What a crock! Or is that crook?

What a crock! Or is that crook?
Where's all of the, "Democrats For Riley" signs hiding out? No one's seen any of those!

The Story of Nancy "Turn-Coat" Riley (Democrat).

Nancy ran as a conservative Republican, got to Oklahoma City, and governed as a liberal Democrat.

Driving through her district (37 - Sand Springs, Sapulpa, Glenpool, Bixby, South Tulsa, Broken Arrow), you will see signs that read, "Republicans For Riley". These are obviously intended to confuse and deceive her constituents. Someone who would purposely do that should not be an elected representative of, "We, the people...".

She does not state that her party is now the Democrat Party in her TV commercials or throughout her brochures.

The Oklahoma Democrat Party has been a willing accomplice throughout the period of this behavior; she has raised a very substantial war-chest of campaign funds, after her antics gave full control of the State Senate to the Democrats. Perhaps, after 100 years, it's time for Oklahomans to, finally, let the Republican Party have their 1st chance ever to see if they can do a better job for the good people of the great state of Oklahoma.

The word is hitting the streets about these deceptive practices and Oklahomans are NOT going to put up with this type of activity. A candidate of either party should be forth-coming to their constituents when they've changed political party affiliation; especially, when they make the switch after they've been elected.

Her opponent, Dan Newberry, has been running a clean campaign, having living-room discussions with literally thousands of his neighbors. He wants to represent all of his district's citizens in an open and honest manner. He wants to personally hear, and give deep consideration to, the concerns, thoughts, and ideas of his constituents.

At the time of this writing, Dan Newberry has never even met the citizenry that is putting forth this blog, but he will enjoy the support of this blog, because we need more HONEST elected representatives in government.

Riley Kills House Bill 2470

http://www.roemermanonrecord.com/2006/08/riley-kills-house-bill-2470.html

I received this press release from the South Tulsa Citizens Coalition detailing how State Senator Nancy Riley (Democrat) derailed a bill that would have forced the proposed toll bridge in South Tulsa to be competitively bid.

For the past nine months, the South Tulsa Citizens Coalition (“STCC”) has been working with Oklahoma State Representative Pam Peterson and Oklahoma State Senator Clark Jolley to firm-up Oklahoma’s law regarding the types of public contracts that are subject to competitive bid. House Bill 2470 clarifies the definition of a “public construction contract” under the Oklahoma Competitive Bidding Act by expressly including those types of public contracts that are derived from other forms of consideration besides cash, such as the pledging of a certain percentage of revenues or toll charges to a public entity.

On February 16, 2006, House Bill 2470 passed in the Oklahoma House of Representatives by a vote of 94 to 3. On April 25, 2006, the bill passed in the Oklahoma Senate by a vote of 43 to 2. However, Oklahoma State Senator Nancy Riley had the title of House Bill 2470 stripped*. Instead of the bill being sent to Governor Henry to be signed into law, Senator Riley’s actions basically killed House Bill 2470.

STCC spokesman Michael Covey said, “It just makes sense that a bridge that will cost over $30 million to construct should be put out for competitive bid. I can’t believe that our legislative system allows one senator, who received numerous campaign contributions from the principals of IVI, to derail a bill that had such overwhelming support of the people. Nevertheless, STCC will continue to work with state lawmakers to make sure that a situation like the South Tulsa bridge situation never happens in Oklahoma again.”

* - to change the title of a bill to a few words which are briefly descriptive but constitutionally unacceptable. The major intent of this action is to ensure that the bill will go to a conference committee. The same effect may be achieved by striking the enacting clause. Any Senate legislation being reported out of a Senate committee, with the exception of an appropriation bill, must have an enacting clause or resolving clause and a Senate and House author.

No comments: