Roger Barnett - Who enforces RESIDENCY LAWS?
New Topic as requested by "Anonymous', 6-24-2011.
New Topic: Who is responsible for investigating and prosecuting Roger Barnett for his residency issue?
Let me see, do we need more laws? Nope. More attorney generals? Nope to that too.
What we need is someone to put teeth into the laws that we have and someone to investigate and prosecute those who break the law. And why can’t we have that? We can’t because no one is in charge; everyone‘s the boss. Each can do as they please. It’s called living in a Banana Republic, a politically unstable place that is ruled by a small self-serving group of people, where laws don‘t matter to the ones in charge.
The following law is clear. It has been a law for years, but who cares? If one law that is very clear but does not apply to anyone, why should any law apply to anyone too? If Roger Barnett is elected as the Second Chief, or is even allowed to run for that office, who cares? Roger Barnett should not have been allowed to run in the last election. Why didn’t someone stop him. He should not be the Speaker. Roger Barnett has been in violation of the residency clause of the Creek Constitution for years. What is wrong with us that we can allow a law to be broken into pieces, and by a person who swore to uphold it, even? Why have laws? Because no one gives a fF--k.
Article V1, Section 2(b) says:
“Each representative shall be a legal resident of his/her district for one full calendar year, prior to filing for office and shall be an actual full time resident within that district for the term of office. When the representative ceases to be an actual resident of the district, they disqualify themselves as a representative of that district. “
So what happens to Roger Barnett who lives in Okmulgee but elected in the Creek District and in clear violation of the above statute? The answer is that nothing will happen because there is no one with the authority to enforce this law. There is no one to investigate something illegal even if it is known to a multitude of citizens.
Roger Barnett can “prove” through paperwork that his residency is the district that elected him, but citizens know he lives in Okmulgee. He will be delivered from the jaws of justice by his fellow collaborators who will say “We have looked in the issues of Roger Barnett’s residency and judge that he has not violated that statute.”
The fact that Roger Barnett has been in violation of that article of the constitution for years does not matter to anyone. Then what law of the constitution does matter to anyone? If we cannot get one piece of the constitution to work, how can we get anything in the constitution to matter? And why should we have any laws? I think that answers itself, we don’t.
New Topic: Who is responsible for investigating and prosecuting Roger Barnett for his residency issue?
Let me see, do we need more laws? Nope. More attorney generals? Nope to that too.
What we need is someone to put teeth into the laws that we have and someone to investigate and prosecute those who break the law. And why can’t we have that? We can’t because no one is in charge; everyone‘s the boss. Each can do as they please. It’s called living in a Banana Republic, a politically unstable place that is ruled by a small self-serving group of people, where laws don‘t matter to the ones in charge.
The following law is clear. It has been a law for years, but who cares? If one law that is very clear but does not apply to anyone, why should any law apply to anyone too? If Roger Barnett is elected as the Second Chief, or is even allowed to run for that office, who cares? Roger Barnett should not have been allowed to run in the last election. Why didn’t someone stop him. He should not be the Speaker. Roger Barnett has been in violation of the residency clause of the Creek Constitution for years. What is wrong with us that we can allow a law to be broken into pieces, and by a person who swore to uphold it, even? Why have laws? Because no one gives a fF--k.
Article V1, Section 2(b) says:
“Each representative shall be a legal resident of his/her district for one full calendar year, prior to filing for office and shall be an actual full time resident within that district for the term of office. When the representative ceases to be an actual resident of the district, they disqualify themselves as a representative of that district. “
So what happens to Roger Barnett who lives in Okmulgee but elected in the Creek District and in clear violation of the above statute? The answer is that nothing will happen because there is no one with the authority to enforce this law. There is no one to investigate something illegal even if it is known to a multitude of citizens.
Roger Barnett can “prove” through paperwork that his residency is the district that elected him, but citizens know he lives in Okmulgee. He will be delivered from the jaws of justice by his fellow collaborators who will say “We have looked in the issues of Roger Barnett’s residency and judge that he has not violated that statute.”
The fact that Roger Barnett has been in violation of that article of the constitution for years does not matter to anyone. Then what law of the constitution does matter to anyone? If we cannot get one piece of the constitution to work, how can we get anything in the constitution to matter? And why should we have any laws? I think that answers itself, we don’t.
He gets away with it through loop holes. Legal address is your voting address( State, Federal, Tribal), where you pay your taxes and get your refunds. Whoops forgot Roger doesn't pay taxes does he.
Reply to this
Bottom line on Barnett is this. He has six months left as speaker then his seat is eliminated. Unless he is elected as 2nd Chief he is history to Creek Tribal Government for a while. The real question is whither or not the voters of this nation want someone that doesn't pay his taxes (over $100,000 to the federal government) or his child support(and all divorced mothers know how important these monies are), does not exhibit the moral character that the would want from their own family can continue to support people like this. It is absolutely amazing how many of our elected representatives ignore the support of their own families and we elect them in hopes that the will look out for the betterment of our entire tribe. The women that sit on our council and march lock step with their male counter parts have a history of non-support ( Roger Barnett and George Tiger being the largest offenders) should be ashamed of themselves. It is time, it is past time for the voters to a long hard look at the people that we are sending to Okmulgee to represent us.
Reply to this
If we cannot get one piece of the constitution to work, how can we get anything in the constitution to matter? And why should we have any laws? I think that answers itself, we don’t.
Please read this real good now and then ask the distric court, sup. court, and the executive branch this......................oh my lmao now
Reply to this
That issue is one that's really bothersome. We are taught that a law is a law, and we can't pick and choose which to follow. If we think a certain law is unjust, there are legal ways to change it. Roger certainly isn't the 1st to ignore the residency law, which the council has failed to address. It was brought up before about Shirlene Ade and also Ron Cleghorn. There's probably others who were allowed to live where ever. If I remember, reports were that Cleghorn lived with D. Nichols in Okmulgee, and with Eddie LaGrone in Muskogee, all the while a representative for Tulsa. Was reported that Ade was living in Cherokee country with her husband, not in her own district. They all knew about it and just smirked and did nothing about it.
Reply to this
Pay attention to whats being said above. Look at the players in the story and who your candidates are this year so far. Remember the official filing has yet to take place and there could be more.
Reply to this
Speaking to Roger Barnett's place to live, "not taking one side or the other", it is not unlawful to have more than one place to live. State and Federal elected officials often have a home where they reside and a place to live where they work, sometimes regular citizens have two homes too, even more if you can afford it. Check Barnett's homestead exemption address. Years ago that was settled in the Supreme Court when Mae Jackson ran for Council. She had homes in Okemah and Oklahoma City. The Supreme Court voted in her favor.
Reply to this
One must own a home to have a homestead exemption. Barnett along with Tiger has never owned a home they always move in with a woman. Any ole port in a storm.
Reply to this
The real issue is "How can persons who continuely violate the Constitution even be allowed to run for any elected position within the Creek Nation."
Just look at all these Council persons - Alexander, Tiger, and Barnett, none of whom ever follow laws of the Creek Nation, State of Oklahoma or U.S. just look at their history of tax liens, personal lawsuits, run ins with the law, the list goes on and on and they want to be Chief?
Reply to this
lets not throw the first stone
Reply to this
Truth is being thrown, not stones (or stoned). I believe we should be aware of all candidates' past, even present, to make our decisions on whether to support one or another.
I would endorse someone who drinks just because I drink. Or anyone who can't manage their finances, because I am like them & don't pay my debts, etc. That seems to be our criteria in choosing whom to endorse and vote for.
That is just about familiarity, not self-education on a candidate. That way of choosing does not work nor will it ever work.
To me, common sense ability and ethical behavior are 2 main characteristics of a capable candidate.
