OKLAHOMA PUBLIC EDUCATION NEEDS MORE THAN MONEY!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

WALTERS RESIGNATION

by Steve Fair

 

     The Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) was founded in 1991 by Washington state legislator Robert Williams and political operative/consultant Lynn Harsh.  It is a 501c3 organization promoting conservative causes.  In March, the Freedom Foundation started the Teacher Freedom Alliance (TFA).  The TFA is an anti-union organization for teachers that does not engage in collective bargaining with school districts.  It exists to help removing existing teachers’ unions and providing liability insurance for classroom teachers.  Oklahoma already has a similar organization- Public Educators of Oklahoma (POE).  One of the founders of POE- Mike Tinney- is on the state school board.

     On Wednesday on Fox News, Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instructor Ryan Walters announced he will be resigning in October to become the CEO of the Teacher Freedom Alliance.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma's public education outcomes remain stagnant.  For years, Oklahoma has lagged behind in education.  The Oklahoma Education Association (OEA) lobbies every year for legislators to increase teacher pay.  They promise if teachers are paid more, test outcomes will improve.  That has yet to happen.  When Ryan Walters was elected, he assured voters he would turn it around.  That didn't happen.  The governor and the legislature said they would fix public education by increasing teacher pay to the regional average.  That action resulted in no significant improvement in test scores. 

     A major issue is over 50% of Oklahoma public education dollars are being spent for non-classroom related activities.  That number hasn't changed in over 25 years.  Republicans, who took control of the state legislature in 2004, have dealt with public education largely the same way the Democrats did before for a century before. 

     Sharing of school administration and infrastructure is discussed, but never implemented.  Consolidation of school districts in rural areas is fought like the dickens.  Oklahoma taxpayers fund more school buildings and buses than any state per capita.  Recognizing the money isn't getting to the classroom and the unwillingness of parents to take responsibility for the education of their child is dismissed by public education leadership. 

     The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result.  That is what Oklahoma continues to do in public education.

     Second, Walters is a self-promoter.  That's why he made the announcement on Fox News instead of local media.  He loves attention.  Instead of making fundamental changes to public education as he campaigned, Walters has spent his three years in office sensationalizing and engaging in melodrama.  He appears angry and confrontational, even to those who agreed with him.  He has alienated former allies and takes pride in making political enemies.  Oklahoma public education hasn't improved during his tenure.  It remains static. 

     During his three years in office, Walters has amassed a loyal following who believe he is faultless, unstained, and incorruptible.  While Ryan Walters' political future is uncertain, he has cultivated a formidable voter base.  Don't be surprised if Walters runs for Oklahoma governor.    

     Third, the next State Superintendent must take on the education establishment.  Governor Stitt will appoint someone to serve out the remainder of Walter's term.  The next Supper needs to focus on how tax dollars are being spent in public education.  They should demand financial accountability.  They should recognize they can't dictate improvement in a public education with a memo or a news conference.  It is going to take a plan to help Oklahoma parents take equity in their kid's education. The next education czar needs to have the courage to admit they don't know everything- a rare trait for a politician.

     The reaction to Walters' departure varied.  His political opponents held parties celebrating his resignation, while his allies blamed his detractors for pushing him out.  No one doubts Ryan Walters has courage, but it more than courage to get thing done.  It takes action, purpose, direction, commitment, and resilience to move policy forward.  His inability to 'sell' his ideas before he held a news conference made him ineffective.  Walters wasn't always wrong, nor was he always right, but Ryan was always in front of a camera.

Political Parties should determine their nominee!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

DON’T SIGN SQ836

by Steve Fair

      On Tuesday the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled unanimously against the Oklahoma Republican Party (OKGOP) that State Question 836 (SQ 836) can proceed to the signature-gathering phase. The OKGOP had argued SQ 836 infringed on the First Amendment rights of political parties and violated a parties' 'associational rights. 

  SQ836 proposes an open primary where all candidates would appear on a single primary ballot, regardless of party affiliation.  All registered voters, including Independents, could vote and the top two candidates would advance to the general election.    Currently Oklahoma has modified closed primaries.  Only voters registered Republican can vote in the Republican primary.  Democrats allow Independents to vote in their primary.  Changes to the primary system require a change to the state constitution and therefore a vote of the people.  Supporters of SQ836 now have 90 days to collect at least 172,993 valid signatures from Oklahoma voters.  If they are successful, SQ836 would likely be on the November 2026 ballot.  SQ836 could still face legal challenges.  In its ruling, the Supreme Court said the challenge to the initiative petition could occur after signatures have been collected. 

