Anthony G. Martin wrote the following explosive article about the Arizona Immigration Law. Wrong Court Ruled on Arizona Law
In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the ruling against the State of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new immigration law is illegal.
The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part, "Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder.
But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.
"Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction."
In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes abundantly clear, only the U.S.. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve a state. This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco , to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to rule on the issue. Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.
In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who actually take the Constitution seriously. The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous delay or inaction on the part of the federal government.
From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
Read more!
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Reporters vs. Conservative Black Leaders at Press Conference 8 4 2010
There truly are Conservatives Blacks. This video shows true Patriots. Please watch this video you will be encouraged. Too bad we did not get to hear all of them.
Read more!
Friday, May 28, 2010
OKLAHOMAN’S CONFUSION OVER TAXES AND FEES
By Charlie Meadows
Charliemeadows7@gmail.com This past Thursday the Oklahoman ran an editorial called “Possibilities: Could provider fee survive a challenge?” The editorial couched what I believe is the Oklahoman’s desire to raise revenues by
adding what they suggest is a fee of 1% on claims paid by insurance companies. They couched the editorial in terms, that if South Carolina could finally raise the tax on tobacco, maybe the Oklahoma legislature could raise a fee that would surely be called a tax by its opponents. Sound confusing, hopefully I can shed some light on the issue.
In 1991 the citizens of Oklahoma passed State Question 640 which did the following: It said the legislature could not raise taxes without a 75% super majority of support in both chambers of the legislature or the proposal would have to go to a vote of the people. The measure only put restrictions upon taxes, it did not prohibit the ability of the legislature to raise fees. What 640 did not do was DEFINE the difference between a tax and a fee.
As a result, anytime the legislature has wanted more revenues, they call revenue increases “fees” and thus get around the need for a 75% super majority or a vote of the people. Though Senator Brogdon and Representative Wesselhoft have tried to introduce legislation to define the difference, they have not met with success. Not until last year when Oklahoma’s taxpayer watchdog, Jerry Fent, took a case before
the State Supreme Court. He won a case that did a fairly good job of defining the difference.
If we ever want to have good government it will be very important to know the difference, especially if we are ever successful in restructuring our tax codes. It is such an important issue that it is one of the 10 questions on our legislative candidate survey and I might add, one that very few candidates know the difference.
Please pay close attention. A FEE is revenue raised from a particular activity or upon a certain item (such as a car tag) and all the money raised must be spent ONLY on the regulation or support of that activity. Example, all monies paid to use our turnpikes are fees as all those monies are used ONLY to pay off bonded indebtedness, repair the roads and pay for their operations.
The wildlife department is similar, as all monies spent for licenses and specialty stamps or tags are used to fund the wildlife department and thus those revenues are fees. However, if some of those monies were to be used for roads or education, those revenues would no longer be deemed a fee but rather a tax.
Taxes are revenues raised from a particular activity or upon a certain item. However, the money can be put into the general fund to be used for things other than the support of the activity from which the revenue was derived.
Thus, if the revenues derived from when we purchase a gallon of gas, our auto tags, our registration fees or driver’s licenses were to all be used to build roads, bridges and pay for the highway patrol and the overhead at the Oklahoma Department of Transportation, then all those revenues would be considered as fees. However, when they are diverted to build the weather school at OU or the bio-terror lab at OSU and the support of local school districts, then they are in actuality a tax.
The reason Representative Doug Cox’s (R-Grove) proposal is a tax and not a fee is that it forces the people who pay for health insurance to be charged higher premiums because when the insurance company pays out more it will raise rates to compensate for the increase. The legislation will have all insurance companies to pay 1% of any claim to state government, not to be used to support health care for all,but to support the health care of people who don’t pay for insurance. Thus it is not a fee, but rather a tax.
Folks, this was a demand by the Democrats who trusted one of their buddies (Representative Doug Cox) to carry the legislation as a Republican to help its chances for passage. Of course Cox wasn’t alone in his efforts as a large number of the usual suspects helped. Lawmakers such as Lee Denny (R-Cushing) Don Armes (R-Lawton), Eddie Fields (R-Wynona), Gary Banz (R-Midwest City), Kris Steele (Christian Socialist Progressive Republican from Shawnee) Shane Jett (R-Tecumseh)
Ann Cody (R-Lawton) and a few others voted along with Cox and the Democrats for passage. However, the good news is that it didn’t get close to the 75 super majority, so if the Senate doesn’t kill the measure, then look for another lawsuit by Mr. Fent, a truly great Oklahoman and great American.
Read more!
