Posted on 05/31/2015 5:56:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
I will be very surprised if Abbott agrees with and signs this SB 19.
Best move now is to advise the Governor our view of this infringing SB 19.
Lucky my Texas State Rep. Matt Schaefer is conservative and opposed this mess.
Fascism is as rampant among the GOP as it is the Dims. The really sad part is that some “conservative darlings” are as fascist as any of them and we look the other way. It’s what they count on.
C’mon people. We are NOT Libtards.
Sarah Davis (HD 134) @SarahforHD134,
this RINO is my Texas rep. - how unsurprising - Primary is March 3 2016. looking forward to unseating her - Last cycle she had opposition. This time we may be able to replace her
You’re welcome
To me a RINO is someone who votes at least 75% with the rats, not occasionally
What do you do when you have a two-party system, and both of ‘em suck?
How do you determine this?
I just checked up on her in vote smart.org, she definitely is a RINO. She’s got good grades though regarding guns
There is no recall in TX except at the municipal level, depending on the home rule charter.
Easy, search for US Senate votes and go to the site. With the house vote it’s a little different and I am not quite sure how to do that
Doesn’t matter either Texas or any other State include the Federal Government. It is so damn corrupt that Americans will never know this crap we elect.
during bushies second term i laid this out, only to be ridiculed and ostracized...
it is us versus them..
not pub and dem..
not lib and so called conservative..
but the people versus politicians..
until we the people stop listening to the pundits and start electing our neighbors, we are doomed..
Patrick is a snake.
I don’t listen to the pundits and I don’t vote for those who make a lot of promises, which most don’t have any intention to keep anyway and some might want to, but are unable to
This is not a freedom of speech issue; hardly any major case is. It is always a freedom of the press issue - and such issues are not infrequently wrongly decided. For example, McCain-Feingold was wrongly upheld in the infamous McConnell v. FEC ruling by SCOTUS.Why emphasize freedom of the press over freedom of speech? Both are crucial, but the signal difference between the two is that "the press" is a technology, and "the press" costs money - at a minimum, ink and paper money, in reality the cost of the press itself, and pay for the operators of the press. So freedom of the press ineluctably entails unregulated freedom to spend money to promote ideas - political, religious, or other.
As to the "technology" aspect:
- The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries . . . - Article 1 Section 8.
This implies that although the framers and ratifies of the Constitution could not specifically anticipate the Internet, the TV, the radio - or even the telegraph - they peremptorily approved of all of them, with the caveat that
- Article. V. provides for modification to the Constitution if a technology should become destructive.
The government - of Texas or of the United States - cannot regulate the press, including the internet, without establishing an illegitimate "title of nobility" or established priesthood of people who are allowed to publish on the internet.
You'd think that from the propaganda that emanates from Texas, but the facts are that we have a huge number of legislooters in Texas that are democrats with an "(R)" by their name, because they know they can't get elected if they are honest about it.
Bob Strauss is the definition of RINO.
Texas is way behind the curve on gun rights, and we only just got open carry passed (with an unconstitutional permit required), but it doesn't take effect until January.
I knew Villaba would be on that list.
The situation with SB19 is both better and worse than the author states. I may have to write an article on it.
First, the bill has to, at minimum, go to conference committee because the house radically changed the bill from one about ethics to one that protects the legislators from the people. So, it has to go to the conference committee, have these measures stay in, then go the Senate and be passed, and go back to the House and be passed, then be signed by the Governor. There is a good chance to stop it at each of these points.
Second, the legislators did not limit this to only the Capitol. They put in an amendment to include their home offices! That is correct. If you meet with your legislator in your district, and record the conversation without their permission, this law would allow them to sue you.
Yes, we should mount a campaign to stop this and to defeat the legislators who proposed and pushed it.
Release the tapes outside of Texas and see how far their stupid law gets them. LOL.
Bump
http://www.texastribune.org/2015/05/27/house-kicks-ethics-reform-debate
State Sen. Van Taylor, a Plano Republican who has carried ethics reform in his chamber, quickly issued a statement on Tuesday night expressing “astonishment for the elimination of meaningful ethics reform” in the House version of the bill.
“Some in the House apparently don’t think elected officials are the problem and instead muddled the bill with a litany of bizarre measures that point the finger at everyone besides themselves, including a page from Hillary Clinton’s playbook to launch an assault on the First Amendment,” Taylor’s statement said. “This is one of those head shaking moments that rightfully raise doubts in the minds of our constituents as to the Legislature’s resolve to serve the people above all else.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.