What Are Republicans Doing About Critical Race Theory?

             The Biden administration and numerous progressives are pushing the critical race theory (CRT). Now, Republicans are pushing back with legislation that opposes Biden’s rule to teach American children to make judgments according to skin color. Three Republican representatives introduced legislation: Rep. Burgess Owens (Utah), Rep. Chip Roy (Texas), and Rep. Dan Bishop (North Carolina).

            According to Fred Lucas, Owens introduced two measures to respond to Biden’s proposal to fund critical race theory in the schools. “One of the proposals by Owens … is a bill that would prohibit teaching of critical race theory within federal institutions…. The other is a resolution highlighting the dangers of teaching critical race theory in U.S. schools and decrying the ‘damaging philosophy within this prejudicial ideological tool.’” 

            Burgess has strong feelings about CRT because he “grew up attending segregated schools in the Jim Crow South … when people were treated differently based on the color of their skin.” He added the following in his public statement:

Critical race theory preserves this way of thinking and undermines civil rights, constitutionally guaranteed equal protection before the law, and U.S. institutions at large. This is the United States of America, and no one should ever be subjected to the discrimination that our laws so clearly prohibit.

            Roy’s legislation – titled Combating Racist Teaching in Schools Act (CRT Act) – proposes the blocking of “federal tax dollars from going to schools that teach critical race theory.” The bill includes “any elementary school, secondary school, or institution of higher education.”

Critical race theory, like all its racist derivations, is a direct affront to our core values as Americans….

No one in America – be they students, servicemen and women, government employees, or anyone – should be indoctrinated to hate our country, its founding, or our fellow citizens. Worse yet is its pernicious demands to “divvy us up by race” and perpetuate the lie that we should be treated differently by virtue of our skin color. There is no room for state-sanctioned racism anywhere in our society, and we must oppose it with all our might….

As Americans we believe that all are created equal by God Almighty, regardless of their skin color. That self-evident truth, and the American promise that comes with it, are worth fighting for.

            The first legislation proposed by Bishop – titled Stop CRT Act – would “prevent federal funds from paying for teaching critical race theory.” Roy’s second bill – titled Combatting Racist Training in the Military Act – would “block teaching critical race theory to the nation’s armed forces.” He explained the following in a public statement:

Critical race theory is a poison to the psyche of our nation. This destructive ideology has no place in America’s institutions, and the bills I’m introducing will help ensure that our government isn’t spending resources on promoting it.

            There is need for such legislation because the teaching of critical race theory is widespread in our nation. Anyone who opposes CRT can be punished, such as Lt. Col Matthew Lohmeier, who was the commander of 11^th Space Warning Squadron at Buckley Air Force Base Colorado. He was relieved of duty because he criticized military training in critical race theory. In fact, “the entire Defense Department, with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s approval, promoted a similar reading list, supposedly to combat suspected extremism in the ranks.”

            Bishop stated that Biden and the radical left are “pushing this neo-Marxist propaganda into our classrooms, places of work, and even the military.” He stated that “Legislators on every level must fight back against this insidious effort to undermine the truths about our nation’s founding with everything we’ve got.”

            Lucas wrote that local school districts across the nation are implementing the teaching of CRT in their schools and gave the following examples.

·         Public schools in Evanston, Illinois, promoted the book “Not My Idea: A Book About Whiteness,” with one school asking parents to discuss the book with their children at home. Among other things, the book argues that “whiteness is a bad deal” and “always was,” and that “you can be white without signing onto whiteness.” …

·         In Cupertino, California, educators required third graders to deconstruct their racial identities and then rank themselves according to their “power and privilege.”

·         An advisory board in Loudoun County, Virginia, called for teachers to be dismissed if they opposed the school district’s “equity training” inspired by critical race theory.

·         In Buffalo, New York, the school district applied critical race theory to an “emancipation curriculum” telling students that “all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism.” The district eliminated the line after it stirred controversy. 

·         In Louisiana, the Orleans Parish Board of Education adopted a resolution that says “our country’s racist history” is “still pervasive in today’s systems.” The resolution also calls the nation “an unjust systemic racist America.”

Who Is Art del Cueto?