Charliemeadows7@gmail.com This past Thursday the Oklahoman ran an editorial called “Possibilities: Could provider fee survive a challenge?” The editorial couched what I believe is the Oklahoman’s desire to raise revenues by
adding what they suggest is a fee of 1% on claims paid by insurance companies. They couched the editorial in terms, that if South Carolina could finally raise the tax on tobacco, maybe the Oklahoma legislature could raise a fee that would surely be called a tax by its opponents. Sound confusing, hopefully I can shed some light on the issue.
In 1991 the citizens of Oklahoma passed State Question 640 which did the following: It said the legislature could not raise taxes without a 75% super majority of support in both chambers of the legislature or the proposal would have to go to a vote of the people. The measure only put restrictions upon taxes, it did not prohibit the ability of the legislature to raise fees. What 640 did not do was DEFINE the difference between a tax and a fee.
As a result, anytime the legislature has wanted more revenues, they call revenue increases “fees” and thus get around the need for a 75% super majority or a vote of the people. Though Senator Brogdon and Representative Wesselhoft have tried to introduce legislation to define the difference, they have not met with success. Not until last year when Oklahoma’s taxpayer watchdog, Jerry Fent, took a case before
the State Supreme Court. He won a case that did a fairly good job of defining the difference.
If we ever want to have good government it will be very important to know the difference, especially if we are ever successful in restructuring our tax codes. It is such an important issue that it is one of the 10 questions on our legislative candidate survey and I might add, one that very few candidates know the difference.
Please pay close attention. A FEE is revenue raised from a particular activity or upon a certain item (such as a car tag) and all the money raised must be spent ONLY on the regulation or support of that activity. Example, all monies paid to use our turnpikes are fees as all those monies are used ONLY to pay off bonded indebtedness, repair the roads and pay for their operations.
The wildlife department is similar, as all monies spent for licenses and specialty stamps or tags are used to fund the wildlife department and thus those revenues are fees. However, if some of those monies were to be used for roads or education, those revenues would no longer be deemed a fee but rather a tax.
Taxes are revenues raised from a particular activity or upon a certain item. However, the money can be put into the general fund to be used for things other than the support of the activity from which the revenue was derived.
Thus, if the revenues derived from when we purchase a gallon of gas, our auto tags, our registration fees or driver’s licenses were to all be used to build roads, bridges and pay for the highway patrol and the overhead at the Oklahoma Department of Transportation, then all those revenues would be considered as fees. However, when they are diverted to build the weather school at OU or the bio-terror lab at OSU and the support of local school districts, then they are in actuality a tax.
The reason Representative Doug Cox’s (R-Grove) proposal is a tax and not a fee is that it forces the people who pay for health insurance to be charged higher premiums because when the insurance company pays out more it will raise rates to compensate for the increase. The legislation will have all insurance companies to pay 1% of any claim to state government, not to be used to support health care for all,but to support the health care of people who don’t pay for insurance. Thus it is not a fee, but rather a tax.
Folks, this was a demand by the Democrats who trusted one of their buddies (Representative Doug Cox) to carry the legislation as a Republican to help its chances for passage. Of course Cox wasn’t alone in his efforts as a large number of the usual suspects helped. Lawmakers such as Lee Denny (R-Cushing) Don Armes (R-Lawton), Eddie Fields (R-Wynona), Gary Banz (R-Midwest City), Kris Steele (Christian Socialist Progressive Republican from Shawnee) Shane Jett (R-Tecumseh)
Ann Cody (R-Lawton) and a few others voted along with Cox and the Democrats for passage. However, the good news is that it didn’t get close to the 75 super majority, so if the Senate doesn’t kill the measure, then look for another lawsuit by Mr. Fent, a truly great Oklahoman and great American.
Read more!
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Independent Republicans of Texas
I would like to see Oklahoma elected officials make a similar contract for our state.
As members of the Independent Conservative Republicans of Texas, we pledge to defend the values and principles on which our nation was founded. We are proud Republicans who support our party. But our first allegiance is to the people, the conservative majority of our party who elected us to office. We pledge not to divide, but to unite Conservatives everywhere. We pledge to make America and Texas stronger by defending individual liberty, freedom, and the free market ideals that made our country the envy of the world.
Our Contract with Texas
We give our word to stand for conservative principles and to put people before party.
We give our word to be fiscally accountable,limit the size of government,and fight for free market principles.
We give our word to protect our borders and to support a strong military.
We give our word to protect life, support strong family values,and uphold the Judeo-Christian beliefs our nation was founded upon.
We give our word to defend the Constitution and protect the sovereign rights of Texas. Web Page Read more!