     In a separate case, the Oklahoma Supreme Court granted temporary relief from a new law (Senate Bill 1027), which was passed last session to restrict geographical areas where initiative petition signatures could be gathered. The ruling means supporters of SQ 836 will not have to comply with the new rules during their signature drive.  Three observations:

     First, political parties should determine their nominee, not outsiders.  It makes no sense for those who do not identify, agree with, or participate in an organization to have a say in the parties' business.  No civic club or church opens their business meetings up to whoever walks in off the street.  That's crazy, but that is what Democrats and some Republicans want.  Why?  Because they are losing elections!  If open primaries are such a great idea, why didn't the Ds want it when they dominated Oklahoma politics for a century?  Because open primaries are not a good idea.  It's a scheme to win elections with candidates who are not as conservative.  It's a plan to move Oklahoma to the left.  Instead of educating voters, which takes time and effort, proponents of SQ836 want an election system that will promote manipulation, conniving and scheming. 

     Second, not just Republicans should oppose SQ836.  Democrats should not support a system that allows Rs to vote to determine their nominee.  SQ836 would hurt the Democrat brand.  If registered Independents truly are 'independent,' they shouldn't support it.  They should want the three recognized parties in Oklahoma to pick their nominee and the Independents can vote in the general.  Open primaries would render political parties irrelevant and meaningless.    

     Third, informed citizens should not sign the petition.  Signature solicitors will be at the state fair, in parking lots, and online.  They will make the false claim Oklahoma's current primary system is unfair and disenfranchises/excludes voters. But no voter is excluded in a closed primary who doesn't choose to be excluded.  To participate in the GOP primary, a voter need only to register Republican.  Simple as that.  Don't sign the petition! 

     If Oklahoma moves to open primaries, political parties will become toothless and meaningless.  Special interest money will pour into politics, making it next to impossible for grassroots candidates to win.  Oklahoma's title of the most conservative state in America will be gone.  But those who want Oklahoma to be more liberal will be back in control.   

AMERICA HAS A HEART PROBLEM!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

HANDLING THE TRUTH

by Steve Fair

 

     The killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, 31, has dominated the news since he was shot at a Utah college campus on Wednesday.  The alleged shooter, Tyler Robinson, is being held without bail after being turned in by his father.  Robinson is not cooperating with authorities.  On Friday night, Kirk's widow issued a statement standing by Kirk's chair where he sat when he broadcast his popular podcast.  She vowed to continue Kirk's work at Turning Point USA, and continue his Fall campus tour.  "It will be greater than ever," Erika Kirk said.  Three observations:

       First, political violence is never acceptable.  No civilized society settles political or religious disagreements by killing those who espouse a differing viewpoint.  But that is where we are in the United States- uncivilized/uncouth/course.  Heated political rhetoric on both sides of the political spectrum make 'agreeing to disagree,' nearly impossible.  Most rational people condemned Kirk's murder, but some liberals who disagreed with his political views were ecstatic he had been cut down and rejoiced in his death.  Such behavior reveals a dark, depraved heart in need of regeneration.  America has a 'heart' problem.  Believers should be pleading for a sovereign God to touch hearts and draw men to Him, otherwise our country is doomed.    

     Second, acknowledging different viewpoints was one of Kirk's characteristics.  He would often publicly debate college students whose liberal views contradicted his own, listening with respect.  Kirk reached college students by encouraging them to use critical thinking skills to challenge what they believed.  He taught them political apologetics and forced them to defend their particular position by reasoning and systematic presentation of ideas.  Instead of learning to regurgitate material for a grade, Kirk challenged students to think.  Colleges are teaching students, "what to think," and not "how to think."  They have become institutions of indoctrination, not institutions of higher learning. 

     Third, truth can be offensive.  People don't want to hear the truth and it often makes them mad.  Because they lack critical thinking, reflective judgment and logical inquiry skills, they are easily offended by those who believe differently than they do.  The real truth is not a subjective human concept but an absolute standard stemming from God's infallible character, words, and deeds. Believers believe Jesus is the ultimate revelation of God and, therefore, the source of absolute truth itself.  When He said, "I am the truth," he was not just referring to his teachings but to his very person and divine nature.  Jesus embodied the truth entirely and He was killed for it. 

     Three closing points: (1) Charlie Kirk was not perfect.  No one is.  Some have deified him and have placed him as an object of worship.  Only God is to be worshipped.  Kirk may be admired for his dedication to a cause, but God should be preeminent to believers.  (2) Free Speech is under constant attack in America.  The thought police are out in full force.  When free speech is gone, America is gone.  (3) The events of the last week should make everyone more introspective, not more boisterous.  The depravity of the situation should drive true believers to their knees.    