Reply to this
QUALIFICATIONS TO RUN FOR PRINCIPAL CHIEF,SECOND CHIEF. 1. ONE FORTH OR MORE CREEK 2. 30 YRS OF AGE 3. AN ENROLLED CITIZEN 4. RESIDE WITHIN THE CREEK NATION BOUNDARIES ONE FULL CALENDAR YEAR. 5. TRIBAL REGISTERED VOTER SIX MONTHS PRIOR TO FILING AS A CANDIDATE. 6. NO FELONY WITHIN THE LAST TEN YEARS.A BACKGROUND CHECK WILL BE CONDUCTED. 7. EMPLOYEES OF CREEK NATION MUST TAKE A LEAVE OF ABSENCE ORIOR TO FILING. A NEW ONE SHOULD BE ADDED 8. A PERSONAL FINANCIAL BACKGROUND CHECK WILL BE CONDUCTED ON EACH PERSON FILING FOR THE OFFICE OF CHIEF AND SECOND CHIEF. ALL BACKGROUND CHECKS WILL BE CONDUCTED BY AN OUTSIDE ENTITY OF THE NATION. THIS WOULD ALSO INCLUDE PERSONS FILING FOR THE OFFICE OF THE COUNCIL ALSO.
Reply to this
Why not make it a requirement? After hearing the state of the Nation by Chief Ellis on the financial reports I would want to know for sure the ones in charge of 200 mill plus and other funds have a good solid back ground with their own money handling for sure. Make it a requirement.
Reply to this
then file it with the Judge maybe he and his crew will change the wording
Reply to this
If anyone has paid any attention at all for the last two terms of the council you really know who not to support for any office of the tribe.The current term has cost the tribe hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees for what notta? Can you really believe these people would serve the tribe well notta?
Reply to this
Since the courts have decided that the Council cannot file lawsuits, then all those who voted to initiate any lawsuit should be legally required to re-pay all that's been paid out to the attorneys who took the cases to court. The attorneys are problems too because they do not care, and just took those lawsuits, knowing they would get their money regardless of the bad advice they gave the council, if they did indeed gave any advice at all.
Reply to this
This brings up a thought. If the lawyers know what they are advising, they should have known that the council cannot initiate lawsuits. Bad advice or no advice. Whatever, they got their money.
Reply to this
who is notta ? and why are you asking that person, should they know ?
Reply to this
Notta means nothing. attorney fees for nothing and you councilmen that want to be Chief and SECOND CHIEF will do nothing for the tribe.
Reply to this
WHAT?
NCA 11-087 "Gaming Board Composition"
VETO OVERRIDE
With this VETO OVERRIDE the National Council has taken CONTROL of all 5 gaming board members.
A. Membership and appointment.
GOAB shall consist of 5 members,
2 will be nominated by the Chief and CONFIRMED by the NC
3 will be nominated by the NC and CONFIRMED by the NC
In other words the NC will pick all 5 gaming board members.
Why don't they just say that in their law? WE CONFIRM AND APPOINT EVERY POSITION.
What is the point of confirming and appointing. The mighty NC should just sit in their big black chairs in the middle of the mound building and tell us when to walk, talk, eat, drink, smile, vote, not vote and be their own personal robots to do their bidding.
THERE IS NO SENSE IN THIS LAW. NC MUST CONFIRM CHIEF'S NOMINATIONS BUT CHIEF DOESN'T CONFIRM NC NOMINATIONS.
It is always one way with this National Council. Every single council member now in office MUST be replaced. We are stuck with
10 of them, but we can get some reasonable Creeks for the other 6 seats.
LET'S GET RID OF THEM.
Reply to this
It's like this for all Boards I believe. There should be 2 each with no cross-confirmation and then a third nominated by one and confirmed by the other.
Reply to this
I have come to be a non-proponent of the law called "Checks and Balances", mainly for the reasons that you state. There are no checks and balances when the council can essentially name all the members.
It's my belief that when the chief has legal authority to appoint any member to any position, that should be that. The council should not have the power to dismiss any of the chief's appointments.
The chief can veto council's vote, and they can turn around and override the chief's veto. This is where there are no checks/balances. We citizens get cheated out of a lot of good people just because certain members of the NC doesn't like someone, and the rest of the council are nothing but sheep or cattle, led by whomever is wearing the bell at any given time!
Reply to this
Added to this comment is the fact that if a National Council Member (1) does not want an individual to be on a board, they will round up their National Council buddies and change one or all of the following qualifications within the law:
1. Education
2. Experience
3. Blood Quantum
4. Boundaries
Or, they will not confirm a Creek Citizen simply because he/she follows our constitution or merely because they just don't like the person.
Look at what they did to Supreme Court Justice Amos McNac and Houston Shirley.
