#304 Censoring The People & Other Legislative Updates

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:01):
Good morning.
Welcome everyone to the state of freedom.
Sorry, we're running a few minutes late.
Tech difficulties were plaguing us, but we have overcome them.
uh We are going to, we are going to live.
We, we live to fight another day, Chris.
ah I wanted to make a couple of announcements.

(00:23):
We are now easier to find on Rumble.
So if you uh are someone who watches, uh
Watch the shows on Rumble.
We're on there.
You can just search for us now.
The state of freedom, we should come up and you can give us a follow there.
We were a little harder to find before.
So got that sorted out.
uh Another announcement.

(00:44):
If you are not aware, I started a new show a couple of weeks back called For the Love ofFreedom.
It's live every Tuesday at 2.30.
and it is all within the State of Freedom platform.
wherever you listen to the State of Freedom on those channels, you'll be able to findthese shows as well.
So hope you enjoy them.

(01:05):
Would love your feedback, would love any feedback on some guests you'd like me tointerview.
All right, well today we have updates on executive power, on censorship, parental rights,the future of our water systems and more.
Before we get into all the
Juicy and gory details of that.
Let me read the scripture of the day.

(01:26):
It's Habakkuk chapter 1 verses 3 through 5 and it says, m

(01:52):
Therefore justice comes out perverted.
Look among the nations, observe, be astonished, wonder, because I am doing something inyour days you would not believe if you were told." And the Lord sent me to that scripture
this morning and it was so encouraging to me because it's so easy for us to feeloverwhelmed with the corruption that we see in the world around us.

(02:16):
This has been an absolutely undeniable part of my awakening over the last five, six yearsnow.
that we see more and more corruption everywhere we look.
And I believe that's the experience of most people that I've talked to about theirawakening experience, that you just, you see so much corruption everywhere.
And there are moments and injustices that come up that make us feel like the wicked dohave us completely surrounded.

(02:43):
But God, but God.
These are days when he's doing something so amazing, so transformative in the world thatit astonishes us.
And if we're honest with ourselves, we're in the midst of it.
When we step back, we can see that we are regularly being astonished.
So let's not forget what the prophet Elisha told us, that there are more with us than arewith them.

(03:06):
And the Lord has put us each in this moment in history to partner with him to take downdarkness.
So don't give up.
Don't get into discouragement.
you're in discouragement, get out of there, rise up in faith and be sure you are fightingin the place he's called you to fight because we cannot take part in the glories of
victory if we do not go into the fight.

(03:27):
That is so, so true, Danielle.
You know, the wicked surround the righteous.
The wicked surround the righteous.
It's like on all sides.
And but, know, you and I have talked about this before.
When God pulls us through and gives us the victory, I think he wants us to have no choice.

(03:52):
The conclusion that
God was responsible for this must be inescapable.
And the only way that that can happen is if it looks in the eyes of the world as thoughthere's no way.
In fact, if you read the Psalms, there were times when David's enemies were scoffing athim saying, where is your God?

(04:13):
Where is your God?
Just arrogantly ah chiding him and saying, there's no hope for you.
And sort of that's sometimes the way
I think the world is supposed to look at people just before the great victory emerges, andeven they have to point to God and say there's no possible way this could have happened

(04:34):
without God.
Yeah.
And we've seen some victories this week that are pretty remarkable.
while we have, while we do have some things to be salty about and keep fighting for, we doalso have some surprising victories.
ah All right.
Well, you want to get into it?

(04:56):
Yeah, let's get into this.
Okay.
First up was on Tuesday in house transportation, Senator Valerie Hodges, uh Senate bill216.
This is her contracts bill uh that would give incentives for early completion of roadconstruction process projects and discourage delays.

(05:19):
It's amazing that we need a bill to do that, but uh
I guess the pitchforks of the people standing around the Bourg Bridge is not enough.
uh
me, the pitchforks are not limited to the Bourg Bridge in this state, for sure.
But it was, you know, the glue that holds the Democrats and the Republicans together,which is the mutual frustration over the condition of Louisiana's roads and the delinquent

(05:48):
way in which uh these road projects are so often handled.
So SB 216, Danielle, really will help to streamline that process, changes the biddingprocess, and creates real incentive ah to complete these projects timely.
ah Senator Hodges did a very good job presenting the bill in House transportation.

(06:09):
As you know, Ryan Boriak is the chairman of that committee.
He handled it well, and it's on to the House floor, SB 216.
Yeah, passed favorably with no objections because there's one thing that everyone inLouisiana can agree on.
The roads are garbage.
The bridges aren't being fixed fast enough and DOTD is not working.

(06:33):
And DOTD is not working exactly.
All right.
uh Also on Tuesday in House civil law was Senate bill 39 by Jay Morris.
This is his over detention bill.
um You said, Chris, I believe that this has received a number of amendments to make it notnearly as bad as it was, but it did pass even though, I mean, we've been opposed to it the

(06:58):
whole time.
ah But it did make it through the House civil law committee.
It made it through the House Civil Law Committee, Danielle.
This bill has gone from something that was really bad to something that is just probablyunnecessary.
I think Senator Morris wants to get to the finish line with something on this, but I don'tknow that the bill is even necessary at this point.

(07:23):
I did hear, Danielle, and I'm very happy to report that there was a pretty detailedexplanation by general counsel for the Department of Corrections in the committee hearing.
Wow.
where he talks about the efforts that are being made to streamline the communicationsystems in DOC with the deputies and the sheriffs and the courts and the clerks.

(07:46):
And he made the representation that because of the way they are doing this now, thisshould not be a huge problem going forward.
So I was very happy to hear that.
And obviously he thought enough of it to come to the committee and testify and give thatexplanation.
ah So I do believe they're making a genuine effort to fix this problem instead of justdisplacing the blame.

(08:12):
Well, that's so encouraging.
And also that should give the air cover to Senator Morris to drop the bill, right?
He could say very well, we heard from the DOC, we'll give them the benefit of the doubt ifthey're able to move forward with what they've got, then we don't need this.
You would think that they could do that.
He could do that.
Yeah, they could.

(08:32):
And of course the bill still has to be voted on on the House floor and we'll see whathappens.
But as we said before, the former concerns that we had regarding the bill are not nearlyas grave as they were because of all the amendments on it.
Great.
Okay.
Well, this was, in my view, a massive, massive slap in the face.

(08:57):
What comes up next?
And that's Senate Bill 80 by Senator Greg Miller.
This is the bill that we have been railing against as a giant censorship bill, a hugeoverreach by the Secretary of State's office, and basically uh forced on us.
by our legislators, by those who are sent to represent us who seem to have voices in thisstate.

(09:20):
ah This is the exit polling bill, Chris.
Yeah, who seemed to have.
Yes, this is the worst bill of the session.
Second, possibly the House Bill 206, which we'll get to.
The bill that the government just issues a sweeping ban on any ordinary regular citizenfrom conducting a lawful exit poll.

(09:46):
The only state in the country, if this passes, that will make a distinction between
legitimate news organizations like, you know, MSNBC, Danielle and CNN, and ordinaryLouisiana citizens, and only the legitimate news organizations in Louisiana would be able
to conduct lawful exit polls.
Absolutely atrocious bill.

(10:08):
We have raised the, you know, the fire alarms on this.
I do want to mention that on the Senate floor on SB 80, when this when this was voted on,
There were five Republicans who stood up and voted against it for all the right reasons.
And if I'm not mistaken, Danielle, it was Senator Blake Miguez Senator Alan SeabaughSenator Mike Fesi Senator Rick Edmonds, and there was one other, right?

(10:39):
Did you say okay I have Edmonds, Fesi, Hodges, Miguez, and Seabaugh
I hadn't mentioned Hodges.
Those five voted against it and they are on the ball.
They know the constitution.
Right now, this is now going to the governor's desk, Danielle.
So we've adjusted the call to action at lacag.org to go straight to the governor urging aveto of this bill.

(11:06):
You know, Danielle, if Governor Landry wants to try and reignite the rapidly ah
dying flame of his conservative support in the state of Louisiana.
This would be a good step in that direction to do it uh and to explain to the public whyhe's doing it.

(11:27):
So we are watching this very closely and he has every reason to veto this horriblelegislation by Senator Greg Miller.
But I did want to give those five Republican senators full credit for standing up againstthis grotesque government overreach.
Yeah, and it's time to mobilize our lawyers.

(11:48):
Absolutely.
you know, William Most, who, as you know, brought the bill challenging the formerconstitutional amendment that was struck down, that was voted down, uh will be on the red
line dial on this.
Great, great.
I can't wait to see this challenged because I think it needs to go further.

(12:08):
I think the challenge needs to go further than just this law because I don't think anyoneneeds to even register with the Secretary of State's office to conduct an exit poll.
I find that also repugnant.
Yes.
I think you put this, I think that your position on this fundamental free speech and freeassociation issue, Danielle, is analogous to your position on the second amendment when it

(12:33):
comes to the right to keep and bear arms.
Where in the, and you're the one who has reiterated this a lot during Blake Maguez's billon the second amendment last session.
Where does the constitution authorize the government to require permission?
for a law abiding citizen to keep and bear arms.
And I think that is analogous to your position on this issue as well, even though it's afree speech issue.

(12:57):
Shall not infringe.
Yeah, it's the place of the government to get, to back up, to back up.
They're supposed to uh protect free speech, not dictate what free speech is.
Exactly, the circumstances in which it can be exercised and which citizens can exerciseit.

(13:19):
Yeah, so what the mess my message to the state legislature on this one, except for thosefive who voted against it and my message to Secretary Landry remains the same.
Know your place.
This is not it.
This is absolutely not it.
Yes, and go to lacag.org and make sure you do this call to action.

(13:40):
The governor needs to get hundreds and hundreds and thousands of emails and communicationsurging him to veto SB 80.
This is bad on its face and a dangerous precedent for liberty.
Yeah, absolutely.
Okay.
There was a bill that was meant to be heard.

(14:00):
We thought it was going to be heard earlier in the week, but it is uh subject to calltoday.
And that is Senator Blake Miguez's Senate Bill 117.
This is the bill that would ban ultra processed foods from public schools.
uh I don't know if we're expecting very much uh opposition to this bill.
I think Senator McMaster, similar one seems to have.

(14:21):
been moving pretty easily through the chambers on this, do you have any expectation fordifficulty on this one, Chris?
I don't really have any expectation for difficulty, but just a curious obligation.
oh Senator Mcghez's SB 117 is very similar to Senator McMath's SB 14.

(14:42):
I think it's a very good bill.
And I've noticed that Senator McMath's bill has received all the fanfare and all thepublicity and all of the exposure.
And Senator McGhez's bill has really not been.
either by the governor or people in the administration.
And I wonder on some level if that has anything to do with the fact that Senator McGhaz ahperiodically actually exercises some legislative oversight and actually stands up against

(15:12):
the executive branch.
I'm just curious.
No empirical data to back that up.
It's just an observation.
Well, that's what we're here for observations.
All right.
uh Senate Bill 46 by Senator Fesi.
This is his bill to ban geoengineering and weather modification.
This one is scheduled for final passage in the House today.

(15:36):
Yes, and it hasn't had much difficulty so far.
And I don't anticipate great difficulty with this on the House floor.
I'm sure there'll be a lot of Democrats who are standing up and raising objections andarguing against it and voting against it.
But we'll be keeping a very close eye to see which Republicans on the House floor voteagainst a bill.

(16:03):
to stop poisoning from being dumped on us, on our crops, on our food, on our children,which is absolutely happening right now.
We're keeping a very close eye on this one.
We have a call to action up on this now, lacag.org.
Yep.
And speaking of children, House Bill 400 by Representative Emily Chenivere.

(16:24):
This is her bill to return parental rights for them to give consent for their minorchildren's health care decisions.
The fact that we're even having this is so crazy to me, but it did pass 83 to nine in theSenate.

(16:46):
in the House, sorry, in the House, and 11 Democrats joined the Republicans.
So I think they bear mentioning Chris.
are Roy Adams, Ken Brass, Chad Brown, Marcus Bryant, Robbie Carter, Timmy Chassault, AmyFreeman, Alonzo Knox, Terry Landry, Rodney Lyons, and Pat Moore.
Yeah, so thank you, Representative Carter, Representative Moore, Knox, Lyons, and the restof the Democrats who joined in the yes votes on this important legislation.

(17:14):
There was one absence, Danielle, ah and that was, I believe, Representative Mark Wright.
Uh, nothing probably sinister about that.
The bill passed overwhelmingly in the house, but we just wanted to mention it for therecord.
All right.
Next up is House Bill 457.
This is by uh Representative Denise Marcel, a Democrat.

(17:35):
She brought a solitary confinement bill that would make it so anyone put in solitaryconfinement would have access to educational materials.
She heard our request, which I was very grateful for, as I know you are, Chris, to includereligious materials in this bill so that people could read the Bible.

(17:56):
they're put in solitary confinement if they so choose.
And this passed the house 99 to nothing.
99 problems, but a lack of religious material in solitary confinement in jail ain't one.
You are so crazy.
uh
And you're right, Danielle, you're the one who, uh, who mentioned once we, when we lookedat the bill initially, see if we can get an amendment in there, uh, to include, to include

(18:26):
religious materials.
We reached out to representative Marcel.
She very graciously included that and it passed the house floor and on to the Senate onhouse bill four 57.
Thank you, representative Marcel, a Democrat.
Yep.
And very proud of this.
Very proud to see that our tough on crime Republican legislature was able to find it intheir hearts to do this.

(18:48):
Absolutely, there is a faint glimmer of compassion within the criminal, hardened criminaluh core of the Republican Party in the legislature.
Did you just say that there are hardened criminals at the core of the Republican party inthe legislature?

(19:10):
You know that saying, I said what I said.
All right.
Next up is Senate Bill 214.
This is by Senator Royce DuPlessis, who loves to bring bills that we generally hate.
And this is his bill that would make the insurance commissioner no longer subject to thewill of the people, no longer accountable to the people, but instead appointed by and

(19:36):
accountable to the governor.
um This has been recalendered a couple of times, Chris.
It's facing some headwinds.
Yeah, spacing headwinds.
We have a strong call to action against this bill.
We have made it very clear to our senators that this is a bad, bad bill.
There is no reason why the commissioner of insurance, a statewide position in Louisiana,ah should not be subject to direct vote of the people.

(20:05):
This bill would move it into the category of appointed position
by the governor.
Sorry, for reasons that you and I have mentioned multiple times, the executive branch isalready too powerful in Louisiana.
And this is a Democratic Republic.
We vote for our elected officials.
This is not an appointed position.

(20:26):
As you said, Danielle, this bill has been returned to the calendar on the Senate floor twoor three times now.
So obviously, that's an indication that the votes are not there currently.
And so hopefully, it will remain in this posture.
and we'll be able to go forward with continuing to elect our Commissioner of Insurance inthe state of Louisiana.
Yeah, I agree with you.

(20:47):
I agree with you and I'm happy to see that people are standing against this.
If he had the votes, he would have brought it.
So we just need, we just have to keep the pressure up because we know that the governor'soffice is not relenting on their pressure.
Yes, and at some point, Danielle, we're going to go over all of the bills that werebrought forward because there's a handful of them that would have resulted in an increase

(21:14):
of power in the hands of the governor.
I think it's an interesting study that we could do, and we just need to devote a show tothat just so we can make it clear that under a constitutional and political system in
Louisiana, where the executive branch already has
vastly disproportionate power to any other branch.

(21:35):
We have these bills that are being pushed to even further increase the power of theexecutive in Louisiana.
It is just grossly misguided that we would be trying to do this.
It is, it is.
I just think that our legislature operates with perverse incentives, right?

(21:56):
Because the pressure that they seem to respond in some ways more to is pressure from theexecutive and pressure from lobbyists.
Now, we are seeing that they're responding to pressure as well from the citizens when itis loud enough, when it is voluminous enough.

(22:16):
We are certainly lower on the totem pole than the other two.
I'll say it that way.
yes.
It's almost like you're inside your house ah and you're...
I'm not saying this.
This is just an analogy, okay?
So you literalists out there, please understand this is only an analogy.
It's like you're sitting inside your house and you're doing drugs and you're engaged inall kind of illegal activity.

(22:41):
And that's really what you'd rather be doing.
But there's just this relentless banging on your door that simply will not stop, will notstop, will not stop.
And finally, you start going crazy.
So you have to answer the door and standing at the door are Louisiana citizens demandinggood government.
And so basically that's what's going on here.

(23:01):
It's not as though they really, it's not their natural inclination for most of them tofaithfully represent the citizens, but they will do it when they hear loudly and clearly
enough from the citizens.
Yep.
Okay.
I'm not really sure what the drug doing drugs in your house has to do with the analogywhere it fits in.

(23:22):
yeah, that's a good question.
We'll have to parse that one later.
Yeah.
right.
We can move along though, Chris, to House Bill 206 by Michael Melloran.
This is one that we have had a lot of concerns about.
This one is the one that just gives Secretary of State Nancy Landry everything she wantson a silver platter, I believe.

(23:46):
You can correct me if I'm wrong, but it...
Did we just talk about that one or we talked about another one?
No, we talked about another one.
Okay.
And this one, this one's recalendered as well.
Yeah, this is House Bill 206 Michael Melloran, which I cannot understand the purpose forthe bill.
Not only is it probably illegal and unconstitutional, it appears to be creating a pathwayto try to give Cleo Fields a second term in the U.S.

(24:15):
Congress.
The bill says that any agreement entered into by an election official and any third partyin the state that
is illegal that violates the Louisiana election code can be ratified through a concurrentresolution in the legislature.
Just put the stamp of approval on it and then go right ahead.

(24:38):
And this appears to be a way for the Secretary of State and who else may be behind it,behind her, to enter into a consent agreement with Cleo Fields and give him a new
district.
without having to go back in session, the legislature and draw up a constitutionally uhadequate district.

(25:00):
So I think that's probably what's happening here.
And we're watching HB 206 very closely and everybody knows where we stand on this bill.
Well, it's legal gymnastics for one.
That's how we've described it.
The other thing, Chris, is I think it's very notable and bears watching who votes in favorof this, which is basically almost everyone because that they're showing such disregard

(25:30):
for the law.
And do they not know that they're the ones who passed the laws?
Chris, is that a little is that a little?
uh ridiculous that the people who should be having some of the most respect for the laws,because they're the ones who spend the time and the effort working to get laws passed, are
going to hand over a blank check to the Secretary of State and every election uh officialin the state saying, but if you don't follow the laws that we have set out for you as the

(26:03):
representatives of the people who employ you,
and who employ us, we will just let you do whatever you want and give you a pass.
What kind of ridiculousness is that?
It (SB206) is the most absurd thing that I have ever seen and it's very disturbing.

(26:24):
When you break the law, you don't create a streamlined mechanism whereby the legislaturecan ratify the law breaking.
That's not what happens when people enter into illegal agreements or do anything that'sillegal.
breaking.
That's the only, if you are rubber stamping a law being broken and not saying that there'ssomething wrong with the law, right?

(26:49):
There's no one saying there's anything wrong with the law.
They're just saying that it's okay that you broke the law.
Is that right?
So they're rubber stamping the illegality means that they are complicit in the illegalaction as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah, there's no legal challenge to it.
That's such a great point, Danielle.

(27:10):
Nobody is coming in and telling the legislature, this is wrong or, you know, we need tochange the law here.
And here's why.
No, they're breaking the law, doing what they want to do, and then coming in and gettingthe legislature to ratify it through a concurrent resolution, which is not a bill.

(27:31):
It's not passing a bill changing the law.
It's very, very different.
And you know, this concurrent resolutions, Danielle, you realize there's a provision inthis bill that allows the legislature to do this remotely through email.
They get to vote.
So.
Oh, so we don't even have to call a special session to rubber stamp the illegal behaviorof our election officials in this state.

(27:56):
Exactly.
There's a provision in the bill that allows the legislature to ratify an illegal agreementremotely without even having to convene to do it.
I don't even know what to say.
Yeah, so needless to say, our opposition to this on a scale of 1 to 10 is 9,000.

(28:23):
Yeah, 9,000.
Chris, do you think, where do you think we go from here?
So it's been recalendered, it's in its final place, right?
It's in the Senate, ready to be voted on.
It's in the Senate, ready to be voted on.
it is, you know, we again, we've made our position on this extremely clear.

(28:48):
I believe that Paul Heard, who is the most accomplished redistricting lawyer in the stateof Louisiana, who's handled all of the major redistricting cases in Louisiana, has
predicted that uh Cleo Field's congressional seat will be vacated by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
And I believe he may have actually spoken to the Attorney General, Murrell, yesterdayregarding the profound concerns he has with this legislation and what may be afoot here

(29:18):
regarding Cleo Fields.
If the intent here, Danielle, is not something sinister, if they're not passing this inorder to be able to do something that they would otherwise not be able to do under the
law, then the bill makes no sense.
Bill, they're telling you what they want to do.

(29:39):
They're telling you that something illegal is going to happen.
That's why we need this procedure so that we don't all go to jail.
Exactly.
And of course, the bill was sold in the committee by Representative Melloran as justanother layer of legislative oversight.
This is just another layer.
It's just the opposite of that.
All the legislative oversight we need is in place.

(30:02):
The law is in place.
And when someone breaks the law, they either get sued or uh they get sanctioned forbreaking the law.
They get challenged.
their actions do not get ratified in the streamlined process in the legislature.
I'm so interested to see what comes of this.
I hope this bill dies.

(30:22):
hope HB 206 dies and we've done everything we can to raise the alarms on it.
Yeah, I hope it does too.
All right, Chris.
Well, on to the next one.
House Bill 592 by Representative Beau Bowie.
This is an election code reform bill.
This is subject to call.
It's been returned to the calendar, I believe, once.

(30:45):
Yeah, so we're keeping an eye on this bill by Boye and we'll see what happens with this.
Yeah, and Chris, just back to 206 for a minute, because I can't, I'm like a dog with abone.
Providing additional legislative oversight is such a weak and ridiculous argument byMichael Melloran, because the legislature does not provide the oversight that it has the

(31:10):
authority to uh wield right now.
Exactly.
And this is not an issue of legislative oversight.
The legislature has passed a law.
It's called the election code.
And when you enter into an agreement that violates the election code, you are, as I said,either sued for it or if it rises to the level of malfeasance in office, you're criminally

(31:42):
prosecuted for it.
You can be administratively sanctioned for it.
So, and that's a function of the executive.
The legislature at this point has no role in this.
The legislature's job is to make the law and they've made the law, period.
Now all, you know, and so saying that this is a more legislative oversight is justridiculous.

(32:04):
I agree with you.
Yeah, basically it's just a bill that would make the legislature the puppet of thesecretary of state.
All right.
I will I'll let us move on from that, but I don't I don't promise to not come back to it.
we can come back to this one anytime you want.

(32:25):
All right.
Yesterday in House and Governmental Affairs SB 8, Senator Jay Morris's uh proposedconstitutional amendment um to make it easier to fire government employees did pass
yesterday.
It passed on party lines.
You said nine to four, Chris.
Nine to four strict party lines.

(32:46):
you know, one of the big issues that kept coming up uh from Senator Morris and people whotestified in favor of the bill is the fact that right now civil service employees in
Louisiana are virtually untouchable as far as being able to demote, suspend, fire,discipline.
They are really a protected class of people under the civil service system.

(33:09):
And so what Senator Morris's constitutional amendment would do
would simply allow a statewide vote of the people to give the legislature the authority tomove ah at their discretion to pass a bill that would move certain categories of employees
in Louisiana from the classified status to the non-classified status.

(33:32):
You know, and that's all it would do.
So if it goes to the people and the people vote to give the legislature authority to dothis, they still have to go back in and pass a bill.
that would that specifically does it.
So this is a two step process, but something needs to be done because the Louisiana CivilService uh structure right now in Louisiana is everything is in the hands of the Louisiana

(33:55):
Civil Service Commission, which is, you know, made up largely of members of politicalpatronage uh and really a lot of corruption, unfortunately.
the Civil Service
situation in Louisiana has got to be reformed so that it can create more efficiency in ourgovernment.

(34:17):
Yeah, well, I'm happy to see that it's got support and hopefully it'll make it throughinto the ballot.
I hope so.
We are happy to support this.
Yeah.
Yesterday in House Health and Welfare, we got dealt quite a heavy blow.
I was super surprised about this.
Very disappointed, extremely disappointed in House Health and Welfare Committee.

(34:40):
Senate Bill 2 by Senator Mike Fesi, his bill that would ban fluoride in the water, died incommittee.
10 to 5.
10 to 5 vote and the you know the there was a lot of debate on the bill in the legislaturebut you know I think it's scientifically documented Danielle that the fluoride in our

(35:04):
water is harmful to us neurologically physically but there were some special interestsdown there that that
Opposed it and you know the big argument that they made Danielle that kept coming up overand over again was that if you take the fluoride out of the water, there's a substantial
percentage of Louisiana children who will lose all their teeth because they don't havethey will not get the tooth protection that you get through fluoride and that was

(35:36):
basically it and so but anyway, so it went down uh
Representative Cruz, Representative Echols voted for it.
ah
mention it.
So the people who voted for it in committee who supported the ban of fluoride were Cruz,Kelly uh Hennessy Dickerson, Michael Echols, Peter Egan, and Christopher Turner.

(36:01):
The nos, I'll list the Republicans here, Chris, Stephanie Barral, Rhonda Butler, EmilyChenivere, um Wayne McMahon, and Joe Stagney.

(36:32):
Yeah.
I know they mean that they think the kids are gonna have their teeth rotting out of theirhead, probably.
But this is ridiculous, Chris.
This is so offensive.
should, you know, Senator Fesi's argument in the Senate was that this is uh a matter ofinformed consent and we are not given informed consent about the chemicals that we are

(36:58):
putting in our bodies.
And if you think you're not drinking it, well guess what?
It's going, you're taking a shower in it.
It's being absorbed through your skin.
that's exactly the point that Senator Fesi made in response to the arguments that ourdrinking water does not have, or our drinking water is within acceptable federal uh
standards.

(37:18):
uh And Senator Fesi said, well, even if that is the case, you're not just drinking it,you're taking a shower in it, you're taking a bath in it, you you wash your face with it,
you do all this stuff with it.
So, and you're ingesting it through your pores as well.
So he made that argument.
But yes, uh this SB2 to uh ban fluoride from our public water systems has died in theHouse Health and Welfare Committee.

(37:45):
And the other thing that's offensive about that is they point to federally acceptablelimits.
When's the last time you believed what the federal government said was an acceptable limitabout anything to put in your body?
Exactly.
What was the federal acceptable limit for the COVID shot?
uh Six, six boosters.

(38:07):
And now we look back and realize how harmful that is to us and was to us.
So uh it never ceases to amaze me, Danielle, how people place such blind faith in what thefederal government says about anything.
We should be inherently skeptical of anything the federal government says about anything.
Yeah.

(38:27):
And yet we have people who take what they say regarding this very important issue at facevalue.
Well, and this is another issue of the lobbyists winning out, the professional classwinning out over the citizens.
Yeah, I think you're right.
And I don't think you've heard the last of this from Senator Faisy.

(38:47):
No, nor us.
All right, well, Senator Fesi did have a victory yesterday in House health and welfare.
Senate Bill 19, uh his dispensing uh over the counter of Ivermectin passed withoutobjection.
Yes.
And Dr.
Ralph Abrams uh was there and he testified in favor of it.

(39:09):
It was a very, very good hearing.
was a lot of, you know, lot of questions, a lot of heated debate.
There was even the suggestion made in committee that, that Ivermectin may not besufficiently safe to take over the counter.
But clearly it is, and it's been proven to be very, very safe.
As Katie told me last night, Danielle, it's

(39:30):
You get Tylenol over the counter and you can take too many Tylenol, you know, but anyway,the bill does require that this be under a standing order from the Louisiana Department of
Health or a physician within the Louisiana Department of Health.
so, but, it will be readily accessible to the citizens of Louisiana without a doctor'sprescription.

(39:53):
And can you imagine where we'd be if that had been the case during COVID?
Right, right.
Except for if those big box retail stores, I don't know where they stand with that.
Can they take dictates from corporate that don't align with state law?
I don't think so.

(40:13):
Not when the bill says that ivermectin shall be available ah in this way without adoctor's prescription.
mean, guess that they could make anymore.
And I guess we wouldn't have jurisdiction over that or they could possibly have supplychain issues.

(40:33):
You never know.
But at least as a matter of law, ivermectin will be.
readily accessible to Louisiana citizens.
Okay, great.
Okay, next up Senate Bill 15 by Senator Jay Morris.
This is his bill um about ICE and saying that no official or citizen can thwart federalimmigration enforcement efforts and that passed 7-4 on party lines.

(41:03):
guess there were some Democrats who wanted to be able to inhibit ICE.
Yes.
And sometimes it's very difficult to understand the basis for some of the Democrat votesagainst certain legislation.
All this bill does, and this was in the criminal justice committee, it simply requires, itcriminalizes the failure to pick up the phone or otherwise notify ICE if you have an

(41:33):
illegal alien in your custody that has committed a crime.
or is accused of a crime.
It makes it a crime for a public official, a law enforcement officer or agency not tonotify ICE with regard to the status of that defendant.
And it's just, it doesn't make any sense.

(41:57):
Yeah, well, we can't get inside of people's heads and understand where they're coming fromon some of these things.
No, but I think it's a good bill.
You know, I think it's already a violation of federal law.
ah But
this would just make it a violation of state law as well.
this would just codify it in state law.

(42:17):
I was going to say, don't know how uh necessary this is as a bill, but I guess, you know,just it's an added incentive to do the right thing.
This is called, Danielle, what you and I have talked about before, preemptive legislation.
There may not be an immediate problem with this in Louisiana now, but Senator Morris issmart enough to note that it could very well become a problem.

(42:41):
And there's no requirement that in order to pass legislation, you have to be alwaysreacting and responding to a particular set of circumstances.
Sometimes you pass legislation to prevent those circumstances.
from arising to deter the type of activity that you're concerned about.

(43:03):
And sometimes I think Democrats have a hard time getting their arms around that concept.
If I had a dime, every time I heard a Democrat in the legislature say, this looks like asolution in search of a problem, as if that's the criteria by which you have to determine
whether legislation is good or bad.
It's not.
This is preemptive, it's good.

(43:25):
and we support Jay Morris on this.
Yeah, there are plenty of Republicans who don't understand preemptive legislation as well.
Chris, have you heard, I mean, are our prisons referring illegal immigrants that aredetained to the federal government?
I haven't heard much about that at all.
Yeah, I mean, they're they are every everyone that I've heard of every everything thatI've seen suggests that they are that they're that they're reporting, uh you know,

(43:56):
arrestees who are illegal to ice, you know, within 24 or 48 hours.
So they're really I don't think it's a it's a problem in Louisiana right now.
like it would be a little more newsworthy,
what?
that we're sending the illegals out of the state.

(44:16):
mean, freeing up space in our prisons, making the streets safer.
You're not hearing very much about it.
No, you're not.
Well, because I don't think that the legacy news media, either state or national, has muchsympathy for uh true immigration reform, really enforcing federal immigration law and

(44:39):
protecting American citizens.
That's not something that they have a lot of sympathy for, unfortunately.
I guess not.
All right.
Next up is a bill we followed very closely and continue to follow very closely.
House Bill 601 by Representative Brett Gaiman.
This is his uh bill on CO2 sequestration, eminent domain rules.

(45:00):
Yeah.
And this this bill will, would repeal eminent domain for carbon capture sequestration.
And it has been set now for several days for vote in the house and was rescheduledyesterday.
So it may get voted on today.
We don't know, but this is the last man standing when it comes to protecting Louisianacitizens from this carbon capture sequestration scam and the uh grotesque

(45:30):
ah encroachment on private property rights.
HB 601 is the last man standing.
Yep, so go to lacag.org and take action on this.
Make sure to keep the pressure up because, mean, Chris, it's in the house still, huh?
It's in the house.
It's still in the house.
we need it to move.
mean, he needs to get this voted on so that if should it pass, it can make moves in theSenate.

