. He states, “The efforts to develop common curricula nationally and internationally are simply working to perfect an outdated paradigm. The outcomes are precisely the opposite of the talents we need for the new era.” This entire article is well worth reading.
In the Communist Manifesto the outline eats away freedoms. Number 10 is the “Free education for all children in public schools. When parents fail to protect, is there any doubt that the education in public school has a way of progressivism that infiltrates all that attend? The tide is going out and it’s taking the next generation with it.
2013 Senate members and House Members
Please copy the block of emails for your contact list so you are able to email all of them and help to inform and educate them before the new sessions begin. Use Bcc to send dozens of email with one email from you to them. This will look like you send each one of them a personal email with only their email showing as the recipient. Please mention the Sooner TeaParty in your emails so they will have a healthy respest for what we do.
Here are the updated House members email addresses in three blocks of Thirty- four each and updated senate emal addresses in one block.
Remember to strip the unsubscribe link before forwarding this newsletter to prevent someone from taking you off our list! Use our forward this email link at the top of the newsletter to prevent being accidently unsubscribed.
Money is always needed for printing costs, postage, sign materials, and robo call costs. We are tightfisted; we will spend your hard earned money wisely and frugally as we do our very best to clean up Oklahoma politicians so we can begin to clean up our country.
You can donate by sending a check to Sooner Tea party, 358 North Rockwell Ave, Oklahoma City, OK, 73127 or visit Soonerteaparty.org and use the Paypal donation button.