State Rep. Cook Rejects GOP Platform and Embraces Roe v. Wade

 State Rep. Cook Rejects GOP Platform and Embraces Roe v. Wade

By

James Scott Trimm

And as Chair of the Texas House State Affairs Committee, Byron Cook has repeatedly used his position to water down and even block pro-life legislation.

Byron Cook pretends to be pro-life but in May 2015 Cook wrote a public letter defending late-term abortions on babies who are diagnosed with a disability! 

Recently at a hearing for a pro-life bill, Cook had a citizen dragged out of the meeting by force and arrested for the crime of recording the meeting (a right which Texas State law is supposed to guarantee.)

Now Cook is at it again.  Cook is refusing to even grant HB 948 a hearing claiming that the bill is “unconstitutional”.  

HB 948 is a bill that would end abortion in Texas by invoking the US Constitution and the tenth amendment.  The tenth amendment states that the states and the people retain all powers not delegated to the federal government in the US Constitution.  Since the US Constitution does not delegate power to the federal government in the area of medical procedures, but does guarantee the right to life saying a person may not be deprived of life “without due process of law;” (14^th Amendment) Moreover the Preamble to the Constitution says:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to... secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Therefore the Constitutional right not to be deprived of life without due process of law extends not only to “ourselves” but to “our posterity” which by definition means the unborn.

Furthermore the US Constitution does not delegate power to any branch of the Federal Government, including SCOTUS, to be the exclusive or final interpreter of the US Constitution.  To the contrary Thomas Jefferson wrote:

“…this [federal] government, created by this compact [the Constitution], was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress."

(Thomas Jefferson; Kentucky Resolution 1798)

And James Madison, the father of the US Constitution wrote:

The Constitution of the United States was formed by the sanction of the states, given by each in its sovereign capacity. It adds to the stability and dignity, as well as to the authority, of the Constitution, that it rests on this legitimate and solid foundation. The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.

(James Madison; Report on the Virginia Resolutions of 1798)

In a recent letter to Byron Cook, HB 948 Author State Representative Tony Tinderholt recalled Cook’s past opposition to pro-life bills:

"...all human life is precious and should be protected under state and federal law. I have voted for every pro-life bill that has come before the Texas House since my time in the legislature. I know we disagree on this issue, as you have taken positions that have affirmed your belief that there are unborn children who should be able to be aborted in our state."

Tinderholt then wrote:

"Representative Cook, we are the Texas Legislature. We determine what laws are best to protect our citizens. Perhaps you and I have a difference of opinion on whether or not Roe v. Wade should be the law of the land. Perhaps that is the more serious difference of opinion we face."

"Representative Cook, I will not let you hide behind the Office of Attorney General on this issue. You are the Chairman of the House Committee on State Affairs. In reference to issues before your committee, you alone decide which bills get a hearing and which do not.”

Perhaps Representative Cook should be reminded that nullification of federal court rulings by the Texas Legislature is part of the 2016 Texas Republican Party Platform:

State Sovereignty- Pursuant to Article 1 Section 1 of the Texas Constitution, the federal government has impaired our right of local self-government.  Therefore, federally mandated legislation, which infringes upon the 10th Amendment rights of Texas, should be ignored, opposed, refused, and nullified. Regulation of Commerce in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution has exceeded the original intent. All attempts by the federal judiciary to rule in areas not expressly enumerated by the Untied States Constitution should be likewise nullified. Any federal enforcement activities that do occur in Texas should be conducted under the authority of the county sheriff.

Moreover the 2016 Texas Republican Party specifically calls upon the Texas Legislature to “ignore and refuse to enforce any and all federal…  court rulings, which would deprive an unborn child of the right to life.”

Abolish Abortion- We call upon the Texas Legislature to enact legislation stopping the murder of unborn children; and to ignore and refuse to enforce any and all federal statutes, regulations, executive orders, and court rulings, which would deprive an unborn child of the right to life.

HB 948 is a platform item.  The constitutionality of nullification and the non-constitutionality of Roe v. Wade are also platform items.  Moreover “strict adherence to the original intent” of the “US Constitution” is also spelled out in the Party platform.

It appears that Byron Cook rejects the primary tenants of the Republican Party platform, but does believe that there is a Constitutional Right to an abortion! 

Byron Cook’s position seems to believe that his own position on these issues is so weak, that it cannot withstand debate in an open Committee hearing, nor does he believe our elected representatives should be allowed to debate this bill on the house floor and vote on it.

Lord Byron wants to decide all by himself.