(45:56):
We've got two weeks left.
We've got two weeks left and I continue to try to emphasize the importance of getting arecord vote on the House floor on this bill.
Because, Danielle, this is the only eminent domain bill, the only issue that reallyaddresses the extent to which these private corporations can seize property, either for

(46:20):
CCS injection wells or pipelines or anything like that, that has a chance to be voted on.
by the full House.
So even if it doesn't pass, it is extraordinarily valuable to have a record vote on thisissue by every Republican in the state legislature.
That's why it's so important.

(46:41):
Yeah, because we need to know who's getting primaried.
We need to know, we need to continue to build our record and we need to force them to makea vote on HB 601, which is what we're trying to do.
There are some other things in the works here, Danielle, that we're not really at libertyto talk about now, but I'll say that, know, Representative Gaiman is coloring outside the

(47:03):
box here, thinking outside the box.
I'll leave it at that.
and Chris, I just want to go ahead and on the record state that any absences for a floorvote oh on 601 will be marked as a vote against in my book.
I could not agree anymore.
There's nothing more important.

(47:23):
You need to be there and be ready to vote.
exactly.
They have, they have nothing to hide behind.
Get up there and if you need to vote against your citizens so that you can appease whoeveryou really serve, well, go ahead and do that, but know that your seat is, your days in
that seat are numbered.
Yeah.
And quite frankly, Danielle, I have more respect for Republicans who vote againstsomething, even though it's a terrible vote that they're making.

(47:49):
I have more respect for that than people who try to show up and not show up and just kindof go hide in the shadows and act like, you know, it is cowardly.
Yeah.
take a vote.
All right, next up, uh some pretty interesting things have happened this week.
uh House Bill 603 by Representative Dixon McMakin, uh who brought some bills that were uhsurprising to me this session, seemed a little out of character, but this is his bill that

(48:18):
would change uh how the governor appoints the heads of licensing boards, committees, andauthorities.
It was in Senate.
in government affairs and it failed because Senator Miguez joined the Democrats inopposition to this and we were opposed to this and I was so pleased to see this Chris.
mean I was grinning from ear to ear when I read that on Twitter.

(48:42):
this was one of the first bills, HB 603, Danielle, that you and I talked about at leastonce, maybe twice on the podcast, opposing this because right now in Louisiana, are 31
very powerful regulatory boards and the governor
is required to make, to appoint the heads of those boards from a list that's provided tohim, a list of nominees by the trade associations in Louisiana.

(49:12):
And he's got to choose from that list.
uh This bill would take that requirement from being mandatory to permissive, whichbasically means, yes, you could submit your list, but the governor is under no statutory
obligation to choose from that list.
He can completely disregard it and appoint whoever he wants.
And that was one of the big issues that Senator McGeas and Senator Carter, uh a Democratbrought up yesterday, the same objection that I made to Representative McMacon early on.

(49:43):
What is the point of submitting the list if the governor is under no obligation to followit?
If he can just throw it in the trashcan?
It really doesn't make any sense.
That's the same point that Senator McGeas and others brought up yesterday.
And this
bill by Senator McMacon went down four to three in the Senate Governmental AffairsCommittee.
uh Thank you Senator Blake Miguez and the Democrats who were smart enough to see howunwise this is.

(50:11):
Yeah, and this is a this bill was really about a consolidation of power, right?
It's not like we believe that these licensing boards are not corrupt.
It's not that we believe that these committees are without corruption.
They are, but it is dispersion of power, regardless of the level of corruption of thoseboards, which I do believe.
yes, Danielle, that is exactly my point.

(50:33):
Corruption diffused is less sinister than corruption concentrated.
And that's the way I look at this.
And yes, maybe they are corrupt.
I don't know if they're all corrupt.
Maybe some of them aren't.
Maybe some of them are.
But I do know that the last thing we need to be doing in Louisiana is concentrating morepower in the executive branch of government.

(50:56):
That's the last thing we need to be doing.
this vote yesterday in Senate Governmental Affairs is a refreshing vote uh for Louisianacitizens across the state.
That's the way I look at it.
yeah.
And we shall see if the governor lashes out against Senator Miguez because we have seensome lashing out in previous administrations when the governor doesn't get his or her way.

(51:22):
So we'll be mindful of that.
It'll be interesting to see, but this is one of a number of items of legislation,Danielle, that has been brought by Representative McMacon, who's my representative right
here in Baton Rouge, that have been head scratchers, real head scratchers.
Chris, your screen went black.

(51:43):
Oh, sorry.
Are we okay?
Okay.
Sorry about that.
all good.
Next up, House Bill 364 by Representative Darrell Deshotel This is another bill that wouldtry and consolidate power with the governor.
And this is the one that would have given him the ability to appoint two additionalmembers to the Public Service Commission.

(52:06):
We have been on record loud.
and continually, or at least we were early.
We haven't talked about it lately, but this bill was voluntarily deferred.
Voluntarily deferred in committee by the author, uh Representative Deshotel this was aconstitutional amendment that once again continuing with this pattern of executive power

(52:29):
that would have put it on the statewide ballot.
for people a constitutional amendment so people could vote on whether or not the governorshould be able to appoint two additional members of the Louisiana Public Service
Commission.
And it was voluntarily deferred.
My gut feeling tells me, Danielle, that the last thing the voters of Louisiana have anappetite for is a direct vote to increase the power of the executive branch and

(52:59):
specifically the power of this governor.
I think Representative Deschatel was smart enough to see that and said, we're just goingto quit.
We're just going to get out while the getting's good on this because this ain't going topass on a statewide ballot.
But it's very revealing that it was even brought forward to begin with.
Yes, it is.
A couple points on that.

(53:19):
One is ah first, under Governor Bell Edwards, did we see quite this much ah legislationcome through for consolidation of executive power?
I know in some ways he had the legislature quote unquote against him, although they prettymuch kind of did his bidding a lot of the time.

(53:44):
ah
uh John Bell Edwards used the power of the line item veto uh very, very uh profligatelywhen he was governor.

(54:08):
And that's what he used largely to get what he wanted.
I don't remember Danielle, the CAG was in existence, I think for the last year or 18months of Governor Edwards administration, but I do not remember seeing this number of
bills going forward that would have increased his power statutorily.
I just don't remember seeing that.

(54:29):
Yeah.
And I guess Governor Landry feels like he's, you know, he's got a legislative support forthis, but I'm happy to see both of these bills fail.
The other point on the Public Service Commission bill, Chris, is how are you ever thinkingthat you can sell this to the public?
Well, that's exactly right, Danielle.

