Weekly Opinion/Editorial

NOT

by Steve Fair

Oklahoma citizens may have lost out economically last week because our two United States Senators have integrity. Neither Senators Jim Inhofe nor Tom Coburn were willing to sell their vote on the health care bill in exchange for preferential treatment for their constituents. That was not the case with several of their Democrat colleagues.
*****
Rest assured, there will be short sighted people in the Sooner state who will criticize Coburn and Inhofe for failing to ‘bring home the bacon’ like the more aggressive, less principled lawmakers who were willing to sell their vote. But until Congress is full of people who are looking out for the average guy, American citizens are the long-term losers in these ‘vote auctions’ the Democrats are conducting.
*****
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid,( D-NV) secured the 60th vote – that of Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson -- for promising $100 million in Medicaid assistance for the Cornhusker state. In effect, the other 49 states will subsidize Nebraska. Previously, Reid made a $600 million deal for Vermont, a $500 million boondoggle for Massachusetts, and Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu, (D-LA) committed her vote for $300 million. In addition, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, (D-CT) has reportedly received $100 Million in the health care bill to build a hospital at the University of Connecticut.
*****
Nelson’s actions will not just impact Nebraska, but all states. Oklahoma State Senate Pro Tem Glenn Coffee said, “Oklahoma taxpayers – and citizens of Texas, Arkansas, Kansas and other states will pay in multiple ways for years to come for Harry Reid’s outrageous Christmas gifts to his fellow Democrat senators,” Coffee said. “The favoring of one state and its Senator at the expense of other states and their taxpayers is unjust.”
*****
Nelson’s ‘deal’ is not likely to stand up to Constitutional scrutiny. U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham, (R-SC) said, “Legally, I think other states can make a constitutional challenge. Instead of negotiating in public, there was a back-room deal. One state cannot have a different plan than the other forty-nine. I think Nelson sold his vote for nothing.”
*****
Whether the deal stands up or not, the point is no deal should have been made. Senators should not be auctioning off their vote to the highest bidder. With an economy on the verge of collapse, a national debt that has grown by twenty five percent the last year and a weak dollar, America needs political leaders with the courage and wherewithal to say no to earmarks and bribes. Abramoff is serving time for bribing elected officials with private money, but Reid is using our money to accomplish much the same thing.
*****
When Senator Coburn said about the upcoming vote, "What the American people ought to pray is that somebody can't make the vote tonight. That's what they ought to pray," the liberals went nuts!
*****
They accused Coburn of wanting Senator Robert Byrd, (D-WV) to die. The ninty three year old Byrd has to be wheeled into the Senate chamber to cast his votes. Known as the ‘king of pork’ in Congress, Byrd has never excercised fiscal restrainst in his fifty plus year political career. Coburn never mentioned Byrd by name during his floor speech, but Democrat Senator Dick Durbin, (D-Illinois) took issue with Coburn’s remarks saying, "I don't think it's appropriate to be invoking prayer to wish misfortune on a colleague. I've tried to reach out to him. He is my friend and I have worked with him but this statement goes too far. The simple reality is this: we are becoming more coarse and more divided here."

*****
Who is really who is at fault because of this ‘coarse and divided’ enviroment? Is it the Republicans who have not been given any imput into ‘the most important piece of legislation since Social Security.’ The Democrats have not allowed any meaningful debate or discussion on this bill and some even admit they are unsure what is in it.

*****
The impact of the federal health care bill on the Oklahoma state budget could be catastrophic according to State Senate Pro-Temp Coffee. “While Harry Reid sells his soul and financial indulgences for the votes of his fellow Democrat senators this Christmas season, all he will leave for Oklahoma taxpayers will be a multi-year, multi-million dollar lump of coal, and a cumbersome, unaffordable system that will disenfranchise more citizens than it will help,” Coffee said. “This is the ultimate Dirty Santa gift that we can’t pass off to someone else.”
*****

“Aside from the obvious bad policy that is being foisted on an unwilling American public, the financial realities of this Christmas catastrophe are unconscionable,” Coffee continued. “And the right-thinking, responsible folks here in Oklahoma are helpless to stop it.“We can only hope some sort of sense will overtake those leading the charge to push this disaster on the public, and that Oklahomans – Democrats and Republicans alike – will make their voices heard in Washington,” Coffee added. “We can count our blessings during this season of joy for Oklahoma’s federal delegation, but Washington needs a little more Oklahoma common sense,” he concluded.