As members of the Independent Conservative Republicans of Texas, we pledge to defend the values and principles on which our nation was founded. We are proud Republicans who support our party. But our first allegiance is to the people, the conservative majority of our party who elected us to office. We pledge not to divide, but to unite Conservatives everywhere. We pledge to make America and Texas stronger by defending individual liberty, freedom, and the free market ideals that made our country the envy of the world.
Our Contract with Texas
We give our word to stand for conservative principles and to put people before party.
We give our word to be fiscally accountable,limit the size of government,and fight for free market principles.
We give our word to protect our borders and to support a strong military.
We give our word to protect life, support strong family values,and uphold the Judeo-Christian beliefs our nation was founded upon.
We give our word to defend the Constitution and protect the sovereign rights of Texas. Web Page Read more!
Thursday, February 11, 2010
State Sovereignty
We need to encourage our legislators to reintroduce HJR1003 after the 2010 election. This should help get back to limited government. Check out New Hampshire's Sovereignty bill. The introduced version of HJR1003 resolves that: The State of Oklahoma claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; the joint resolution serves Notice and Demand to the federal government to stop all mandates that are beyond the scope of constitutionally delegated powers; all federal legislation that requires states to comply due to threat of penalties or requires states to pass legislation otherwise suffer loss of federal funding be prohibited or repealed; and copies of the joint resolution be sent to the President of the U.S., the President of the U.S. Senate, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Speakers and Presidents of each state's legislature in the U.S., and each member of Oklahoma’s congressional delegation members.
HJR 1003, as introduced, serves notice to the federal government that the State of Oklahoma claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, and demands that the federal government cease and desist mandates to states that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.
Vetoed by the Governor. Read more!
HJR 1003, as introduced, serves notice to the federal government that the State of Oklahoma claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, and demands that the federal government cease and desist mandates to states that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.
Vetoed by the Governor. Read more!
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
How Did Our Legislators Do Voting The Conservative Cause?
Let's start watching their votes more closely. Doug Cox and Charles Wyrick are a disappointment. Put pressure on them to start being more conservative. We can't afford any more liberals. Pressure them to also stand up to the Federal government for states rights.
OKLAHOMA CONSERVATIVE INDEX 2008 (Updated Fall 2008)
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The Senate
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The House
This issue of the Oklahoma Constitution presents the 30th annual Oklahoma Conservative Index, rating our state legislators. Members of each house of the Oklahoma Legislature were rated on ten key votes. A favorable vote on these issues represents a belief in limited government, individual liberty, traditional standards, free enterprise, and constitutional government.
After taking suggestions from many conservative leaders, the staff of the Oklahoma Constitution submitted bills to a vote of the members of the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC) for recommendation of the ten key votes.
A complete listing of all legislators, their vote on each of the ten key legislative issues, their total score for this year, and their cumulative score averaged from their previous years is found on the following pages. A detailed description of the ten key issues voted on by the legislators is also provided.
RATING CALCULATION
To determine this year’s rating, 10 points were earned for each conservative vote (designated by a C), and no points are awarded for a liberal vote (indicated by an L). Each failure to vote (recorded as a Z) provides only three points. When the rating system was created in 1979, it was decided that there should be a difference between voting liberal, and missing a vote. A legislator missing all the votes would score only 30%, which is our recommended score for seeking a replacement.
Thus, a legislator voting conservative on eight votes, liberal on one, and failing to vote on another, would receive eighty plus three, or an 83% conservative rating.
This year’s conservative rating was averaged with the legislator’s scores from previous years to obtain the cumulative score, or average for all the years that a legislator has been rated. With term limits, we are moving into a period where no legislator will have a cumulative score based on longer than twelve years. By examining this year’s score in relation to the cumulative score, the voting pattern of a particular legislator can be determined. While most score nearly the same, year after year, others trend upward or downward from their average. If your legislator is trending toward conservatism, please offer you encouragement and support. If your legislator is exhibiting a leftward trend, it is time to express your disappointment and suggest the need for a replacement if the trend is not reversed.
The average score in the House was 50%, down slightly from last year’s 52%. The highest average occurred in 1981, at 63%. This year, 52 legislators scored 70%, or better, up from 40 last year. These lawmakers should be commended. The Senate actually had a higher conservative average than the House, a first. The Senate had an average of 57%, up from last year’s 49%, and much higher than the 39% of two years ago.
Readers should consider replacing those who scored less than 30%, while giving close scrutiny to those who scored between 30% and 70%.
The Top Conservative and Top Liberal legislators were selected by their scores on the Index. Making the Top Conservative Legislators list were those who scored 80%, or better. On the Top Liberal Legislators list were the legislators who scored less than 20%.