            My VIP for this week is Art del Cueto, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council. He is familiar with the southern border because he has been patrolling the Tohono O’odham Indian Reservation in Arizona for most of his career. He knows much about the drug war and the amounts of drugs coming over the border. He claimed that numerous amounts of drugs are being smuggled through the area – drugs that include hard drugs, cocaine, methamphetamines, and fentanyl – and then added: 

That doesn’t stay in just those communities. It gets spread out throughout the United States. I’ve said it many times before. Because of how bad it is lately and because of the bonanza that the drug smuggling cartels are seeing [as] they’re able to bring their product across, I believe every single law enforcement officer in America, every sheriff in America, they’re all border sheriffs. And they’re in essence all border police officers because of how bad it is and how much drugs are coming into the U.S.

            Del Cueto was born in Mexico, but his parents were U.S. citizens. His parents were visiting Mexico and did not have time to return to the United States before he was born. As a citizen of the United States, he is concerned for the future of America. He knows about the current border crisis, and he worries about how future generation will be affected.

My loyalty is just toward one country, and when I see the words that are being used, when I see how disrespectful some people have been toward America and toward our country, it’s frightening and it’s sad. Because I believe a lot of these individuals are going to grow up in America and they will not have a true allegiance to this country.

Was There Enough Fraud to Swing Elections?

             The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday is election integrity. President Donald Trump has become “enemy #1” of the people – mostly Never Trumpers, Democrats, liberals, and socialists – because he continues to claim that he won the 2020 presidential election.

He may be right!

            Evidence is coming out that there was election fraud – enough to swing at least one state. The Arizona State Senate is auditing Maricopa County, and the audit is showing fraud. Dr. Kelli Ward, President of the Republican Party of Arizona, made the following statement: 

The Democrat plan for reengineering our country starts with open borders and open elections. Forget the rules, anyone can enter our country illegally, and if you ask for voter identification or try to stop phony mail-in ballots from being counted, or try to stop those dead people from voting, well, that is what those Democrats call voter suppression. And at this very moment, while the hand-counting of ballots continues, there’s a lot happening behind the scenes and legal action is imminent… And now Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer has revealed in a letter to voters that he learned that prior to his term a breach of voter identification information occurred last election cycle and is now being investigated by law enforcement. If I were a Democrat, I think I’d be in a frenzy myself. [Emphasis added.]

Ward was not the only person in Arizona to make a statement about election fraud. Arizona Senate President Karen Fann sent a four-page letter to the Maricopa Board of Supervisors this week. She demanded answers to “serious issues” that are resulting from the audit of the 2020 election. According to Alex Swoyer at The Washington Times, Fann told Jack Sellers, the Chairman of the Board, that county attorneys will not deliver internet routers – used during the election -- to be inspected during the Senate’s audit. She said that the county refuses to provide the passwords to enter vote tabulation devices. 

The letter also said that the contractors hired by the Senate have raised issues about “apparent omissions, inconsistencies, and anomalies relating to Maricopa County’s handling, organization, and storage of ballots.” The letter also noted that the inspectors discovered one database directory that was deleted from an election machine, removing details related to the election. “This suggests that the main database for all election related data for the November 2020 General Election has been removed.”

            Fraud is showing up in states other than Arizona. According to The Washington Examiner, Officials in Republican-majority Antrim County in Michigan told a judge that they found 1,061 “phantom votes” while auditing the election. The officials initially reported that Joe Biden had gotten the most votes in the presidential race. Then they found tabulation errors, which showed that Donald Trump won the county. Human error was blamed, but two local citizens filed a lawsuit stating the election was manipulated the Dominion Voting Systems machines that tabulated the votes. 

            Matthew DePerno, attorney for William Bailey of Antrim County explained the problem. A recount in December showed 15,962 ballots, but the database for the Michigan secretary of state showed only 14,901 ballots. These means that there were 1,061 voters who are not on the voter rolls. DePerno also said that data shows nearly 100% of voters aged 65 to 80 turned out for the election and 20% of the ballots were sent to Post Office boxes.

Attorneys made arguments before Antrim County Circuit Judge Kevin Elsenheimer in a virtual hearing on Monday over the scope of the ever-expanding lawsuit and whether to dismiss the case, in which both sides have issued dueling analyses. Defendants, which includes Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, say the plaintiff lacks standing and has already received everything he initially sought from the court. The judge said he will likely make a decision next week.

            A third audit is taking place in New Hampshire. U.S. News reports that the attorney general’s office announced that there will be an audit of the legislative election that has been controversial. The audit will begin on Tuesday and will review the results for four state legislative seats. Republicans won all four seats, but a Democrat requested a recount. The results showed that all four Republicans gained an additional 300 votes, but the Democrat lost 99. The discrepancy adds fuel to claims that the election process in America is not fair. 

            With discrepancies in the election process from Arizona to Michigan to New Hampshire, there are questions about the entire 2020 election. Did fraud cause Republican candidates for the Senate to lose? Democrats wanted total control badly. Did they want it enough to commit widespread election fraud?

Why Is Marriage between a Man and a Woman Essential?

             My Come, Follow Me lesson for this week took me to Doctrine and Covenants 49-50. The members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were gathering to Kirtland, Ohio, in 1831 when these sections were revealed. Leman Copley had joined the Church of Jesus Christ, but he did not let go of all the teachings of his previous church, the Shakers or United Society of Believers in Christ’s Second Appearing.

            Some of the Shakers’ beliefs were completely opposite to the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ. One such belief was that the Second Coming of Jesus Christ had already taken place and that He had returned in the form of a woman, Ann Lee. The Shakers did not believe that baptism by water was essential, and they rejected marriage, believing that people should live in total celibacy for their entire life. Some of them did not believe in eating meat.

            The Prophet Joseph Smith was concerned about the situation. He wanted to have a “more perfect understanding on the subject,” and he inquired of the Lord. His prayer was answered with the revelation that is now Section 49. This revelation was given through Joseph Smith to Sidney Rigdon, Parley P. Pratt, and Leman Copley on May 7, 1831, at Kirtland, Ohio. It refutes some of the basic concepts of the Shaker group. Rigdon, Pratt, and Copley took a copy of the revelation to the Shaker community that was located near Cleveland, Ohio). They read the entire revelation to the group, but the Shakers rejected it. The revelation contained God’s will concerning the Second Coming of Christ as well as counsel on other matters.

5 Thus saith the Lord; for I am God, and have sent mine Only Begotten Son into the world for the redemption of the world, and have decreed that he that receiveth him shall be saved, and he that receiveth him not shall be damned.

6 And they have done unto the Son of Man even as they listed; and he has taken his power on the right hand of his glory, and now reigneth in the heavens, and will reign till he descends on the earth to put all enemies under his feet, which time is nigh at hand.

7 I, the Lord God, have spoken it; but the hour and the day no man knoweth, neither the angels in heaven, nor shall they know until he comes (Doctrine and Covenants 49:5-7).

            A few verses later, the revelation answered the questions about baptism, marriage, and eating meats. The revelation refuted all four basic concepts of the Shaker group.

12 Believe on the name of the Lord Jesus….

13 Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ… for the remission of sins….

14 And whoso doeth this shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, by the laying on of the hands of the elders of the church.

15 And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man.

16 Wherefore, it is lawful that he should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation;

17 And that it might be filled with the measure of man, according to his creation before the world was made.

18 And whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God;

19 For, behold, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and that which cometh of the earth, is ordained for the use of man for food and for raiment, and that he might have in abundance (Doctrine and Covenants 49:12-19).

            While all these topics are essential to the gospel of Jesus Christ, this essay will be about marriage between a man and a woman. Marriage is fundamental to the plan of Heavenly Father for the eternal happiness of His children. Therefore, Satan is eager to create confusion about it. God ordains marriage between one man and one woman, and this is His pattern for marriage.

The Book of Mormon – Another Testament of Jesus Christ enlarges our understanding of this pattern. In teaching the Nephites, Jacob taught, “For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none” (Jacob 2:27). Jacob then gave the reason why this is God’s pattern:

28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.

30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things (Jacob 28-30).

            The Lord’s pattern for marriage is one man and one woman – unless He gives a different commandment to increase the number of children being born. He gave the commandment for plural marriage in the early days of the Church of Jesus Christ, but the Saints were forced by the U.S. government to stop practicing it. The commandment is still in force, but members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do not practice plural marriage and have not practiced it since 1890. Any members who practice plural marriage are excommunicated.

            One may wonder why the Lord is so adamant about His pattern for marriage. The bottom line is that marriage between a man and a woman is essential Heavenly Father’s plan. He sent His sons and His daughters to this earth to gain physical bodies and experiences needed to develop the capacity to be like Him.

Elder David A. Bednar of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gave two reasons why marriage between a man and a woman is essential: “Reason 1: The natures of male and female spirits complete and perfect each other, and therefore men and women are intended to progress together toward exaltation…. Reason 2: By divine design, both a man and a woman are needed to bring children into mortality and to provide the best setting for the rearing and nurturing of children.” Elder Bednar expanded on his reasoning as follows:

By divine design, men and women are intended to progress together toward perfection and a fulness of glory. Because of their distinctive temperaments and capacities, males and females each bring to a marriage relationship unique perspectives and experiences. The man and the woman contribute differently but equally to a oneness and a unity that can be achieved in no other way. The man completes and perfects the woman and the woman completes and perfects the man as they learn from and mutually strengthen and bless each other….

A home with a loving and loyal husband and wife is the supreme setting in which children can be reared in love and righteousness and in which the spiritual and physical needs of children can be met. Just as the unique characteristics of both males and females contribute to the completeness of a marriage relationship, so those same characteristics are vital to the rearing, nurturing, and teaching of children (“Marriage Is Essential to his Eternal Plan,” Ensign, June 2006, 83-84).

            We are created in the image of God, male and female. If only males or only females were necessary for His plan to function, Heavenly Father would not have created us as male and female. Therefore, both males and females are necessary, and marriage between a man and a woman is essential to God’s plan.   

Why Is Abortion Not Considered to Be Essential Health Care?

             Families are stronger when all members recognize that every life has value from conception to natural death. In a society where the political agenda is abortion-friendly, it is sometimes difficult to know where to draw the line. Is every abortion wrong? What should be done with pregnancies that began in incest or rape? Is abortion essential health care?

            There are many tough decisions involving abortion. However, pro-life advocates worry that the political agenda about abortion is now affecting the medical specialty of obstetrics and gynecology. Nevertheless, OB-GYN medical professionals who are also pro-life are upholding the sanctity of life as they oppose the idea that abortions are part of essential health care.

            Dr. Christina Francis is the chairwoman of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG). Francis spoke about the situation with Virginia Allen at The Daily Signal and made this statement, “The fact that 85% of women’s health care specialists don’t perform abortion, to me, tells you everything you need to know that abortion is not essential health care because if it was, you wouldn’t have only 15% of OB-GYNs performing it.” Francis continued by saying that AAPLOG “has submitted amicus briefs to the Supreme Court in defense of our members’ conscience rights and on every major abortion case since 1973.” Most Americans know that 1973 is the year that the Supreme Court legalized abortion with its Roe v. Wade decision. 

            Francis considers helping women and children as her mission in life. She enjoys being a part of women’s lives from their teenage years to their menopause years. However, her mission is to take this message to the women and girls in this nation and around the world: “abortion is not good for them.” Francis stated that she was “always” prolife. Her family is Christian, and her parents taught her about the sanctity of life and that we are all children of God and valuable to Him. In addition, her mother works for a [National] Right to Life affiliate in Southern Indiana. However, she did not know why she was pro-life for a long time, and she did not know how to defend her position beyond her Christian faith.

            This changed one day after her best friend studied abortion during the 40 Days for Life. She called Francis and said, “We need to talk.” Then she enlightened Francis: “Well, you’re a woman, and you’re an OB-GYN, and you say that you’re pro-life. But what are you really doing about it? I think that you could be doing so much more.” Francis thought about the challenging words of her friend and decided, “She’s right.”

And I find myself in this position where I’m a woman, and so regardless of whether this is correct or not, I think that people tend to listen to women a little bit more on this issue. Even though I’m of the opinion, certainly, that men have just as much of a say about whether abortion is right or not. But I’m a woman and I’m an OB-GYN, and so I see these preborn children from their very earliest stages, the earliest that we can see them.

And I see them throughout pregnancy, and I see them when they’re born. And I see all of the emotions that go along with a pregnancy, whether it be a wanted pregnancy or an unplanned pregnancy. Because of that, and because of my medical training, maybe I am really uniquely positioned to be able to address this. So it really was just kind of a searching of my heart, of totally shifting my perspective….

And so [I] just did a lot of soul searching. And I’ll tell you that the moment that I think I knew for sure that this was what I was supposed to do was: I was in Washington, D.C., for national March for Life and I went to the Holocaust [Memorial] Museum there…. I was in one of the rooms in the museum that talks about kind of the lack of response to what was going on to this Holocaust, this slaughter of millions of innocent people that was going on.

And the lack of response from the U.S. and other Western countries. And I just remember thinking when I was sitting in that room and I was reading some of the news articles and listening to the audio commentary. I just remember getting very indignant and thinking, “Man, if I would have been alive back then I would have done something, there’s no way I could have been quiet about that.” How could people know that millions of innocent people were being killed and not do anything about it?

The irony of that thought hit me in that moment. And I just thought, there’s a holocaust going on right now. There’s a holocaust of preborn children who are being killed every day for the sake of convenience. And not only are preborn children being killed, but women are being harmed. And they’re being lied to about abortion and about what abortion can, quote unquote, accomplish for them or help them to accomplish.

I know better and so why am I not saying anything or doing anything about it? And so that really was kind of my defining moment, I would say. I’d always considered myself pro-life, but [that’s] where I just thought, “OK, I can’t be silent about this anymore.” …

… I was very lucky and blessed to receive some pro-life apologetics training from Scott Klusendorf with Life Training Institute. And just really for the first time, I think ever in my life, [I] saw that yes, being a Christian informs my stance on abortion. But also even if I wasn’t a Christian I would still be pro-life, because it just makes sense when you look at true human equality. And when you look at the fact that science tells us beyond a shadow of a doubt that those preborn children are full-fledged, whole, distinct, and living human beings from the moment of fertilization.

            Francis said that her “duty as a physician is to protect that life as well as the life of the mother.” Once her eyes were opened to her mission, she gradually met other pro-life people and was introduced to the CEO at AAPLOG. She had another eye-opening experience when she attended her first AAPLOG conference.

We hold an annual educational conference every year for physicians and other medical professionals that provide academic-level presentations for continuing medical education about different aspects of abortion and the pro-life movement and conscience protections in medicine….

But I was blown away at the level of the presentations that were given, the science that was presented. And realizing that science really is on the side of the pro-life movement. Not only when you look at the fact that these preborn children are in fact human beings and deserving of our protection, but also when you look at the overwhelming evidence that exists, that abortion is harmful for women. Not only does it end the life of an innocent human being, but it also sometimes permanently harms the life of that woman who has made that abortion decision, oftentimes under duress, or just in a moment of panic. Not realizing and not being told by the abortion industry, that this is going to harm her lifelong.

And so that was another life-changing moment for me to say not only should I be defending the rights of these preborn children, but man, in my practice and in my interactions with colleagues, I need to be passing this information along. That really, if we’re recommending what’s best for our patients, that’s never going to include abortion.

            There is much more to Francis’ story. The bottom line is that she wants to arm other physicians and people in the medical field with information on how to oppose the political agenda of abortion. That information is contained in this idea:

I’m opposing abortion because it’s bad for my patient. I’m not just opposing abortion because I have a moral objection to it; I’m opposing it because it’s bad for my patient. And it’s bad for me as health care provider to violate my conscience, to violate what I know to be best for my patient, just to give into this cultural narrative.

            Just as Francis uses her knowledge as a Christian and as a physician to oppose abortion because abortions are bad for both the child and the mother. We can also use our knowledge to oppose the abortion political agenda. We know that a pre-born baby is more than just a clump of cells as we were once told because we can see the baby in a sonogram. We can oppose abortion on demand because it is bad for child and mother, and we can strengthen our family, community, and nation as we do so.

 

Where Is the Proof that America Has Systemic Racism?

             School children are being taught that America was created on the backs of slaves and that our history began in 1619 with slavery rather than in 1776 with the Revolutionary War. Riots are raging about the racist inequality in America. Politicians claim that new election integrity laws are racist. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris claim that the nation has systemic racism. Where is the proof?

            Deroy Murdock wrote an interesting article focusing on the claims of systemic racism and immigration – both legal and illegal. I note that he is a black man just for a point of reference. He gave the following information, which is the most recent data from Department of Homeland Security. 

Between 2015 and 2019, 548, 891 African immigrants became permanent U.S. residents.

In 2020, these were the top 10 African sources for such new green card holders – plus each nation’s black population percentage, courtesy of the CIA “World Factbook.”

1. Nigeria: 12,247 individuals from a 99% black country.

2. Democratic Republic of Congo: 11,752; 100%.

3. Ethiopia: 5,461; 87.4%.

4. Ghana: 4,532; 98.5%.

5. Kenya: 3,063; 91.8%.

6. Eritrea: 2,845; 95%.

7. Cameroon: 2,747; 95.5%.

8. Somalia: 2,636; 85%.

9. South Africa: 2,372; 79.2%.

10.Sudan: 2,017; 70%.

Total: 49,672 permanent residents from 10 nations that are 90.1% black, on average. America’s population is 13.4% black.