     In his book, Truth Wars, John MacArthur exhorted people to, "Buy the truth, and do not sell it."  His point is the truth should be cherished and defended.  It shouldn't be compromised for relevance.  "An understanding and appreciation of biblical truth is a hallmark of a genuine believer, " MacArthur writes. 

     Col. Nathan Jessup famously yelled at Lt. Daniel Kaffee: "you can't handle the truth."   

Sadly, that seems to be where many Americans are. 

Homeless problem is more complex than having OHP haul off trash!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD

by Steve Fair

 

     In 2024, SB#1854, authored by Senators Weaver, (R-Moore), Shane Jett, (R-Shawnee), Cody Rogers, (R-Catoosa), and Rep. Chris Kannady, (R-Moore), was signed into law.  It made it a crime to have a homeless encampment on state owned property.  On Thursday, Governor Kevin Stitt announced the creation of Operation SAFE (Swift Action for Families Everywhere).  SAFE's first act was to clear homeless camps in Tulsa set up on state owned property inside Tulsa city limits.  On Friday, the Oklahoma Highway Patrol (OHP) removed 5 truckloads of debris from 21 homeless camps across Tulsa.  The camps were closed down, apparently without notice.  Illegal immigrants were arrested and turned over to ICE.   Tulsa County Sheriff Vic Regalado, whose jail facilities are near capacity, said:  "I think we're missing the point in all of this. We can't incarcerate ourselves out of homelessness."

     When he announced the action, Stitt said it wasn't his job to deal with Tulsa's homeless problem, but Tulsa Mayor Monroe Nichols and Tulsa leadership 'have not met the level of action needed to keep neighborhoods safe.'  Mayor Nichols fired back saying: “Kevin Stitt has shown himself again to be an unserious person. I am not interested in being lectured by someone who has proven time and time again that he only cares to intervene to score political points.” Nichols is a former four-term Democrat state representative who is a regular critic of Stitt. Three observations:

     First, homelessness is a national issue.  An estimated 770,000 people are homeless in America.  That is up nearly 20% in the last two years.  One in four homeless in the US are in California.  The rising cost of housing is a factor, but a high percentage of homeless are mentally ill or drug users.  Some people who experience homelessness are employed in low-wage jobs and can't afford a place to live, but some are homeless for reasons known only to them.       

     Second, it's not a crime to be homeless.  The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Oklahoma rightly pointed that out after the governor's decree.  The ACLU solution is for the overtaxed/overworked to give the homeless a hand out and turn them into permanent dependents for the taxpayer.  Many homeless don't identify as victims.  They simply dropped out of society because they wanted out of the rat race.  They want to be left alone.  When their independence intrudes on other citizen's liberty, then something has to be done.  Homeless camps in Tulsa had become areas for drug use, crime and unsanitary conditions.  While it's not a crime to live without a home, it is a crime to not respect a fellow citizen's property.    

     Third, there is not a 'right to roam,' in the U.S.  In many countries of the world, public land can be used by the public for reactional purposes.  In early America, allowing public access to government land was a given and the concept was considered for inclusion in the U.S. Constitution.  While public lands are generally accessible, most have restrictions and charge fees.  

     In a June 2024 case (City of Grants Pass vs. Johnson), the U.S. Supreme Court held local governments can criminalize public camping and sleeping for people experiencing homelessness.  The Court reasoned camping bans address behavior, not homelessness as a status.  

     Government is good at implementing short-term fixes and avoiding the core problem.  The homeless problem in Oklahoma is more complex than hauling off trash and running people off public land.  Stitt's action did little more than 'kick the can down the road.' Stitt, Nichols and other local leaders in the Sooner state should work with non-government organizations to determine the root cause of homelessness.  Treating symptoms and not the root cause will just relocate the problem, not fix it.

AUDIT REVEALS INCOMPETENCE IN OKLAHOMA GOVERNMENT!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

INCOMPETENCE

by Steve Fair

 

     On Wednesday, Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector (OSAI) Cindy Byrd released a 200-page performance audit on federal money the state of Oklahoma received in COVID relief funds.  Byrd said that state agencies failed to spend the money as it was designated.  The audit found the money was spent on administrative salaries and personal expenses and not on public assistance as the feds had intended.  Byrd says state taxpayers may possibly be on the hook for up to $200 million.