THE TOP CONSERVATIVES
Eight legislators, five in the House and three in the Senate, scored a perfect 100% conservative rating this year. They were Rex Duncan (Sand Springs), Sally Kern and Mike Reynolds (Oklahoma City), Jason Murphey (Guthrie), and John Wright of Broken Arrow in the House. In the Senate, Patrick Anderson (Enid), Randy Brogdon (Owasso), and Anthony Sykes of Moore all had perfect 100% conservative scores.
Paul Wesselhoft (Moore) of the House scored 93%.
House members who made 90% included Charles Key (Oklahoma City), and Randy Terrill of Moore. In the Senate, 90% conservative scores were registered by Cliff Aldridge (Midwest City), Bill Brown (Broken Arrow), David Myers (Ponca City), and Jim Reynolds of Oklahoma City.
House members who scored 80% were Gary Banz (Midwest City), Marian Cooksey (Edmond), George Faught (Muskogee), Jeff Hickman (Woodward), Dennis Johnson (Duncan), Mark McCullough (Sapulpa), Ron Peters (Tulsa), Pam Peterson (Tulsa), Ron Peterson (Broken Arrow), Colby Schwartz (Yukon), T. W. Shannon (Lawton), and Mike Thompson of Oklahoma City.
Senate members with 80% conservative scores included Glenn Coffee (Oklahoma City), Brian Crain (Tulsa), Mike Johnson (Kingfisher), Clark Jolley (Edmond), Ron Justice (Chickasha), Todd Lamb (Edmond), Owen Laughlin (Woodward), Mike Mazzei (Bixby), Mike Schulz (Altus), and James Williamson of Tulsa.
THE TOP LIBERALS
Ten legislators, all House members, earned conservative scores of zero to lead the Top Liberals list. They included Scott Big Horse (Pawhuska), Wallace Collins (Norman), James Covey (Custer City), Darrell Gilbert, Chuck Hoskin (Vinita), Ryan Kiesel (Seminole), Al Lindley and Al McAffrey of Oklahoma City, and Wade Rousselot of Wagoner.
Jeannie McDaniel (Tulsa), and Jerry Shoemake of Morris scored a dismal 3% conservative.
Scoring 6% conservative were Bill Nations (Norman) and Paul Roan of Tishomingo, while John Auffet (Stilwell), Anastasia Pittman (Oklahoma City), and Glen Bud Smithson made 10% conservative. David Braddock (Altus) and Danny Morgan (Prague), made just 13%.
Ed Cannaday of Porum, and Jerry McPeak of Warner both scored 16%.
2008 Conservative Index
The votes used on this year’s Conservative Index are:
(1) MAKE FINGER IMAGING OPTIONAL
SB 1413 - by Sen. Randy Brogdon/Rep. Rex Duncan
This legislation would have ended mandatory finger imaging for driver’s licenses. Many consider compulsory finger imaging an invasion of privacy and are worried about potential misuse of the information. The digitally scanned images conform with international biometric standards which make it possible to share the electronic data with international databases. There is growing concern about the proliferation of computerized identification systems and related identity theft and security issues. The House passed the bill 58-33 on April 24, and the Senate passed it 38-8 on March 10. The bill died in conference committee. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
(2)BASKETBALL TEAM SUBSIDY
SB 1819 - by Sen. Glenn Coffee/Rep. Chris Benge
This bill expanded the Oklahoma Quality Jobs Act to include sports teams. It will provide a $60 million tax break over 15 years to help the owners of the Seattle SuperSonics relocate their team to Oklahoma City. It was approved by a 27-21 vote of the Senate on April 15 and a 67-32 vote of the House on April 17. It was signed by the governor on April 17. A "No" vote is conservative.
(3) MAKE ENGLISH OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
SB 163 - by Sen. Owen Laughlin/Rep. Randy Terrill
This bill was amended in the House to allow voters in the fall general election to decide if taxpayer-subsidized services should be provided in languages other than English. Since the law would only affect state government, private individuals and businesses would still be allowed to use whatever language they choose. Both Braille and sign language would continue to be allowed in government services. Several other specific exceptions were included for public health and safety, as well as trade, commerce and tourism. There was also an exemption for the languages of the 39 federally recognized Indian tribes in Oklahoma.
The bill passed the House by a vote of 70-28 on April 23. On May 7 the Senate voted to reject the House amendments and substitute weaker language in a 25-23 vote. This resulted in the bill being sent to a conference committee which effectively killed the proposal. In the House, a "Yes" vote is conservative. The “No” votes to the motion to substitute the weaker language and send the bill to conference are the conservative votes in the Senate.