*****
The Portland Liberal Examiner disagrees with Coffee about Inhofe and Coburn. They write: “Thank you, Oklahoma voters, for giving the rest of America the worst Senator pair in the country. Do these two represent the citizens of Oklahoma, or their own self-interests?”

*****
Yes, Coburn and Inhofe are ours and represent Oklahoma common sense values. We are blessed to have them, and so is America, if nothing else because they are ‘not for sale!’

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

DON’T KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD!
by Steve Fair

Last fall, the national media said Oklahoma was one of the few states that had dodged the economic recession. But last week, the National Conference of State Legislatures released a report that showed the Sooner state has the largest budget shortfall of all fifty states- a whopping 18.5%. In just the first five months of this fiscal year, Oklahoma’s tax revenue is down 28.5% below last year. If the trend continues, revenue will be more than 1 billion short of projections for the 2009 fiscal year.

*****
Oklahoma’s 2009 state budget is 7.06 billion, which is down –6.7% from 2008. Of that total, Education gets 54%, Health and Human Services 27%, and Public Safety and Judiciary 11.3%. That leaves less than 8% of the state budget for General Government, Natural Resources and Regulatory Services. Realistically, any meaningful cuts have to come from the first three listed.
*****
Why is revenue down? Oklahoma state government gets revenue from seventy (70) different sources, but a substantial amount of state revenue comes from ‘gross production tax.’ The seven percent tax is accessed on oil and gas producers, but was off a whopping 84% in November alone. Every major source of state revenue was off except motor vehicle tax by double digits in November. Less money is coming in than was projected, so it’s belt-tightening time- or is it?
*****
Some legislators, Republicans as well as Democrats, favor taking the $600 million ‘federal stimulus’ money Oklahoma has left and cleaning out the Rainy Day fund (also $600 million) to shore up the budget. That would solve this year’s budget woes, but what if things get worse? The Spears School of Business at OSU believes economic conditions in the state will not get better in 2010 and budget woes may continue into 2011.
*****

In a report released November 17th in OKC, they conclude, “ While FY 2009 was challenging for state and local budgets, FY 2010 will exhibit continued deterioration of the tax base. We anticipate some tax base recovery in FY 2011, but not enough to restore tax collections to their FY 2009 levels. “ They go on to say, “No significant recovery in U.S. natural gas prices is currently projected, but much could change through this winter. End of March storage and production levels should offer more insight into the trajectory of energy prices through 2011.”
*****

The Spear’s report lists four major ‘risks’ to the state forecast; (1) Further deterioration of national economic conditions. (2) Suppressed oil and natural gas prices through 2010 and lack of resolution on energy policy from Obama Administration. (3) Negative multiplier effects from strained state and local budgets. (4) Restricted capital access to Oklahoma's small businesses.
*****

With a projection that things could get worse, cleaning out the savings account (Rainy Day fund) is not the solution. That’s irresponsible and requires no creativity. That’s just ‘kicking the can down the road.’ Tough times require tough decisions by tough leaders.

*****

Ronald Reagan said, “A leader, once convinced a particular course of action is the right one, must have the courage and determination to stick with it and be undaunted when the going gets tough.”

*****
Here are a couple of suggestions for the legislature. Since Common Education gets the lion’s share of the state budget, it’s time for them to deal with the ‘elephant in the room.’ They should present a plan to share administration and infrastructure. They should lead the charge in the consolidating of Oklahoma’s 539 school districts. Instead of just lobbying for more money, Education should lead this initiative.

