The Oklahoma State Capital

It had taken controversial Oklahoma House member Chris Kannady just 60 seconds to win committee approval for one of House Speaker Charles McCall’s most frightening proposals. Kannady didn’t have to take a single question as the green-voting lemmings, including a whole clump of candidates now running for statewide office, advanced a 244-page monstrosity with what could have become one of the surveillance state’s most powerful tools to control every financial transaction we make: a central bank digital coin.

A few days later, the whole thing blew up in just one of Tucker Carlson’s many insightful interviews: it was March of 2023 when then–South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem took to Tucker’s Fox News show to tell America that she had just vetoed the South Dakota Legislature’s latest Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Act bill.

Noem told Tucker that the complicated, highly technical proposal appeared to pave the way for something that we can never allow to happen: a central bank digital currency.

There was a very good reason for Noem’s concern. The legislation established a regulatory scheme for “electronic money” just as the Biden administration was in full swing, punishing and destroying the free-market crypto endeavors that would allow future generations to escape from government-mandated fiat.

To those in the know, the clear alternative to free-market crypto such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and of course DOGE, would be a crypto controlled by the nation’s fiat-loving central bankers known as Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) or in every day parlance, Fedcoin.

There are some who likely believe that Fedcoin could provide the tool central planners need to make centrally planned economies function where communism failed. These theorists argue that the collapse of communist systems stemmed from the planners’ inability to observe and control real-time spending and production, making it impossible to match the means of production to actual consumer demand. With programmable digital money, they believe this barrier can be overcome: if the state can control how and where people spend their money, it can finally “crack the code” of central planning. As former Bank of England Deputy Governor Jon Cunliffe explained to Sky News, CBDCs are not unlike “giving your children pocket money but programming the money so that it couldn’t be used for sweets.”

The question was: were those central bankers attempting to pave the way for Central Bank Digital Coin by taking advantage of the highly complex Uniform Commercial Code to prepare for the inevitable issuance of a currency by the nation’s central bank?

The UCC is a set of very technical laws created by a multi-state brain trust—likely dominated by national-level bankers and the highest power players on the national banking scene—and then pushed out to clueless state representatives. These are the mindless drones who simply hit their green buttons without even reading the bills, not that they would understand them if they did.

As she explained in her interview with Tucker, Noem warned: “We’ve got that same language coming to 20 other states.”

Uh-oh. Could that effort have been underway in Oklahoma?

That question set the curious researcher off on a mission to search through the hundreds of bills making their way through the Oklahoma legislative process—a process known for its opacity and less-than-curious members who have been browbeaten into mindless submission over the years of the imperial speakership of Charles McCall and who were not apt to ask real questions or expose diabolical plots.

And yes, there it was: a 244-page monstrosity of highly technical language—House Bill 2776—by none other than the Speaker himself, Charles McCall.

Those few who understood the diabolical nature of the Oklahoma House of Representatives immediately knew the danger of this.

Very few legislators have the courage to vote against a bill sponsored by the one state representative who holds all power—McCall. And McCall’s bill hadn’t been sent to the Banking Committee, where members might have had subject-matter expertise and a fighting chance of figuring out what it contained. Rather, McCall’s bill had gone to the “sycophant” committee—the Rules Committee—a special committee made up of those who almost always support the administration.

This is the committee that both fast-tracks bills important to the Speaker and forever tables bills that are important to the people but not favored by the Speaker. It’s the committee most under the Speaker’s control, and its members are those chosen because they can take the heat for the Speaker.

It had taken that committee just 60 seconds—from the time that the Speaker’s designated spokesman for the bill, Chris Kannady, took to the microphone to the declaration of the vote.

Sixty seconds. That’s all. In that amount of time, the committee had signed off on 244 pages of legalese without proffering a single question to Kannady, the representative notorious for conducting the dastardly purge of conservative House members in 2018.

Those Rules Committee members who signed off on the proposal—without asking a single question—included Echols, Pfeiffer, and Hill, all of whose names will appear on the 2026 ballot as they are running for statewide office, and all of whom should be forced to answer for this vote along with McCall himself.

It’s a question that should be proffered whenever one of these candidates appears before the many grassroots groups they now likely tour—desperate for your vote in their latest attempt to acquire more power.

And so, by early March of 2023, as Noem went nationwide with Tucker, McCall’s bill was just one quick House floor vote from final passage.