(4) DEBT FOR ENDOWED CHAIRS
SB 1373 - by Rep. Ken Miller/Sen. Mike Johnson
Rather than appropriate the funds from the budget, the Legislature voted to issue $100 million in bond debt to match a backlog of private donations for endowed chairs at state universities. Under the program, endowment funds are established and the interest earned is used to pay the salary of designated professors. The state will borrow money (perhaps at a higher rate than the endowments will earn) to provide the state match. The bill was approved by the House on the 23rd of May by a vote of 80-16. It was approved in the Senate by a vote of 44-4 on the same day. The governor signed the bill on June 2. A "No" vote is conservative.
(5) VOTER FRAUD PROTECTION
SB 1150 - by Sen. John Ford/Rep. Sue Tibbs
This bill would require Oklahomans to show identification before they could vote. Election officials have discovered discrepancies in past elections, including votes being cast by dead people, residents of vacant homes or those with fictitious addresses. The legislation would require voters to present a valid identification card, driver license, passport, state identification card, a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, or any other government document showing the voter's name and address. If such a measure is eventually signed into law, Oklahoma would join 22 other states that have adopted similar voter identification requirements. The House approved the bill on April 14 by a vote of 56-42. The bill was returned to the Senate for consideration of House amendments where it failed (25 votes needed) in a 24-23 vote on May 6. The “Yes” votes are conservative.
(6) OMNIBUS PRO-LIFE BILL
SB 1878 - by Sen. Todd Lamb/Rep. Pam Peterson
Senate Bill 1878 was amended in the House to become an omnibus bill including several pro-life measures filed by lawmakers:
* Creates the Freedom of Conscience Act which protects the rights of healthcare providers to refuse to take part in the destruction of human life;
* Ensures the chemical abortion pill, RU 486, is used in accordance with FDA guidelines;
* Ensures the mother's consent to abort is truly voluntary, and protects against coerced abortions;
* Provides a woman with an ultrasound of her unborn child which she can view prior to undergoing the abortion; and * Cultivates respect for disabled children by banning the wrongful-life lawsuits that claim a baby would have been better off aborted.
The legislation was approved by a 38-10 vote on April 9 in the Senate and by an 81-15 vote on April 27 in the House. Gov. Henry vetoed the bill on April 16. The next morning, the Senate voted 37 - 11 to override the governor’s veto, and the House followed with an 81-15 vote to override. A "Yes" vote to override the veto is conservative.
(7) NEW HOPE SCHOLARSHIPS
SB 2093 - by Sen. Glenn Coffee/Rep. Ken Miller
This legislation would start a very minimal school choice program that would target poor families. Businesses or individual taxpayers could contribute to a scholarship fund and receive a tax credit for part of their contribution. Poor families in underperforming public schools could access the funds to pay tuition to a private school. In addition to providing poor families with the resources to escape bad schools, it would save the taxpayers money. The cost of the tax credits would be less than the cost of attending the government schools. This could have been a first step to break the monopoly currently enjoyed by the government schools. The Senate approved the bill 33-15 on March 13, but the House voted it down in a 40-57 vote on April 23. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
(8) OKLAHOMA GOVERNMENT TELEVISION
HB 2205 - by Rep. John Wright/Sen. Cliff Aldridge
This bill re-constituted the Oklahoma Education Television Authority (OETA), the state-subsidized television network, through 2012. If the bill had failed, OETA would no longer be a unit of Oklahoma government. With the diversity of channels available to nearly all Oklahoma citizens, there is no need for taxpayers to duplicate and compete with private enterprise broadcasters. The House and Senate authors are listed due to their committee chairmanship, but both voted against the bill. The continued state sponsorship and support was approved by a 79-18 vote of the House on February 28, and a 34-14 vote of the Senate on April 2. The measure was signed by the governor on April 8. A "No" vote is conservative.
(9) RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINTS PROTECTION
HB 2633 - by Rep. Sally Kern/Sen. Clark Jolley
This legislation requires schools to treat students who voluntarily express religious viewpoints in homework, artwork and other written or oral assignments the same as students expressing secular viewpoints on the same subject. It also allows students to organize prayer groups or religious clubs at school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other non-curricular student activities and groups. School administrators are often unaware of what is legal and wrongly stifle all religious expression by students. The bill clarifies and codifies within state law what the Supreme Court has already said is legal with regard to religious expression by students. The bill was approved by the Senate 48-0 on April 16 and the House 70-28 on May 12. It was vetoed by Gov. Henry on June 6. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
(10) TERM LIMITS FOR SECONDARY OFFICES
SB 1987 - by Sen. Randy Brogdon/Rep. Trebor Worthen
A provision added to this bill by Sen. Brogdon would have allowed voters in the fall general election to decide whether to enact 12-year term limits for secondary statewide offices (Lt. Governor, Attorney General, State Auditor and Inspector, State Treasurer, Commissioner of Labor, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The Legislature and the governor are already term limited. Incumbents are routinely reelected because they enjoy high name recognition and can typically raise campaign funds from the people they serve or regulate more easily than can challengers. Their long stays in office allow them to amass power and they become less responsive to the people. This has resulted in a permanent, professional class of politicians – far from the country’s founders’ vision that citizens would dedicate themselves for short periods to public service. Officeholder turnover freshens politics, giving new people a chance to serve and new ideas a chance to emerge in policy. The bill passed the House with amendments by a vote of 56-44 on April 17. The Senate failed to accept the House Amendments by a vote of 23-23 on May 5. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
Index In PDF Format.