            Murdock pointed out that there were more permanent residents to America in 2020 from each of these African nations than there were from Sweden – which is 82.3% white. He noted that a nation that is systemically racist would encourage white immigrants and discourage black immigrants – which was not the case.

Between 2015 and 2019, Caribbean green card awardees totaled 816, 522. They, too, swapped black-ruled islands for this allegedly racist superpower. Here is 2020’s top five snapshot:

1. Jamaica: 12,719 individuals; 92.1% black.

2. Haiti: 9,285; 95.5%.

3. Trinidad & Tobago: 1,656; 34.2%.

4. Bahamas: 549; 90%.

5. St. Lucia: 449; 95%.

Total: 24,668 new permanent residents from five nations that are 81.4% black, on average.

            Murdock again compared the permanent residents to America in 2020 from each of the Caribbean islands to those coming from Denmark with its 86.3% white population. Why were there more people from St. Lucia immigrating to “systemically racist” America than there were from white Denmark?

            Noting that it would be easy for a systemically racist nation to deny visas to black people, Murdock noted that the U.S. accepts hundreds of thousands of applications. The U.S. Embassy in each nation would simply deny the visa applications if America were systemically racist. He asked a good question: If America hated its black citizens so much, why would it allow more black people to immigrate? He then noted that legal immigration is not the only way that black people are coming to America.

Beyond legal immigration, which “system racism” could control, African and Caribbean illegal aliens keep running across America’s borders and breaking into this country without permission. Between 2015 and 2019, DHS apprehended 16,210 African illegal aliens, including 9,003 from the 10 nations analyzed above. During those years, 14,534 illegal aliens came from the five forementioned Caribbean states.

It’s much harder for “systemic racism” to control this illegal black influx. But beyond that, one wonders why these Africans and Caribbeans leave their majority-black nations to penetrate Earth’s supposed headquarters of anti-black bigotry.

Moreover, they do so while risking drowning in the Rio Grande, rattlesnake attacks, Gila monster bites, fatal dehydration amid cacti, and robbery and rape by human traffickers. Why would blacks overseas confront these dangers merely to be crushed beneath the cold, hard heel of America’s racist boot?

            Murdock made some great points! Why do black people from numerous nations that are mostly black come to “systemically racist” America? They obviously do not believe the big lie that America is “systemically racist.” They come to America for the same reasons that many other people come to America – for the same freedom and opportunities that America offers to people of all colors.

Why Did Cheney Have to Go?

             Today, Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming) was voted out of her third-ranking leadership position in the Republican minority in the House of Representatives. The reason given is that she was not a team player. Former President Donald Trump may be out of office, but he is still the head of the Republican Party. This is a fact that Cheney could not accept, and she often spoke against Trump and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement.

            Republican members in the House gave Cheney a chance to play for the Republican team when the majority of the GOP members in the House voted in February to retain her in the leadership position. However, she continued to fight against the MAGA movement and lost her support in the House.

            House Minority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-California) is the highest-ranking Republican in the House, and GOP Whip Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) is the second-highest ranking Republican in the House. Cheney was the third-highest ranking Republican member. McCarthy and Scalise grew tired of Cheney not supporting the direction that the GOP is moving. The people of Wyoming are also tired of her non-support of the MAGA movement, so she may not be re-elected to Congress.

            It sounds like Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-New York) will be voted to take the leadership spot vacated by Cheney. However, conservatives in the House are not pleased with the choice. Stefanik does not have a stellar record for supporting conservative causes. She has a lifetime record of voting nearly 44% conservative, compared to Cheney’s lifetime record of 78.3% conservative.

Stefanik may not have voted conservative as often as Cheney, but she represents a completely different type of constituency. Cheney represents Wyoming, where more than 70% of the residents support Trump. Stefanik represents New York, which is mostly liberal. Stefanik was outstanding in her support for Trump during both impeachment trials.

Time will tell if Stefanik is suitable for the position. If she is not a good fit for conservatives, she will not last. The freedom caucus in the House got rid of both John Boehner and Paul Ryan as the Republican leader in the House. Now they have ousted Cheney. Boehner, Ryan, and Cheney were all members of the “Establishment” in Washington politics – meaning that they are part of the “Swamp.” Cheney’s father was Vice President in the George W. Bush administration, so she has deep roots in the swamp of Washington.

The people who are elected to represent Americans in the federal government are supposed to work for the people who elect them. Cheney was not working for the people of Wyoming or for the Republican Party. This is the reason why she had to go. The next election will determine if the residents of Wyoming want her to continue as their representative.