The National Council is all about NOT FOLLOWING OUR CONSTITUTION.
DO NOT ELECT ANYONE ON THIS NATIONAL COUNCIL TO ANY OFFICE, CHIEF, 2ND CHIEF OR NATIONAL COUNCIL.
WE DON'T NEED THEM TO RUN OUR LIVES ANYMORE, GIVING OUR MONEY AWAY TO THEIR FRIENDS, RELATIVES OR FOR VOTES.
Reply to this
I Love reading how everybody on here always complains about this and that and has a better way of doing things. I'll bet you even sit back and smugly believe you've "contributed" somehow too. Don't you ?
Telling somebody whats wrong with "this and that" and how YOU believe things should be run, is nothing but "words on paper",....How about actually DOING SOMETHING instead of whining about it?
(I suppose your next question would be what,...right?) If you have to ask, you're part of the problem and NOT part of the solution. Okis Ce
Reply to this
You've assumed incorrectly I think. I have an idea that those who write on this site coherently are out there, speaking to reps, other elected officials, appointed officials such as managers and directors. They're not on here just whining and complaining. I think they're apt to be the ones who make telephone calls, write letters, talk directly to those in positions. What about you? I have assumed nothing about you, but now I will ask. Are you making any efforts to get citizens more informed, and connecting with officials to let them know you're not satisfied with decisions or actions? I am one who does and I'll bet there are a lot more on here who do.
Reply to this
DREAM ON! little man (or woman). I ASSUME nothing! Your idea is as ignorant and misinformed as nearly everybody else on here. Most of the people on here don't live within 500 miles of the NATION! your idea that they do,..is sadly mistaken. Because, if they did what you say,...we wouldn't be in the shape we're in right now. They are APT to be the ones who are just enough informed to make ignorant statements ON THE INTERNET about things they know little or NOTHING about.
As for me,..I have served my community and my tribe at many levels,..MY WHOLE LIFE! I have served on a Constitutional Committee,a Board (guess which one),initiated Cultural Preservation projects (community and tribal levels), had my name included in a Supreme Court Decision ( I won). Been a part of our Tribal Honor Guard which has provided final military Honors to HUNDREDS of Creek veterans for over 20 yrs. and I continue to be a friend to our Chief and many National Council members and a committed member of this tribe,..EVERY DAY OF MY LIFE! (and yes I do constantly give them a piece of my mind)
If you are not satisfied with our officials,...TURN OFF YOUR COMPUTER AND GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, CAUSE YOU'RE WASTING YOUR TIME TRYING TO RABBLE ROUSE PEOPLE WHO DON'T CARE ENOUGH TO DO WHAT I JUST SAID.
Reply to this
What do you want on your tombstone?
Congratulation to the unnamed Creek for the perfect epitaph for the Creek Nation:
“You've assumed incorrectly I think. I have an idea that those who write on this site coherently are out there, speaking to reps, other elected officials, appointed officials such as managers and directors. They're not on here just whining and complaining. I think they're apt to be the ones who make telephone calls, write letters, talk directly to those in positions. What about you? I have assumed nothing about you, but now I will ask. Are you making any efforts to get citizens more informed, and connecting with officials to let them know you're not satisfied with decisions or actions? I am one who does and I'll bet there are a lot more on here who do.”
Moty is right; you’ve got to let ‘em hang out there. Talking to reps, keeping oneself informed, informing others, etc, is not doing anything. Doing nothing and doing nothing again is the same as doing nothing, but calling it something; It’s not doing anything but protecting the family jewels. It‘s the same as trading two $500.000 cats for a million dollar dog and thinking you have a million dollar dog.
Saving a Nation is tough stuff. You don’t actually have to die, but you do have let them hang out there. “Everybody wants to go to Heaven, but nobody wants to die,” the song goes. It is the same song that is sung in the Creek Nation: Everyone want the Creek Nation to be better but no one is willing to let them all hang out to achieve it.
Dying from high a cholesterol level does not make a patriot; letting them all hang out does.
Reply to this
Does Roger Barnett get paid mileage and if so where from? Bristow or Okmulgee?