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The Senate
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The House
Call 1-405-366-1125 or Email Editor@OklahomaConstitution.com.
Copyright © 2001 The Oklahoma Constitution
Read more!
OKLAHOMA CONSERVATIVE INDEX 2008 (Updated Fall 2008)
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The Senate
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The House
This issue of the Oklahoma Constitution presents the 30th annual Oklahoma Conservative Index, rating our state legislators. Members of each house of the Oklahoma Legislature were rated on ten key votes. A favorable vote on these issues represents a belief in limited government, individual liberty, traditional standards, free enterprise, and constitutional government.
After taking suggestions from many conservative leaders, the staff of the Oklahoma Constitution submitted bills to a vote of the members of the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC) for recommendation of the ten key votes.
A complete listing of all legislators, their vote on each of the ten key legislative issues, their total score for this year, and their cumulative score averaged from their previous years is found on the following pages. A detailed description of the ten key issues voted on by the legislators is also provided.
RATING CALCULATION
To determine this year’s rating, 10 points were earned for each conservative vote (designated by a C), and no points are awarded for a liberal vote (indicated by an L). Each failure to vote (recorded as a Z) provides only three points. When the rating system was created in 1979, it was decided that there should be a difference between voting liberal, and missing a vote. A legislator missing all the votes would score only 30%, which is our recommended score for seeking a replacement.
Thus, a legislator voting conservative on eight votes, liberal on one, and failing to vote on another, would receive eighty plus three, or an 83% conservative rating.
This year’s conservative rating was averaged with the legislator’s scores from previous years to obtain the cumulative score, or average for all the years that a legislator has been rated. With term limits, we are moving into a period where no legislator will have a cumulative score based on longer than twelve years. By examining this year’s score in relation to the cumulative score, the voting pattern of a particular legislator can be determined. While most score nearly the same, year after year, others trend upward or downward from their average. If your legislator is trending toward conservatism, please offer you encouragement and support. If your legislator is exhibiting a leftward trend, it is time to express your disappointment and suggest the need for a replacement if the trend is not reversed.
The average score in the House was 50%, down slightly from last year’s 52%. The highest average occurred in 1981, at 63%. This year, 52 legislators scored 70%, or better, up from 40 last year. These lawmakers should be commended. The Senate actually had a higher conservative average than the House, a first. The Senate had an average of 57%, up from last year’s 49%, and much higher than the 39% of two years ago.
Readers should consider replacing those who scored less than 30%, while giving close scrutiny to those who scored between 30% and 70%.
The Top Conservative and Top Liberal legislators were selected by their scores on the Index. Making the Top Conservative Legislators list were those who scored 80%, or better. On the Top Liberal Legislators list were the legislators who scored less than 20%.
THE TOP CONSERVATIVES
Eight legislators, five in the House and three in the Senate, scored a perfect 100% conservative rating this year. They were Rex Duncan (Sand Springs), Sally Kern and Mike Reynolds (Oklahoma City), Jason Murphey (Guthrie), and John Wright of Broken Arrow in the House. In the Senate, Patrick Anderson (Enid), Randy Brogdon (Owasso), and Anthony Sykes of Moore all had perfect 100% conservative scores.
Paul Wesselhoft (Moore) of the House scored 93%.
House members who made 90% included Charles Key (Oklahoma City), and Randy Terrill of Moore. In the Senate, 90% conservative scores were registered by Cliff Aldridge (Midwest City), Bill Brown (Broken Arrow), David Myers (Ponca City), and Jim Reynolds of Oklahoma City.
House members who scored 80% were Gary Banz (Midwest City), Marian Cooksey (Edmond), George Faught (Muskogee), Jeff Hickman (Woodward), Dennis Johnson (Duncan), Mark McCullough (Sapulpa), Ron Peters (Tulsa), Pam Peterson (Tulsa), Ron Peterson (Broken Arrow), Colby Schwartz (Yukon), T. W. Shannon (Lawton), and Mike Thompson of Oklahoma City.