*****
Secondly, state agencies should be required to submit next year’s budget requirements using ‘zero based’ budgeting. They should have to justify every tax dollar they receive. The legislature should check their work; verify the taxpayer’s money is being spent in an efficient and prudent way.

*****
Legislators should make strategic cuts that deal with waste, duplication, and unnecessary functions. Everyone knows there is waste in Oklahoma state government. Everyone knows Oklahoma should share school administration and infrastructure. Everyone knows Oklahoma has more school districts than is efficient or necessary. But every legislature has just ‘kicked the can down the road’ in the hope a future legislature will deal with it.

*****
“Kicking the can down the road" was a game played by children in years past. In most versions of the game, someone kicked the can and then the person who was "it" had to retrieve the can before they could chase the other players. Kicking the can as far down the road as possible gave the other players the maximum possible time to hide or scatter or whatever is required by the game. Metaphorically, "kicking the can down the road" is similar to a delaying tactic, putting it off until later, etc. Let’s hope the Republican led legislature will show some courage and not play this children’s game.

From the Wall Street Journal

The Health Bill Is Scary
"Government guidelines would likely have forbidden

the test I used to discover Sheila's cancer. "
By Senator Tom Coburn, M.D.

I recently suggested that seniors will die sooner if Congress actually implements the Medicare cuts in the health-care bill put forward by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. My colleagues who defend the bill—none of whom have practiced medicine—predictably dismissed my concern as a scare tactic. They are wrong. Every American, not just seniors, should know that the rationing provisions in the Reid bill will not only reduce their quality of life, but their life spans as well.
*****

My 25 years as a practicing physician have shown me what happens when government attempts to practice medicine: Doctors respond to government coercion instead of patient cues, and patients die prematurely. Even if the public option is eliminated from the bill, these onerous rationing provisions will remain intact.
*****

For instance, the Reid bill (in sections 3403 and 2021) explicitly empowers Medicare to deny treatment based on cost. An Independent Medicare Advisory Board created by the bill—composed of permanent, unelected and, therefore, unaccountable members—will greatly expand the rationing practices that already occur in the program. Medicare, for example, has limited cancer patients' access to Epogen, a costly but vital drug that stimulates red blood cell production. It has limited the use of virtual, and safer, colonoscopies due to cost concerns. And Medicare refuses medical claims at twice the rate of the largest private insurers.
*****

Section 6301 of the Reid bill creates new comparative effectiveness research (CER) programs. CER panels have been used as rationing commissions in other countries such as the U.K., where 15,000 cancer patients die prematurely every year according to the National Cancer Intelligence Network. CER panels here could effectively dictate coverage options and ration care for plans that participate in the state insurance exchanges created by the bill.
*****

Additionally, the Reid bill depends on the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in no fewer than 14 places. This task force was responsible for advising women under 50 to not undergo annual mammograms. The administration claims the task force recommendations do not carry the force of law, but the Reid bill itself contradicts them in section 2713. The bill explicitly states, on page 17, that health insurance plans "shall provide coverage for" services approved by the task force. This chilling provision represents the government stepping between doctors and patients. When the government asserts the power to provide care, it also asserts the power to deny care.
*****

If the bill expands Medicaid eligibility to 133% of the poverty level, that too will lead to rationing. Because Washington bureaucrats have created a system that underpays doctors, 40% of doctors already restrict access to Medicaid patients, and therefore ration care.
*****

Medicaid demonstrates, tragically in some cases, that access to a government program does not guarantee access to health care. In Maryland, 17,000 Medicaid patients are currently on a waiting list for medical services, and as many as 250 may have died while awaiting care, according to state auditors. Kansas, the home state of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, faces a Medicaid backlog of more than 15,000 applicants.
******

Other unintended consequences of the Reid bill could wreak havoc on patients' lives. What happens, for instance, when savvy consumers commanded to buy insurance realize the penalty is the de facto premium? It won't take long for younger, healthier Americans to realize it's cheaper to pay a $750 tax for coverage instead of, say, $5,000 in annual premiums when coverage can't be denied if you get sick.
*****