(54:50):
Under the best of circumstances, people are acutely skeptical of our political leadersright now, not only nationally, certainly in our state.
But think about the particular circumstances of this governor.
I mean, we are right still on the heels of a uh severe rebuke of a constitutionalamendment that he

(55:14):
loudly and broadly supported along with the entire republic's establishment in Louisianathat was rejected because the voting public feels like they were completely misled on that
by the governor and others.
So what does it tell you about the pulse or the lack of a pulse on the mood of the votersof Louisiana that there would be an effort to put something like this on a statewide

(55:39):
ballot in Louisiana?
It tells me that they are absolutely tone deaf.
to the current mood of the state of Louisiana.
Yeah, and if they need to ask what the mood is in the state of Louisiana, they probably, Idon't know, I don't have really any advice for them on that.
and don't stick your finger in the air to see which way the wind's blowing becausesomebody's going to bite it off.

(56:03):
That's right.
Chris, we haven't really followed lately uh Representative Emerson's bill that she wasbringing back that was going to be a second bite at the apple of what was essentially
constitutional amendment two that got uh slammed down by the people.
Have you followed that at all?
I haven't looked at it lately.
it for two reasons.

(56:24):
Number one, as she said on our show, she really is isolating the issues.
She's putting the issues on there, you know, one at a time.
I think she's going to honor the constitutional requirement for one object.
And it's not going to include anything about the, you know, the religious exemption orteacher pay raises, stuff like that.

(56:47):
So we don't have concern about it.
And secondly, uh as you know, Danielle, this is a, I believe would be a constitutionalamendment.
So the people would nonetheless have a chance to vote on this and we'll have a chance toweigh in on it then.
So we really haven't followed this too closely.
I'd be surprised if this does not at least get voted on to be able to go to the people.
And I think representative Emerson has, has learned.

(57:10):
certainly hope she has.
She suggested that she had when she was on our show learned her lesson.
about the best way to go about doing this.
Yeah, it would be worth us taking a look and seeing where it sits today because I justhaven't followed it.
Okay.
uh What's happening today, Chris?
There's a couple things House Bill 304 by Representative Carter.
This is a carbon capture bill that will be in Senate Natural Resources today.

(57:36):
This is a very important bill, Danielle.
It doesn't really go to the core issues of carbon capture sequestration, uh but it is animportant issue and very revealing.
uh This bill simply says that if you engage, if you're a corporation who engages in anexpropriation action for CCS, uh that that action has to be brought within the parish

(58:00):
where the property is located, period.
It's very, very simple.
You know, no conservative Republican who has any respect for private property rights orthe convenience of a citizen whose property may be on the verge of being seized for this
purpose should vote against this legislation.

(58:21):
All this is is an issue of venue convenience for a property owner.
That's it.
So if Republicans vote against this and Senate natural resources, this is going to beappalling.
It should be a uniform vote to get this through Senate natural resources today on thisbill.
Well, Chris, there, I mean, is there any chance that it would get moved from Senatenatural resources to like one of the legal ones, one of the judiciary committees, if this

(58:52):
is really a matter of civil law?
I think it could, I think it could because they're not really dealing with CCS proper, thesubstance of CCS.
They're just dealing with venue provisions.
So yeah, I think it could be, but I believe now, as you said, Danielle, it's set in theNational Resources Committee because the subject is CCS, right?

(59:13):
It is, and you know, it did go through House Natural Resources.
It didn't go to House Civil Law.
So that's an interesting one.
That's an interesting one.
Okay.
Next up today, the cockroach.
The cockroach is coming to Senate transportation today.
It's SB 519 by Representative this year being brought by Representative Brian.

(59:37):
And I was in such a good mood.
Brian Glorioso has brought this.
It's gotten some amendments.
It's not necessarily as disgusting and horrible as it has been before.
It's still extremely offensive to anyone with common sense, anyone who believes in freewill.
But this is saying that you can get a ticket, you can be criminalized if you are usingyour cell phone while, if you're speaking on your cell phone while driving a car.

(01:00:09):
This has nothing to do with texting, as we've said before, but Senator, RepresentativeBrian Glorioso is carrying this one back, I guess, the insurance.
Who's the force behind this, Chris?
Who's the lobby behind this?
The insurance uh lobby?

(01:00:31):
I wouldn't be surprised because this doesn't have anything to do with public safety.
Danielle Ed Tarpley has pointed out repeatedly that there is no statistically reliableconnection between talking on a handheld cell phone in your car and increased traffic
accidents.
Everybody knows this.

(01:00:53):
Secondly, responsible citizens are able to talk on a phone.
hold it to their ear and drive their vehicle at the same time.
It's absurd.
This is about revenue harvesting.
As Mike Baham has said more than one time, this is about raising money for the state.
This is not about public safety.
And you and I have said multiple times, this bill will do absolutely nothing to reduceinsurance rates.

(01:01:18):
It will do nothing to reduce traffic accidents.
know, Danielle, in this bill itself, it requires
Department of Corrections and other agencies who are involved in this to report, I thinkin late 2027, ah whether or not this bill, once it goes into effect, has resulted in an

(01:01:39):
increase in traffic wrecks.
And I will bet you if they're honest with the stats, they're going to come back and saythere is no significant correlation between this law and
a reduction in traffic wrecks.
guarantee you that's what's going to happen.
You know what else is going to happen 100 %?
I guarantee you this is going to be used as a pretext by law enforcement for furtherencroachments on liberty.

(01:02:03):
There's no question about it.
Not all law enforcement officers are honest and they unfortunately often will use this asa pretext through which to
ultimately end up inside someone's vehicle, end up inside someone's phone, end upquestioning a driver about things that they have no probable cause to question them about.

(01:02:28):
And that is going to be the end result of this and it's not going to end well.
And this is exactly why Madison said you've got to confront encroachments of liberty everysingle time they happen, because if you don't, it simply progresses more and more and
more.
And that's what's going on here.
This is government overreach at its finest.
will do nothing for any good for anybody.

(01:02:51):
It will only create worse consequences.
It's also intellectually inconsistent.
So we have this Republican tough on crime legislature.
They are convinced, which they're right.
We do have a lot of criminals out on the street.
why do we have that much more money to throw at uh the police force so that they canpolice people who are driving down the road with talking on a phone just as they're

(01:03:24):
policing people who are breaking into cars and mugging old ladies.
I mean, have some sense about where these uh law enforcement officers should be spendingtheir time.
If you truly want to crack down on crime in this state, is diverting the attention and theresources away from true crime going to net out what you want?