Senate members with 80% conservative scores included Glenn Coffee (Oklahoma City), Brian Crain (Tulsa), Mike Johnson (Kingfisher), Clark Jolley (Edmond), Ron Justice (Chickasha), Todd Lamb (Edmond), Owen Laughlin (Woodward), Mike Mazzei (Bixby), Mike Schulz (Altus), and James Williamson of Tulsa.
THE TOP LIBERALS
Ten legislators, all House members, earned conservative scores of zero to lead the Top Liberals list. They included Scott Big Horse (Pawhuska), Wallace Collins (Norman), James Covey (Custer City), Darrell Gilbert, Chuck Hoskin (Vinita), Ryan Kiesel (Seminole), Al Lindley and Al McAffrey of Oklahoma City, and Wade Rousselot of Wagoner.
Jeannie McDaniel (Tulsa), and Jerry Shoemake of Morris scored a dismal 3% conservative.
Scoring 6% conservative were Bill Nations (Norman) and Paul Roan of Tishomingo, while John Auffet (Stilwell), Anastasia Pittman (Oklahoma City), and Glen Bud Smithson made 10% conservative. David Braddock (Altus) and Danny Morgan (Prague), made just 13%.
Ed Cannaday of Porum, and Jerry McPeak of Warner both scored 16%.
2008 Conservative Index
The votes used on this year’s Conservative Index are:
(1) MAKE FINGER IMAGING OPTIONAL
SB 1413 - by Sen. Randy Brogdon/Rep. Rex Duncan
This legislation would have ended mandatory finger imaging for driver’s licenses. Many consider compulsory finger imaging an invasion of privacy and are worried about potential misuse of the information. The digitally scanned images conform with international biometric standards which make it possible to share the electronic data with international databases. There is growing concern about the proliferation of computerized identification systems and related identity theft and security issues. The House passed the bill 58-33 on April 24, and the Senate passed it 38-8 on March 10. The bill died in conference committee. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
(2)BASKETBALL TEAM SUBSIDY
SB 1819 - by Sen. Glenn Coffee/Rep. Chris Benge
This bill expanded the Oklahoma Quality Jobs Act to include sports teams. It will provide a $60 million tax break over 15 years to help the owners of the Seattle SuperSonics relocate their team to Oklahoma City. It was approved by a 27-21 vote of the Senate on April 15 and a 67-32 vote of the House on April 17. It was signed by the governor on April 17. A "No" vote is conservative.
(3) MAKE ENGLISH OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
SB 163 - by Sen. Owen Laughlin/Rep. Randy Terrill
This bill was amended in the House to allow voters in the fall general election to decide if taxpayer-subsidized services should be provided in languages other than English. Since the law would only affect state government, private individuals and businesses would still be allowed to use whatever language they choose. Both Braille and sign language would continue to be allowed in government services. Several other specific exceptions were included for public health and safety, as well as trade, commerce and tourism. There was also an exemption for the languages of the 39 federally recognized Indian tribes in Oklahoma.
The bill passed the House by a vote of 70-28 on April 23. On May 7 the Senate voted to reject the House amendments and substitute weaker language in a 25-23 vote. This resulted in the bill being sent to a conference committee which effectively killed the proposal. In the House, a "Yes" vote is conservative. The “No” votes to the motion to substitute the weaker language and send the bill to conference are the conservative votes in the Senate.
(4) DEBT FOR ENDOWED CHAIRS
SB 1373 - by Rep. Ken Miller/Sen. Mike Johnson
Rather than appropriate the funds from the budget, the Legislature voted to issue $100 million in bond debt to match a backlog of private donations for endowed chairs at state universities. Under the program, endowment funds are established and the interest earned is used to pay the salary of designated professors. The state will borrow money (perhaps at a higher rate than the endowments will earn) to provide the state match. The bill was approved by the House on the 23rd of May by a vote of 80-16. It was approved in the Senate by a vote of 44-4 on the same day. The governor signed the bill on June 2. A "No" vote is conservative.
(5) VOTER FRAUD PROTECTION
SB 1150 - by Sen. John Ford/Rep. Sue Tibbs
This bill would require Oklahomans to show identification before they could vote. Election officials have discovered discrepancies in past elections, including votes being cast by dead people, residents of vacant homes or those with fictitious addresses. The legislation would require voters to present a valid identification card, driver license, passport, state identification card, a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, or any other government document showing the voter's name and address. If such a measure is eventually signed into law, Oklahoma would join 22 other states that have adopted similar voter identification requirements. The House approved the bill on April 14 by a vote of 56-42. The bill was returned to the Senate for consideration of House amendments where it failed (25 votes needed) in a 24-23 vote on May 6. The “Yes” votes are conservative.
