My wife and IFiled under: Politics | Tags: Constitutional Requirements, current-events, Texas
The Texas Constitution Article 1 Section 16 says “that no bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or any law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall be made.” This was pointed out by Rep. David Simpson when SB 293 which had passed the Senate, was brought to the floor by Speaker Strauss, a RINO of the first order. This bill was written because NASCAR wanted to be paid for items that were prohibited under the existing law, passed by the 83rd Legislature in 2013. NASCAR threatened to boycott Texas if they were not allowed to be reimbursed for these expenses. It may be that NASCAR should be invited to do as they wish, I enjoy the races, but not being held up by criminal organizations so I can enjoy them.
The present law does not allow funds to be reimbursed unless the entity is named under SB 1678 which as stated above was passed in 2013. Since that is the case, the bill now before the Texas House SB 293, is an unconstitutional bill, and if it passes the house, the Governor should veto it because it is unconstitutional. This is a travesty, but one that is to be expected because the Speaker of the House in Texas is a Republican in name only (RINO) and even appoints Democrats to chair Committees in a Republican dominated House. It is really high time that the Republicans get rid of these RINO’s and elect Republican conservatives to office. I personally think we should give Austin to California, since it is populated by Liberal Democrats.
Of course that is not possible unless we can somehow uproot the entire city and move it to California. (LOL) There should however be some way to enforce the Constitution of Texas in our own House, but it seems that the Democrats control it as long as Strauss controls the Speaker Chair.
Filed under: Politics | Tags: Democrats, LULAC, NAACP, Picture ID, Texas, Voting
If I want to cash a check, or take money out of my account, the bank wants a picture ID. When I went for Social Security after I retired, I needed ID. When I went to take a test in the hospital, I needed to prove my ID. Why doesn’t anyone complain about all the other Identification needs we have in our daily lives. When a cop pulls you over on the highway, you have to show your drivers license, at least that ‘s what they tell me. (LOL). The truth is that life requires us to identify ourselves in many situations so I have to admit I do not understand why it is so bad that we also want to ask people to identify themselves when they vote.
The State of Texas passed a law that says you have to produce a picture ID in order to vote in an election, DOJ said it discriminated against Hispanic voters. It seems reasonable to me to have this law, yet the folks in the Democratic party, LULAC, NAACP and others are taking the state to court saying that it is discrimination against blacks and hispanics. Why? The state issues ID’s to people without cost to them, seems to me that these folks want to continue having fraud as a part of the election process. I hate to think that this is a truth, but I don’t see any other reason for this adamant cry of discrimination. If this was 30 or 40 years ago, I would be inclined to believe that these folks had the right of it. Not today, simply because, we have folks with Hispanic surnames and there are also many folks of color running for office and holding seats of power in both business and politics in the State of Texas today. The same folks who are against this law, are also the ones who took the state to court over the voting redistricting. Making the same discrimination claims.
It is time for the voting rights act to be questioned and if not done away with, at least modified. It is anti-constitution simply because it treats one group of states differently than others. The assumption is that the state is automatically guilty of discrimination, even when there is no good reason for that assumption.
What do y’all think?
texasjq2 