It would stay in the state until March 20, when House records indicated that public awareness—obviously in response to the outcry initiated by Noem’s interview—likely appeared to have forced McCall’s hand, and he sent the bill back to Rules, where a year later the offending language was stripped out.

And while that was a win for the people, thanks to Tucker Carlson, herein lies another great danger of the Uniform Commercial Code: This complicated set of laws—which, as previously demonstrated, moves through the less-than-curious legislative committees like a hot knife through butter—establishes certain financial rights that, in the event of economic turbulence, could prove catastrophic to the portfolio of the individual.

As it stands now, there's a belief that the UCC already appears, in certain circumstances, to give intermediaries rights to the assets of asset holders even if those assets aren’t pledged or otherwise obligated.

Here’s the concern: a day of reckoning for America and its economy is coming—perhaps triggered by an invasion of Taiwan by China, a move that could bring about the reckoning America’s congressmen, including a majority of Oklahoma’s big-spending delegation, have long made inevitable.

When that happens, the question is: will the average Oklahoman’s investments be protected? Or will they disappear—now possessed by the banking interests and other monied special-interest players who are likely the few who truly understand the impact of each UCC update?

That question is being raised by Cody Maynard, one of the House of Representatives’ Class of 2022, and one of the very few of that class who are still fighting back against the co-opting influences of the Capitol world.

To better understand Maynard's point of view, and the risks embedded within the UCC, and the growing concern that our assets could one day be seized, revealing they were never truly ours, one should read The Great Taking or view the corresponding documentary, both of which are available online at no charge.

Armed with this knowledge, one can help inform the righteous candidates in the years ahead as the grassroots continue to elect a new generation of legislators. They will be the leaders who understand why Oklahoma must act to amend the UCC and restore the right of free-market, private ownership to its rightful place in the hands of the people.

Maynard’s concern is reflected in House Bill 1741, legislation which seeks to amend the UCC and start to restore the balance to the true owner of an asset—the individual who actually owns it—instead of the intermediary interests.

Like McCall’s House Bill 2776, House Bill 1741 was assigned to the House Rules Committee. But unlike McCall’s legislation, 1741 appears to have been assigned for a completely different purpose: it's parked, and it's not moving.

The contrasting examples of these two bills illustrate the grave danger posed by a distant, unaccountable group that drafts legislation for state lawmakers to mindlessly approve—and the broken system that makes it easy to pass massive, complex UCC proposals that few understand, yet nearly impossible to amend once enacted.

Because of this status quo, there’s a growing fear that on the nation’s coming day of reckoning, Oklahomans will awaken to find they never truly owned the securities they believed safeguarded their future financial well-being. Until the people of Oklahoma replace the green-voting lemmings in their House of Representatives who have enabled this system, that risk will endure.

So, how do you know if your legislator is a green-voting lemming?

Well, that can of course be determined by simply clicking through to this year’s special publication of The State Capital known as the Capitol Conformity Report. This report contains a breakdown of every “Republican” legislator’s votes, and the percentage of the time they mindlessly signed off on the many bad and unnecessary proposals that dominate a large part of the legislative docket.

If your legislator voted “yes” 90 percent or more of the time—as did 54 “Republican” representatives, a majority of that chamber—then they need to be replaced in the upcoming 2026 election cycle.

And as you vote in 2026, on June 15th, keep in mind that in statewide race after statewide race, you will finally have the opportunity to provide a referendum on so many of those legislators who were previously beyond your reach as a voter. Now, as they seek more power, as frightening as the prospect of their possible election may be, it is still our neat opportunity as the people to bring about a day of accountability that has been long in coming.

For instance, when you cast your vote in the governor’s race and you vote against Charles McCall, your vote will be the referendum on his digital currency proposal. And notwithstanding his newfound talent for knifing up bananas on camera—the real measure of McCall’s judgment lies in his record. Whether or not he still believes that the UCC proposal was a good idea, his poor judgment in sponsoring it—an effort that, had it not been for Noem and Tucker, was almost certain to win approval—is a powerful indicator of his future governance style.

This, along with his many other betrayals of our values that will no doubt come to light in the weeks and months ahead, is absolutely disqualifying for him to receive our future trust—no matter how many millions are poured into edgy commercials designed to distract and deceive the voters.

And to support the effort to bring transparency to this issue—and to expose the many politicians running the big grift, claiming to stand for our values while continually betraying them—consider becoming a paying subscriber to The Oklahoma State Capital. Your subscription keeps this work alive and sustainable through the next election cycle and beyond. Together, we will reclaim the state government and restore the House of the People—for the People.