(6) OMNIBUS PRO-LIFE BILL
SB 1878 - by Sen. Todd Lamb/Rep. Pam Peterson
Senate Bill 1878 was amended in the House to become an omnibus bill including several pro-life measures filed by lawmakers:
* Creates the Freedom of Conscience Act which protects the rights of healthcare providers to refuse to take part in the destruction of human life;
* Ensures the chemical abortion pill, RU 486, is used in accordance with FDA guidelines;
* Ensures the mother's consent to abort is truly voluntary, and protects against coerced abortions;
* Provides a woman with an ultrasound of her unborn child which she can view prior to undergoing the abortion; and * Cultivates respect for disabled children by banning the wrongful-life lawsuits that claim a baby would have been better off aborted.
The legislation was approved by a 38-10 vote on April 9 in the Senate and by an 81-15 vote on April 27 in the House. Gov. Henry vetoed the bill on April 16. The next morning, the Senate voted 37 - 11 to override the governor’s veto, and the House followed with an 81-15 vote to override. A "Yes" vote to override the veto is conservative.
(7) NEW HOPE SCHOLARSHIPS
SB 2093 - by Sen. Glenn Coffee/Rep. Ken Miller
This legislation would start a very minimal school choice program that would target poor families. Businesses or individual taxpayers could contribute to a scholarship fund and receive a tax credit for part of their contribution. Poor families in underperforming public schools could access the funds to pay tuition to a private school. In addition to providing poor families with the resources to escape bad schools, it would save the taxpayers money. The cost of the tax credits would be less than the cost of attending the government schools. This could have been a first step to break the monopoly currently enjoyed by the government schools. The Senate approved the bill 33-15 on March 13, but the House voted it down in a 40-57 vote on April 23. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
(8) OKLAHOMA GOVERNMENT TELEVISION
HB 2205 - by Rep. John Wright/Sen. Cliff Aldridge
This bill re-constituted the Oklahoma Education Television Authority (OETA), the state-subsidized television network, through 2012. If the bill had failed, OETA would no longer be a unit of Oklahoma government. With the diversity of channels available to nearly all Oklahoma citizens, there is no need for taxpayers to duplicate and compete with private enterprise broadcasters. The House and Senate authors are listed due to their committee chairmanship, but both voted against the bill. The continued state sponsorship and support was approved by a 79-18 vote of the House on February 28, and a 34-14 vote of the Senate on April 2. The measure was signed by the governor on April 8. A "No" vote is conservative.
(9) RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINTS PROTECTION
HB 2633 - by Rep. Sally Kern/Sen. Clark Jolley
This legislation requires schools to treat students who voluntarily express religious viewpoints in homework, artwork and other written or oral assignments the same as students expressing secular viewpoints on the same subject. It also allows students to organize prayer groups or religious clubs at school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other non-curricular student activities and groups. School administrators are often unaware of what is legal and wrongly stifle all religious expression by students. The bill clarifies and codifies within state law what the Supreme Court has already said is legal with regard to religious expression by students. The bill was approved by the Senate 48-0 on April 16 and the House 70-28 on May 12. It was vetoed by Gov. Henry on June 6. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
(10) TERM LIMITS FOR SECONDARY OFFICES
SB 1987 - by Sen. Randy Brogdon/Rep. Trebor Worthen
A provision added to this bill by Sen. Brogdon would have allowed voters in the fall general election to decide whether to enact 12-year term limits for secondary statewide offices (Lt. Governor, Attorney General, State Auditor and Inspector, State Treasurer, Commissioner of Labor, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The Legislature and the governor are already term limited. Incumbents are routinely reelected because they enjoy high name recognition and can typically raise campaign funds from the people they serve or regulate more easily than can challengers. Their long stays in office allow them to amass power and they become less responsive to the people. This has resulted in a permanent, professional class of politicians – far from the country’s founders’ vision that citizens would dedicate themselves for short periods to public service. Officeholder turnover freshens politics, giving new people a chance to serve and new ideas a chance to emerge in policy. The bill passed the House with amendments by a vote of 56-44 on April 17. The Senate failed to accept the House Amendments by a vote of 23-23 on May 5. A "Yes" vote is conservative.
Index In PDF Format.
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The Senate
PDF Of The Conservative Index For The House
Call 1-405-366-1125 or Email Editor@OklahomaConstitution.com.
Copyright © 2001 The Oklahoma Constitution
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
