Showing posts with label Leslee Post. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Leslee Post. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Roll Call~

Ethics Reform or  Placating People?


What do you think about our legislators being lobbyist too? Jason Tolbert from Tolbert Report has a few great post on the new "ethics bill" SB194, regarding the "cooling off" period for legislators and lobbyist.


http://tolbertreport.com/2011/01/31/ethics-bill-filed-beebe-calls-for-stronger-bill/

http://tolbertreport.com/2011/01/31/the-joyce-elliott-rule/



For American Majority yesterday I posted the blog "Paging Senator David Johnson~ Where Are You?" which discussed the reimbursement part of the bill. This is where those clearly taking advantage of the system ruin it for everyone. I will say it again,  "I don’t think there’s a constituent in our state that would expect or want our law makers to absorb personal costs for officially tending to the affairs of our State" but we must have accountability and transparency across the board for the sake of all parties concerned. 






Arkansas Responds to Healthcare News


Yesterday a Florida  federal judge declared Congress violated the Constitution by requiring Americans to buy insurance as part of the Obamacare health overhaul passed last year and said the entire law "must be declared void." Here are some snippets of the conversations in Arkansas on the topic: 


Lt. Governor Mark Darr:
 “I fully support District Judge Roger Vinson’s ruling that the health care reform law is unconstitutional. The judge’s ruling and the fact that a majority of states were parties to this lawsuit proves that this case has merit. I join the vast majority of Arkansans in my opposition to health insurance being mandated and run by the federal government.”


Congressman Tim Griffin: 
 "I welcome the ruling in favor of the 26 states that sued the federal government over the constitutionality of the health care law. I voted to repeal the law earlier this month, and I look forward to continuing the process in the House to replace it with a new one that increases access, lowers costs, limits government, promotes job creation and follows the Constitution."


A statement from the GOP of Arkansas: 
The Republican Party applauds today’s ruling in Florida that the Obamacare mandate is unconstitutional as it further erodes individual rights of choice,” said Republican Party of Arkansas Executive Director Chase Dugger. “Attorney General McDaniel continues to argue the suit is frivolous and costly, but he is forgetting to mention the $100 to $200 million Obamacare will cost our state. While Arkansas’ four Congressmen took a principled stand to represent Arkansas values by recently voting to repeal the harmful law, Attorney General Dustin McDaniel took a stand to oppress freedom of choice and individual liberty by not joining the lawsuit."


Rep. David Meeks sent this tweet:
I applaud the judges ruling and once again shows the bill I filed is Constitutional and should be passed into law. #arleg


On the left all I could find in Arkansas was this nugget~
Activist Judge Rules Affordable Care Act Unconstitutional-On To The Supreme Court~ funny how when a judge follows the Constitution they are called "activist" by the left.


Great Links to National Stories :


Wall Street Journal





A Joke? I Don't Think It's a Joke, Do You? 

Here's Representative Leslee Post's "commentary" on SB113 the bill that would stop tax payer funded abortions in Arkansas. 

There are several bills that I will be watching in the upcoming week. One very disturbing one is SB113 sponsored by Senator Cecile Bledsoe. It prohibits health insurance exchange policies from offering coverage for abortions except through a separate rider. 
What a joke. And the insurance companies know it. Most people are not going to plan ahead for an abortion. What bothers me MOST about this bill is that it denies coverage for procedures needed by women who have had a miscarriage (abortion) from natural causes."

I would be interested in knowing where Ms. Post gets the idea this bill "denies coverage for procedures needed by women who have had a miscarriage (abortion) from natural causes."

I would encourage Ms. Post to consult with her constituents who by majority voted against her in the November election. If you remember correctly Ms. Post was seated because the winning candidate was found to be ineligible (read more...)


She might also want to talk to her counter parts in the Senate who passed the bill overwhelming and by bipartisan vote 27-8. Seems senators in Arkansas don't think it is a joke either.