(01:03:47):
Danielle, I think you just made the most brilliant point about this bill that I had neverthought of and that I don't think was brought up by any in any testimony in opposition on
this bill.
And that's so brilliant that you just brought that up.
If I had thought about what you just said, I would have said that in the committee.

(01:04:09):
We live in a state that is per capita has one of the highest murder rates in the country.
and general serious crime rate in the country.
Baton Rouge is a dangerous place to live right now.
yet, and New Orleans, you know, so Louisiana generally is the murder, you know, we are percapita, horrible crime rate.

(01:04:33):
And you're going to divert the resources of law enforcement when we already have anattrition rate in law enforcement, much higher than we want.
You're going to first...
further stretch those resources and that personnel to harass law abiding citizens who weretalking on a cell phone in their vehicle.
That is brilliant and it is sad, it is sad within this context that anybody would bepushing a bill like this.

(01:05:01):
Yeah, it is sad.
It is sad.
And uh we will encourage everyone to go to lacag.org and let the committee, the Senatecommittee know exactly how you feel about this.
They'll be voting on it.
They actually may be hearing the bill now, Chris.
Well, know, one thing we can do, you know, if it passes, then we absolutely, and it getsto the Senate floor and they vote on it there, we're going to fight it all the way there.

(01:05:29):
And then of course we have the veto.
And this would be an example, Danielle.
And yet another example, if the governor again wants to begin to pull himself up out ofthe quicksand with regard to the grassroots in Louisiana and conservative citizens,
vetoing this legislation would also serve that purpose if he does that, if it gets to hisdesk.

(01:05:54):
Yeah, but I don't see that happening.
Isn't this part of his uh magnificent insurance package?
Insurance reform package?
What a crock.
Sorry.
um Okay, last bill up.
This is on Senate orders today.
House Bill 577 by Representative Darrell Deshotel This is election systems procurement.

(01:06:14):
Is this another carte blanche for Nancy?
This bill uh allows Secretary Landry to dispense with the normal procurement process forgetting a new voting system.
Our current law requires a broad-based competitive procurement process where all vendorsare invited and encouraged to submit a bid, to show what they have, and have a real

(01:06:44):
competitive process to determine
uh which system will deliver the most safety and security for our voting system.
That's why it's a competitive bidding process.
This bill takes that away and converts to what's called an invitation to negotiate thatallows the Secretary of State to invite to negotiate anybody she wants, even one.

(01:07:08):
It says one or more.
So theoretically, and perhaps not just theoretically, Nancy Landry would have theauthority under this bill
to submit an invitation to negotiate to only one vendor, a vendor perhaps that she alreadyhas an idea she wants, she submits that, she ends up getting what she wants that way and
completely circumvents a competitive public bidding process.

(01:07:33):
That's what 577 does.
That's why this is a bad piece of legislation.
Yes, and it doesn't negate the fact that we are against the computer based systems 100 %anyway, but this is like basically putting her in the uh HOV lane to getting the systems.

(01:07:54):
Yes, and Danielle, this this would preclude people who have a workable, efficient,hand-marked paper ballot system from being able to bid, from being able to offer their
services.
If she doesn't want it, sorry, I've already decided I'm going to extend the invitation tonegotiate to this company here, period.

(01:08:15):
Nothing you can do about it.
The bill also, Danielle, severely circumvents the appeal process.
for an aggrieved vendor who doesn't get the bid or the contract, think they were treatedunfairly, this severely accelerates the appeals process, gives them almost no time to do

(01:08:37):
their appeal and to try to get relief on appeal.
It also does that, it guts the appeal process for a vendor who feels like they've beentreated unfairly.
Wow.
Yeah.
Well, Secretary Landry's uh arms have gotten quite long and it's...

(01:09:03):
That's That's true.
Straight up.
All right, Chris.
Well, that rounds us out for today.
I want to let you go so you can go and maybe make some calls on the cockroach bill becauseI hope we can cut that one off at the knees today.
That would be beautiful if we're able to do that.
We will be back here on Tuesday at 8 a.m.

(01:09:24):
giving you the road ahead that we expect and any updates from today.
Any final words from your side, Chris?
I just want to remind everybody, uh please go to lacag.org and do the calls to action.
While you're there, join LCAG.
We are battling against deep pocketed, very powerful special interest groups in the statelegislature.

(01:09:49):
We take no support from any special interest group.
ah They're all pitted against average ordinary Louisiana citizens, which we represent, weadvocate for fiercely and faithfully.
So please go and join for whatever monthly amount you are able so that we can continue tolevel this playing field.
uh Secondly, please go to the LeCag Facebook page and the LeCag X page to get the latestdevelopments.

(01:10:16):
do legislative updates on our social media so you can know what's going on uh and share,share, share all of our posts on social media so that all Louisiana citizens
can know what's going on and reach out to their representatives and senators.
And lastly, please make sure that you also visit the State of Freedom X page, State ofFreedom Facebook, and share and subscribe to State of Freedom, Danielle, because I've said

(01:10:44):
so many times before, there is not a platform in Louisiana that reports to the citizens ina completely unvarnished, shall I say uncensored way.
with regard to what our legislators are doing and citizens.
There's just not another platform that does that.
We don't sugarcoat things, we give credit where credit's due, and we're gonna call peopleout when that is due.

(01:11:08):
So share and subscribe to State of Freedom broadly.
We are the platform advancing the State of Freedom every day in Louisiana, and it is anhonor and privilege to be able to do so.
That's right.
And if you want to visit the freedom at the state of freedom website, it's freedom statedot us and we would appreciate your support as well there because we are fully listener

(01:11:30):
supported.
So support.
100%.
There's no two organizations more worthy of the support of real conservatives in Louisianathan the state of freedom and La Cag.
And Danielle, you can also go back and listen to all of the podcasts that you want to.
that's right.
That's right.
And today's is number 304.

(01:11:50):
So no need to start at the beginning, folks.
No pressure.
Danielle, do you think that that may be a good sign since today's episode 304?
You think Senator Carter's HB 304, that might be a premonition that maybe his bill willget through the Senate natural resources?
Yeah, will so.
Well, call it a sign.

(01:12:11):
Call it a sign, baby.
all right.
Awesome.
Well, Chris, you have a wonderful day.
Thank you all for joining us.
We'll see you back here on Tuesday morning, bright and early, 8 a.m.
Thank you all.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}#304 Censoring The People & Other Legislative Updates

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

#304 Censoring The People & Other Legislative Updates

Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club