An item here about the nutty states rights resolution that cleared committee the other day, and the support a couple of Democrats gave to this Republican propaganda tool, was mailed around in NW Ark. It drew a response from state Rep. Uvalde Lindsey, who'd told an election campaign audience that he was socially liberal. States rights rhetoric is not exactly a staple in liberal salons, I can testify.
Lindsey sent this CYA note to the yellow dogs who'd supported him:
Folks --- let me give you the other side of the story:
HCR1011 was defeated in committee the first time it came up - 11 to 9. I voted NO. When the bill came back up on Wednesday, it was amended to remove the harsh and inflammatory language. Sovereignty was replaced by rights, demand with request, cease and desist with refrain.
But that's not the issue. With nine Republicans on the committee, this thing was going to sit and stew, a festering pot of discontent and a bone of contention. I had requests from constituents of mine in District 88 that strongly supported HCR1011 ---- they simply asked for a chance to be heard on the floor. Butch Wilkins and I accommodated that request.
As you know, the bill is wrong-headed, offered for the wrong reason.
But everyone should have an opportunity to be heard, to present their case, make their points, and live with the consequences. I think that's how good politics should work. This is not Washington --- we don't always vote the party line, and as a result we get some things done. Some of the biggest supporters on the Conservation Easement bill, and the Tobacco Tax (health care) bill, were republicans.
I have not gone "to the dark side" --- I hope you understand that.
I will vote AGAINST HCR1011 when it comes to the House floor, and it will die.