Washington D.C. Comes to the Kentucky General Assembly

by Jim Ramsay

Since mid summer last year, Rasmussen has been polling health care reform. During that time, health care reform has been opposed by the American people. The final numbers of the poll the week of the vote was 41% in favor with 54% opposed. This weekend, despite this overwhelming public opposition and political activism, the Democratic Party in Washington has rejected the will of the American people.

Against that backdrop, the Kentucky State Sovereignty resolution is more important then ever. As was previously reported, one man, 43rd District Representative Darryl Owens, has rejected petitions, letters, calls, and rallies. His staff offered to return calls and never followed through. He attempted to avoid citizens and ran from them rather then speaking to them or giving the bill a hearing:

http://www.ky912.com/2010/03/sovereignty-stampede-breaks-into-sprint.html

Last week, the resolution was stopped by a procedural maneuver:

http://www.ky912.com/2010/03/kentucky-state-sovereignty-update.html

Rep. Lee submitted the discharge petition again. Citizens showed up in support. Rep. Lee again stood in support of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. He referred to the supporters in the gallery. He mentioned that some of them had been in Washington this past weekend and had watched the politicians in Washington D.C. using parliamentary procedures with the health care reform bill. Rep. Lee said that he hoped the Kentucky Assembly would not do the same. Democratic Party Floor Leader Adkins stood to attack the petition. This time, he objected to the petition as being the same petition that had been previously rejected. 95th District Representative and Speaker of the House Greg Stumbo heard the objection but moved to the original complaint. He allowed Representative Lee to address the concern. Representative Lee quoted Section 89 of the printed copy of the Kentucky State Constitution which reads, “Concurrent orders and resolutions on same footing as bill.” During this time, Rep. Adkins began to pace around his desk area. He appeared to know the outcome of his objection. Speaker Stumbo said that the quote above, which is listed in both the printed and online versions of the Constitution, are not in the actual text. He said he had gone back to the original text of the Constitution, which he said was ratified August 3, 1891 which he said was a Monday. The actual text is below and agrees with the LRC summary:

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/Legresou/Constitu/089.htm


Regardless of the clear language of the Constitution and the summary by the LRC, Speaker Stumbo said that while he agreed with the sentiment of the resolution, that his personal interpretation was that a resolution was not a bill. By specifying that the Constitution was ratified on a Monday, which was not in the text of the Constitution available in written form or the online form, it indicated that the speaker had done additional research in an attempt suggest that the people supporting the resolution did not understand the law. He pointed out that it was in his power to rule as he wished. As noted in a prior article, Rep. Owens questioned the relation of this resolution to the election of Barrack Obama and the role of Glenn Beck. Neither individual had anything to do with this resolution. Yet, by his words, choices, and actions, he brought them into the business of Kentucky. The resolution had been submitted before by a Democratic member of the assembly while President Bush was the president: this resolution was about supporting the Constitution, not an individual or party. If the speaker truly agreed with the resolution, he could have asked it to be heard by Rep. Owens’ committee. Instead, their party has chosen to side with Washington D.C. against the citizens of the commonwealth. They have chosen to emulate the policies of Washington D.C. where neither the will of the people nor the rule of law matter. As a party, they determined to which committee the resolution would be assigned. They stood by and ignored the calls, letters, petitions, personal visits, rallies, and emails from citizens. With this leadership in the house, we are clearly neither a republic nor a democracy. They have chosen not to represent the people of the commonwealth. We should ask them, who have they chosen to represent and do they vote in November? We will.