I have read the bill and can't find what she is referring to anywhere. If I didn't know better I would think this is one of those straw-man arguments meant to detract from the real issue of people being made to pay for abortions with their tax money. What are your thoughts?

I just spoke with Senator Bledsoe here is her comment:

“That is an inaccurate statement. There is no language in this bill that would prohibit someone who has suffered a miscarriage of natural causes to get the appropriate care from their physician. It surprises me that anyone would use incorrect medical information to mislead people to the affects of this bill. If you have a miscarriage you will not be denied medical protocol or treatment by your physician.” 

Also spoke with Jerry Cox, president of Family Council:
"I am not sure where Ms. Post got that idea. This bill has absolutely nothing to do with miscarriages. This is an attempt to muddy the waters. If we do not pass this bill I am certain your tax money will be used for abortions on demand."  


Do You believe in States Rights and Constitutional Rule?

Taken directly from Curtis Coleman's blog, this bill will heard by the Senate Committee on Judiciary 


by Curtis Coleman
On Wednesday of this week, eight Arkansas state senators will have a unique opportunity to demonstrate their fidelity to their oath of office by affirming the supremacies of the Arkansas and U. S. Constitutions.
Arkansas Senate Bill 97, “an act to protect rights and privileges granted under The United States Constitution and The Arkansas Constitution,” will be considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee under a special order of business at 11:00 a.m. in Room 171 of the State Capitol in Little Rock. (The Committee will begin consideration of its regular agenda starting at 10:00 a.m.) S.B. 97 is sponsored by Senator Cecile Bledsoe (R-Rogers) and 30 other state senators and representatives (listed at the end of this article).  Contact information for the members of the Senate Committee on Judiciary is listed at the end of this article.
The proposed legislation includes the prescription that “Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code, or system that would not grant the parties affected by the ruling or decision the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the United States Constitution and the Arkansas Constitution.”
While it is extraordinarily difficult to imagine why any elected representative of the people of Arkansas might oppose this profoundly simple and equally profound affirmation of the Arkansas and U.S. Constitutions, the bill is expected to face opposition from some members of the Committee.
Opponents are expected to propose (a) that the bill has a hidden agenda and is a gimmick to insinuate that some Arkansas courts or groups are currently not following the Arkansas Constitution, (b) the bill targets specific groups or religions and (c) Arkansas companies which are or plan to do business in other countries would be adversely affected.  All of these concerns are erroneous and unfounded.
As the co-founder and former President/CEO of an Arkansas company doing business on four continents, I can affirm that S.B. 97 will have either no affect or will strengthen the position of Arkansas-based companies doing business with companies and/or customers in other countries.  Nor does the proposed legislation “target” any specific group or religion.  If this important legislation is adopted, no Arkansans will be limited in the practice of their religion as long as their practices do not conflict with the Arkansas Constitution or the United States Constitution.  The sponsors of the bill insist that S.B. 97 is simply but importantly a pre-emptive affirmation of the supremacy of the Arkansas and U. S. Constitutions.

A news release Monday from the wildlife agency said a fish kill spotted Friday involved only about 500 fish, compared with 83,000 in a fish kill reported Dec. 29.



         
            FEED



RobyBrock8:53am via web
#ARLeg Senate sends ethics bill to State Agencies; House puts ethics bill in Rules Committee. http://bit.ly/gipP6o


ademillo7:49am via web
Ark. Senate to take up a ban on "herbal snuff" sold to minors #ARLeg http://tinyurl.com/4tgcwnk

Disclosure statements are out~Ark. Governor reports more than $175K investmenthttp://ow.ly/3NMcp #ARLeg

RT @FamilyCouncil: Urgent! House Public Health Committee needs to hear from you!http://tinyurl.com/47oqtpl #arkansas #ARLeg#prolife

Moore and Bookout file historic, yet small, ethics legislation: http://bit.ly/hIbTQ3 #ARLeg


#ARLeg Sen. Holland's high-speed chase provides plenty of column fodder for Ark. editorialists, bloggers. http://bit.ly/fVAx8o

Tough week for Ark. poultry cos. Arkadelphia plant closing w/385 lost jobs and this will impact NE Arkansas. http://bit.ly/gJoKp1







Friday, January 7, 2011

Disenfranchised Arkansas District 83?