Reply to this
Bobby's reply to VOC question about who's in charge of enforcing resindency of council members.It has to be the council because they do what they want.I think it's suppose to be on the honor system.These people have no honor and they damn sure don't care about the creek people.Oh they will shake your hand and smile in your face then go around and talk shit about you for asking them to help you.Jennings say's the tribe has to big of a welfare system .Maybe,but he dose'nt complain about the system when he picks up his check walfare is getting a check for doing nothing.Is'nt it? People have been talking about the council for about six years on the VOC,but I know of only two who tried to do anything beside Chief Ellis.Until we do something and we do have the power to have the best TRIBE in the country.Like the creek said you got to let them hang out don't be afraid a good size group of Creeks standing on the west side of the Mound on meeting day will make them afraid of you.We also need to make some laws to keep the council in line.I've never seen so many people afraid to put thier name on piece of paper for something that was good.My soloution vote for new council members make new laws.Let's do something or quit wasteing our time on this machine.MVTO
Reply to this
Who are the other two?
Reply to this
MVTO Bobby! I agree 100%. The council has given out MILLIONS of dollars in welfare to anybody who has the GALL to ask them. They're about to give $100,000 to the MFSI and the woman who is in charge lives in N.M. and takes a big chunk off the top before any programs see it.
Unfortunately, all the seats that are being eliminated this time are people who don't really count except for Roger and a few others. The big chance to get rid of the ticks, lice and vermin that have been sucking the life blood from our tribe comes in 2013. The main blood sucking tick is running for Chief this time around and because he's got that good Creek name he'll probably get elected for no other reason than they like his last name. Wise up ya'll! we're going down the drain and ITS OUR OWN FAULT! MVTO! again Bobby hang tuff brother, we need more patriots like you....
Reply to this
A Nation of nobodies
I know why we can’t do anything. We’re not allowed to do anything. If we try to do anything, like being a leader, “they” will tell you to straighten up your own life before you start telling us what to do.” “They” might even throw in an old refrain: “Who do you think you are?” Our community members have seen us all of our lives. They know our families, and our imperfect lives. We all have done dumb things. In Indian communities they will never forget what those things were and remind you when they think that you’re getting to get too big for your britches. (An Okie saying)
When you try to do something, people will question your motives. They will not believe that you are doing something for the good of the community. “What’s in it for you?,” they will ask Your friends won’t trust you. They’ll think that you’re trying to do something secretly for yourself. When community members say, “No one does something for nothing,” they are spontaneously uttering a deeply held truth that is clear to everyone but to them.
The method used in many Indian communities to keep people in check is to trash the offending person’s car, They will come in the middle of the night with rocks and totally do a number on the trying-to-be-different person’s car. No one wants that to happen to them, and they can’t stop this kind of thing from happening, and so they will mind their manners and conform themselves to the standards of the community.
The other thing that Indians will do if you try to lead a project is to tease and joke about the things that you want to do. It is not teasing and joking in the normal sense. It is code for “you will look ridiculous and we will laugh at you, and you will be embarrassed and lose our respect.” You don’t want to look silly and amusing do you? It is a silent threat, that no matter how internally stable you think you are, will find its way to the doubting Thomas found in all of us.
When people, not from our culture, see us treating each other in these ways, they don’t have a clue about what we are really doing. Even if they did, they would never understand why anyone would not encourage children to take risks or try new things. Indian children, on the other hand, are laughed at --just try to practice talking Creek to find that out-- and taught to conform to the rigid standards of the community.
We are not happy jokesters having a good time. We are engaging in a dark, ritualized and destructive pattern of behavior that is designed to keep us from being specific persons, and distinct from each other.
So if it is difficult, or impossible for you to carry a protest sign or do anything substantive to change your government; why you are less optimistic, confident or motivated from others who can, you’ll know why: Who in hell do you think you are, anyway?
Reply to this
EDUCATION MEANS NOTHING .....
If a person has no common sense (brains).
Having an associate, bachelor or masters degree does not enable a person to make good decisions. It means that person went to school and received a degree.
Reply to this
SAM ALEXANDER'S PRESS RELEASE:
You are so right Sam. Chief, 2nd Chief and National Council races are popularity contests.
When was the last time you voted for someone you didn't like and did not know?
Reply to this