Connect with us

News

Texas Speaker Bonnen Set to Kill Statue Protection Bill after Killing Constitutional Carry

Published

on

With 10 days left to spare, Texas House Speaker Dennis Bonnen has killed very moderate “monument protection” legislation, forbidding the popular measure from even being debated, and this comes after the Joe Straus-protege’ also killed constitutional carry, sources close to leadership report.

In doing this, the Texas House abandoned conventional transparency standards which make individual lawmakers more accountable to their constituents. For example, the minutes showing how individual members voted on the monuments’ legislation still are not available to the public.

When the Texas Committee on Calendars voted to kill SB 1663, substituted in the House for HB 583, the individual votes were not published, concealing Republican betrayals of their constituents — and such dishonest procedural “delays” are common practice when a speaker rams through his personal agenda in conflict with the majority of the electorate.

Trending: More Americans Now Identify as Republicans Than They Do As Democrats

take our poll - story continues below

Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Consider the below screenshot of the State of Texas’ official bill registry, which shows that actions on HB 583 have not been updated since May 6, 2019, even though bill was killed early this morning:

And see the following “bill stages” snapshot:

The use of this practice is a clear attempt to protect the careers of the representatives responsible for killing good bills. These leadership appointees, in return, dutifully salute the personal political worldview of their “boss” (HINT: not the voter), Speaker Dennis Bonnen.

As we speak, the minutes remain unpublished.

The bill in question protected much more than subjectively “constroversial” Civil War memorials, and specifically, protected the universally-loved Alamo Cenotaph memorial from destruction, i.e. “relocation,” by political neophyte George P. Bush. We reported extensively on Bush’s ethical and legal abuse of power this morning on BLP’s home page.  We’ve also regularly reported on Bush’s baldfaced attempt to tear down the vaunted 60-foot, 80-year-old Alamo Cenotaph (“empty tomb.”)

This is similar in form to the speaker killing constitutional carry legislation vis-a-vis the Second Amendment, putting Texas behind almost every other state in its protection of US Constitution’s right to “keep and bear arms,” which “shall not be infringed.” Bonnen infringed.

Although it passed a Senate committee, passed on the floor of the Senate, and passed out of the House tourism committee, the Calendars Committee decided it shouldn’t even be given a chance on the floor (since it would easily win passage.) By the way, it’s the second time the Calendars Committee killed HB 583.

Calendars Committee Vice Chairman Joe Moody, (D-El Pason) in an interview with the Dallas Morning News, defended the committee’s actions by exclaiming:

I don’t think it represented the best of what Texas has to offer. It has no place on the House floor.

Other major influencers, like Daniel Miller of the Texas Nationalist Movement, do not agree:

The Alamo Cenotaph, statues to Sam Houston, schools named after Travis, Bowie, Crockett, Lamar and even Thomas Jefferson are now in greater danger than before.

We have to fight them every single step of the way. (Emphasis Added)

Whatever your views on the issue, please contact the Texas Legislature’s main switchboard, and ask for Speaker Dennis Bonnen’s direct office line: 

Home office: (979) 848-1770.

Austin office: (512) 463-0564.

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Have a hot tip for Big League Politics?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@bigleaguepolitics.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to BLP Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@bigleaguepolitics.com.

You Might Like

News

Did Bernie Sanders Just Endorse a Neocon Regime Change Foreign Policy?

Published

on

Is Bernie Sanders the anti-war candidate that many non-interventionists are making him out to be?

Journalists Jacob Crosse and Barry Grey presented some interesting observations about Sanders’ foreign policy views.

Sanders criticized the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Suleimani in January and also stressed his opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

During the Iowa presidential debate, Sanders loudly boasted, “I not only voted against that war, I helped lead the effort against that war.”

take our poll - story continues below

Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • Should Mitt Romney be EXPELLED from the U.S. Senate by the GOP for his vote to convict President Trump?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

However, Sanders changed his tune when chatting with the New York Times.

The answers the Sanders campaign gave the Times showed its flexibility when it comes to foreign policy.

In other words, the Sanders campaign signaled to the military and intelligence apparatus that Sanders won’t present a threat to their interests and may actually carry out their interventionist agenda.

One question in the survey that the Times sent the Sanders campaign stuck out above the rest.

The third survey question asked, “Would you consider military force to pre-empt an Iranian or North Korean nuclear or missile test?”

The Sanders campaign responded, “Yes.”

Based on this response, Sanders’ is signaling that he’s willing to continue Bush-era policies of “preemptive war.”

Like Obama, Sanders’ opposition to the Iraq War was a matter of politics rather than a principled opposition to regime change wars.

His campaign was also asked, “Would you consider military force for a humanitarian intervention?”

Sanders responded, “Yes.”

Some of the wars that the U.S. carried out in the name of “human rights” have been the Bosnian war and the bombing of Serbia in the 1990s along with the aerial campaign against Libya in 2011 and the Civil War launched in Syria.

All in all, Sanders’ pro-peace/non-interventionist image is at best window dressing.

Under a Sanders presidency, the interventionist status quo will likely stay in place.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


You Might Like

Trending