If you have ambitions of being a playwright I hope you are taking notes on the political happenings here in Arkansas. You could have a best-selling drama.


Remember the story of Tom Fite and Leslee Post from district 83? Mr. Fite was found ineligible to be an Arkansas Representative by Pulaski County Circuit Court Judge Collins Kilgore because he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor bribery charge more than 26 years ago. (Read more here)


Yesterday afternoon members of the 2011 Arkansas House of Representatives voted to seat Leslee Milam Post (D-Ozark) who received only 41% of the vote.


Rep. John Burris (R-Harrison), the Minority Leader, made a motion to delay the seating of District 83 (Post's seat) asking that the Claims Commission be able to review the case just as they had for Rep. Elect Fred Smith just days prior.  Burris explained that the wished of the people in district 83 need to be taken into account and their votes counted."
His motion failed, 60-28.


Then there was a motion to seat Ms. Post to which Rep. Nate Bell (R-Mena) made a statement pointing out that the ruling to disqualify Tom Fite clearly usurped the Arkansas State Constitution and a ruling by the Arkansas Supreme Court case in 2002, Magnus v Carr.


Here is a note from Rep. Bell explaining~


Today I spoke against the seating of Leslee Post in District 83.  My opposition was based on the need to preserve the constitutional separation of powers outlined in the Arkansas Constitution Article 4 sections 1 and 2  and Article 5 section 11 and was not intended to address the merits of the Post/Fite case which is pending before the Arkansas Supreme Court.  The Pulaski Circuit Court ruled in October that the ballots cast for Tom Fite were not be counted.  My argument today was based on the Arkansas Constitution as interpreted by the Arkansas Supreme Court in Magnus v Carr and numerous precedent cases.  The court held that the judicial branch does not have jurisdiction in election cases involving the legislative branch of government due to the separation of powers.  The court has repeatedly held that allowing the judicial branch to intervene in matters related to legislative elections would allow the judges to essentially choose members of another branch of government.  My viewpoint was defeated today 61-29.  I will always stand for constitutional principles even when it is politically unpopular.  6 Republicans voted with the Democrats to allow the judge to usurp the constitutional authority of the legislature.
The citizens of District 83 deserve to have their votes counted.  The votes would have been counted and Fite would have been declared the winner had the judge not intervened. The House would then have determined Fite's eligibility as outlined in Arkansas law.  If he was deemed ineligible then a vacancy in election would have been declared and a special election held.  Instead, the house today voted to seat the person who lost the election garnering less than 42% of the votes cast.  We allowed a circuit judge to elect a person to the legislature who received less than a majority of the votes cast.  I believe we set a very dangerous precedent today.
Here's a link to the case I cited:
http://courts.state.ar.us/opinions/2002b/20021024/02-604.html

The legislature voted 61-29 for Ms. Post to be sworn in and seated on Monday.


Anyone else see a problem here? The way I understand it ( and if I am wrong please let me know) according to the Arkansas Constitution and a case that was decided just 9yrs ago by the Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge Kilgore circumvented the Constitution of our state, ignored precedence, and did a huge disservice to the voters of Dist. 83.


The voters clearly voted for the more conservative candidate, as did the majority of voters in the state, and nation for that matter, and were smacked down. Was this a case of  over-reaching judge. Isn't that the story?


P.S
THANK YOU!! to our 29 Arkansas State Representatives that held the line. Thank you to Representatives John Burris and Nate Bell for attempting to stop the circumvention of our Constitution. I look forward to working with these men and women to bring to Arkansas fiscal responsibility, limited government, and Constitutional soundness.