     Oklahoma received almost $5 billion in federal COVID-19 relief from two major pieces of federal legislation, the CARES Act and the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). The money was earmarked for the state, local governments, and tribal nations, to fund  a variety of programs and services- Byrd claims the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) mishandled $22 million dollars designated to help Oklahomans with rental assistance.  The Department of Human Services (DHS) failed to adhere to the guidelines associated with another $63 million of the relief money according to the audit.  Byrd said Oklahoma taxpayers may have to pay back almost $200 million dollars.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma taxpayers deserve better.  It is not surprising government bureaucrats blow through taxpayer money.  That is what bureaucrats do, but when they ignore spending guidelines and are not competent to do the job, they should be fired.  At the very least, a bureaucrat should have the necessary ability, knowledge and skill to do the job they are being paid to do.  When they fail, those who are elected and charged with appointing and managing those bureaucrats must be held accountable.  Governor Stitt appointed the directors of the two aforementioned agencies.  He is a lame duck and is term-limited, so voters can just butt a stump.  It appears there will be no repercussion or consequences for the incompetence.    

     Second, OMES is a bloated unnecessary state agency and DHS has always been a money pit.  OMES was created in 2012 when Mary Fallin was governor.  The stated reason, at that time, was to consolidate government services and improve efficiency.  The real reason was to give the weak governorship in the Sooner state more power. Since inception, OMES has been a boondoggle that has resulted in an extra layer of government.  DHS has traditionally had a huge annual budget, fraught with waste, so it's no surprise they couldn't properly administer the relief money.  OMES should be dismantled and DHS retooled.            

     Third, the power of the OSAI needs to be expanded.  The state constitution mandates the OSAI audit county government and state agencies, but performing performance audits must be requested by the governor or the leadership of the legislature.  Most Oklahomans mistakenly believe the state auditor can audit anything/anybody/anytime.  To expand the scope of the OSAI's duties would require a vote of the people, but it's past time to get it done.  A conservative legislator should run a Joint Resolution in the coming session expanding OSAI's duties. 

     Cindy Byrd is an announced candidate for Lt. Governor.  Critics of the audit's findings claim she timed the audit's release to further her 2026 statewide campaign.  Byrd has been further accused of 'spinning' the audit's findings, but there is no evidence that is the case. 

     The job of the auditor is to find fraud and corruption and expose it.  Only the naïve and simple believe Oklahoma state government bureaucrats did the right thing with the COVID relief money.  Clearly, errors were made and those who point errors out shouldn't be attacked- they should be commended.  It remains to be seen if the feds will require taxpayers to pay back the misspent money, but meanwhile at OMES and DHS, it's business as usual.

NO TEST WILL FIX AMERICA'S PROBLEM!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

TEST PANDERING

by Steve Fair

 

     Oklahoma is a politically conservative state.  Voters in the Sooner state have voted for the Republican candidate for president since 1968- 15 straight elections!  Republicans have super majorities in both Oklahoma state legislative chambers.  The entire federal delegation is Republican.  All statewide elected officials are Republican.  Republicans dominate elected county offices.  To describe Oklahoma a 'Red state,' is an understatement.  But that could be changing. 

     Oklahoma is experiencing significant inbound domestic migration, attracting over 25,000 new residents each year.  Many are coming from California and other 'blue' states, bringing their politics with them.  A conservative in a 'blue' state is very often a liberal in Oklahoma.  These new Okies scare conservatives in the Sooner state.   One elected official has announced a way to screen these new immigrants.  Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters has announced a plan to test teachers coming to Oklahoma from a liberal state.  Using an assessment developed by the conservative media company, PragerU, out-of-state teacher will have to pass a fifty-question test that appears to be along the line of a basic civic quiz.  The move has sparked controversy, with opponents of Walters labeling the test a "MAGA loyalty test."

     “As long as I am superintendent, Oklahoma classrooms will be safeguarded from the radical leftist ideology fostered in places like California and New York. Any teacher coming from these states will be required to pass our new PragerU assessment before receiving certification, because we refuse to let Gavin Newsom's (governor of California) woke, Marxist agenda turn Oklahoma into the same dumpster fire California has become,” Walters says.  Three observations:

     First, what is PragerU?  Started by Dennis Prager, a Jewish talk show host, and screenwriter Allen Estrin (Touched by an Angel, The Practice) in 2009 to promote conservative and capitalist viewpoints using videos, PragerU doesn't confer degrees.  It is privately funded, with the initial seed money coming from conservative Texas oil tycoon Dan Wilks.       

    Prager, 77, has been called the Jewish Billy Graham, speaks four languages, and has hosted a nationally syndicated conservative talk show for over 25 years.  Prager is a secularist in theology, but has supporters at both ends of the conservative political spectrum. 

