So enlighten me. I moved here from Texas. I haven’t been able to tell a real difference between the two on policy.
They both have very strong ties and, some would say, obligations to House Republican leadership. Shannon was Speaker of the House here in Oklahoma and, while there, big government nanny-state laws were challenged by people OTHER than Shannon, but upheld.
When I moved here from Texas, the most notable was the ridiculous liquor laws in Oklahoma. The back story is that a few families control the distribution of alcohol in Oklahoma and they don’t want competition. The owner of one of the distributors argued (hilariously) that alcohol was bad for society and needed to be controlled. The Oklahoma Legislature allowed them to maintain there monopolies.
Oklahoma requires a litany of meaningless occupational licenses (91).
What did Shannon do to remove state overreach into individuals’ lives?
Oklahoma has laws preventing homeschool kids from attending community colleges before 18. In Texas, the state not only allows it, but pays for a portion of it since we paid taxes and hadn’t gotten a single educational benefit. Why is Oklahoma under Shannon as Speaker so far behind?
So far I’m very unimpressed with both Lankford and Shannon and, despite the endorsement, I don’t think his on the same planet as Ted Cruz.
The examples you listed are not necessarily related to either legislator: it is the difference between Oklahoma and Texas. Oklahoma liquor laws are much better than they used to be. But, they are not remotely the same as Texas. Same with the home schooling example. How they do schools in Oklahoma is very different than how they do it in Texas.
Don’t view what you mentioned as what either legislator has done to correct Oklahoma to make it more like Texas. Try to see how what they did fits in with Oklahoma needs and wants and culture.
We are not Texas.
Sorry it has taken me a minute to get back to you. Been busy today.
As I stated in post 12, Shannon’s background speaks for itself.
I’m not saying Shannon is perfect. And he may not have fought to remove restrictive liquor licenses, etc.
BUT when you compare the two records.. Shannons is WAY WAY WAY WAY better than Lankfords. It’s not even on the same planet.
Shannon was most recently Speaker of the House in Oklahoma. As Speaker, Shannon led some of the most Conservative sessions in Oklahoma history.
Oklahoma passed an immigration law tougher than Arizona. Oklahoma defunded the arts. Oklahoma restricted abortions. Oklahoma cut the budget and cut taxes. Oklahoma passed open carry. Oklahoma voted not to participate in Obamacare.
T.W. Shannon believes that government programs create a cycle of dependency that robs people of their dignity and traps them in generational poverty. If he’s elected to the Senate, he will be a powerful voice for freedom.
Congressman Lankford’s record includes:
Voted to raise the debt limit three times. (2013 RCV #30, 2011 RCV #677, 2011 RCV #690)
Voted to fund Obamacare four times. (2013 RCV #640, 2011 RCV #941, 2011 RCV #719, 2011 RCV #179)
Voted for the Ryan-Murray budget agreement that increased spending, raised taxes, and cut benefits to military retirees. (2013 RCV #640)
Voiced support for amnesty for illegal immigrants as well as a path to citizenship. (AP, 7/10/13)
Voted to allow the National Security Agency (NSA) to continue its bulk collection of phone record data. (2013 RCV #412)
Voted against strengthening the work requirements in the food stamp program for individuals receiving benefits. (2013 RCV #283)
Voted to allow farmers making over $250,000 a year to continue to receive crop insurance subsidies. (2013 RCV #276, 2011 RCV #455)
Voted to protect programs like the Legal Services Corporation (2012 RCV#219) and the Economic Development Agency. (2012 RCV #207)
There is a REASON why Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Senate Conservatives Fund have ALL endorsed Shannon.