     Second, no test will weed out the woke.  All teachers should know basic civics, and not just teachers from blue states.  Every Oklahoman (teacher or otherwise) should know the number of members in the U.S. House of Representatives (435).  They should know the first three words of the U.S. Constitution. (We the People).  But administering a test to separate the sheep from the goats won't work.  Nothing prevents a 'liberal' teacher from marking the 'conservative' answer?  Nothing! 

     For years, conservative college students played 'toady' game.  They passed tests by 'telling the prof what the teacher wanted to hear.'  They hid their true values in order to pass a course.  They pandered/sucked up for a grade.  The 'woke' will do the same on the PragerU test.

     Third, local control of education is a mark of conservativism.  Republicans have advocated for the federal Department of Education to be disbanded for decades.  Every GOP- national and state- platform touts the importance of education decisions being the responsibility of parents and local school boards.  Local school boards are elected by the patrons of the local school district and have the power and authority to hire and fire administrators and teachers.  Because they are on the front lines, local school leadership is in a better position to protect Oklahoma students from the radical left agenda. Parents, administrators, and school board members should pay close attention to what is being taught in the classroom.  If a 'woke' teacher is promoting a world view inconsistent with local values, they should be held accountable.  If local leadership is unwilling to deal with it, vote them out.   

     The woke are educating our children because the American family is disintegrating. When coupled with unengaged citizens in local education, the radical left has a perfect storm.  No test can fix that.      

D.C. is not what Washington envisioned!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

RETROCESSION

by Steve Fair

 

     Washington, District of Columbia (D.C.). was established in 1789 as a federal district under exclusive jurisdiction of the U.S. Congress.  D.C. sets on the Potomac River, across from Virginia.  It shares a land border with Maryland.  In 1846, Congress reduced the size of D.C. by returning land originally ceded by Virginia, including the city of Alexandria.  That action is known as retrocession. 

    D.C. is divided into quadrants that are centered on the Capitol Building.  As of 2020, the population of D.C. is 690,000.  Citizens elect a mayor and 13 council members, who have governed the city since 1973.  D.C. citizens have no voting representative in Congress, but since 1961 have cast three (3) electoral votes in the presidential race. 

     The purpose of the District of Columbia is to serve as the seat of the U.S. federal government. It was established as a neutral territory, separate from any state, to house the nation's capital and its governing bodies. This ensures the federal government's independence from state politics and allows Congress to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over the District. There have been several unsuccessful efforts to make D.C. the 51st state.  The latest was in 2021, when a statehood bill passed the House, but died in the Senate. 

    Last week, citing the crime rate, President Trump announced he was activating 800 National Guard members to take over D.C.'s police department.  Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, who denies crime is out of control in her city, described the troop deployment as an "authoritarian push."  Three observations:

     First, Trump has the authority to be authoritarian.  Until 1973, Congress and the president had 'total control' over the district.  The Home Rule Act of 1973 gave D.C. residents more control over their local government, but with limitations.  Congress and the president still oversee D'C's budget and can intervene/override the district's local government.  A bill to repeal the Home Rule Act was introduced in February, but failed to gain enough support to become law.  D.C.'s local government is primarily federal funded by American taxpayer dollars, not local taxes.   

     Second, crime is a problem in D.C.  In 2024, Washington, D.C. had a homicide rate of 27.3 per 100,000 residents.  That is the fourth highest homicide rate in the country- six times higher than NYC.  If D.C. were a state, it would have the highest homicide rate of any state in the U.S.  D.C.'s homicide rate has doubled in the last 13 years.  Local police have proven they are not up to the task of dealing with their crime rate.  Trump was right to send in the National Guard. 

     Third, D.C. should be reduced in size.  The idea of returning land from Washington, D.C. to Maryland and Virginia, known as retrocession, has been discussed for years. The Constitution allows Congress to alter the federal district's boundaries.  As mentioned above, a portion of the original District was retroceded to Virginia in 1846. 

     Both bordering states have shown little interest in annexing the District, probably because assuming responsibility for a high crime/high unemployment city is not in their best interest.  But it is past time for D.C. citizens to assume responsibility for their own city. Instead of making D.C. a state, the residential areas of the district should be folded into the adjoining states.  One potential obstacle is that retrocession might require a constitutional amendment. 

     When Congress passed the Residence Act in 1790 calling for the permanent seat of government to be located on the Potomac, President Washington took personal control of the layout and construction.  D.C. was originally a ten-mile square block of land that would house the president's mansion, the Capitol and other federal buildings.  It was never intended to be home to 690,000 with the highest crime rate in America.