OMB Budget Director Peter Orzsag's belief that mandatory health insurance will become a "cultural norm" is bureaucratic naivete that will produce skyrocketing premiums and reduced care for everyone. My state's own insurance commissioner, a Democrat, recently confirmed this concern to me in a letter noting that "the result will be higher insurance rates due to a higher percentage of insured being higher risk/expense individuals."
*****

But the most fundamental flaw of the Reid bill is best captured by the story of one my patients I'll call Sheila. When Sheila came to me at the age of 33 with a lump in her breast, traditional tests like a mammogram under the standard of care indicated she had a cyst and nothing more. Because I knew her medical history, I wasn't convinced. I aspirated the cyst and discovered she had a highly malignant form of breast cancer. Sheila fought a heroic battle against breast cancer and enjoyed 12 good years with her family before succumbing to the disease.
*****

If I had been practicing under the Reid bill, the government would have likely told me I couldn't have done the test that discovered Sheila's cancer because it wasn't approved under CER. Under the Reid bill, Sheila may have lived another year instead of 12, and her daughters would have missed a decade with their mom.
*****

The bottom line is that under the Reid bill the majority of America's patients might be fine. But some will be like Sheila—patients whose lives hang in the balance and require the care of a doctor who understands the science and art of medicine, and can make decisions without government interference.
*****

The American people are opposing this bill in greater numbers every day because the facts of the bill—not any tactic—are cause for serious concern.

'SAFE' SCHOOLS?
by Steve Fair

All Americans want our schools and children attending them to be safe. Of course ‘SAFE’ means different things to different people. President Obama has appointed Kevin Jennings as his ‘Safe Schools Czar’- officially the Assistant Deputy Secretary for safe and drug- free schools in the Department of Education. Jennings has a very interesting background.
*****
Born in Winston Salem, NC, the son of a fundamentalist Southern Baptist preacher who died when Kevin was eight, Jennings is a self proclaimed, ‘Mama’s Boy.’ In his book, “Mama’s Boy- Preacher’s Son,” Jennings disclosures how he rejected society’s inequities and his Southern Baptist upbringing by finding his 'salvation' in school. Graduating from Harvard in 1985, getting a Masters at Columbia and earning an MBA from NYU has given Jennings 'an education beyond his intelligence.'
*****
In 1990, Jennings founded Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) and headed the organization until last year. Jennings is openly gay, living with his partner of fifteen years, Jeff and two dogs. He also plays hockey in a ‘gay’ hockey league!
*****
To say this guy is ‘out of the mainstream’ is to put it mildly. In September it came out that, when he was a teacher in Massachusetts, Jennings did not report an incident in which a 16-year-old boy told him that he was having sexual relations with an older man he met in a bus station bathroom. He has defended his decision, which should have been enough to get him fired, but not in the liberal Obama administration.
*****
After the incident was revealed, fifty-three House Republicans wrote President Barack Obama asking him to remove Jennings from that position. The lawmakers accused Jennings of "pushing a pro-homosexual agenda" and said that Jennings's past writings exhibit a record that makes him unfit for the position. "We respectfully request that you remove Kevin Jennings, the Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools, from your Administration," the Republicans wrote. "It is clear that Mr. Jennings lacks the appropriate qualifications and ethical standards to serve in this capacity."
*****
Now it is has been reported that GLSEN recommends books for reading by kids that are pornographic. GLSEN says it works to create a welcoming atmosphere for homosexual students in schools, and that effort includes recommending books for students of all ages.
But critics say many of the books, particularly some that are targeted for children between Grades 7 to 12, are inappropriately explicit. A full list is available at the blog Gateway Pundit, which has published dozens of controversial passages from the books. These recommendations were made when Jennings was heading up GLSEN!
*****
Peter Sprigg, a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, says the content of the books is shocking, and it raises concerns about Jennings' judgment. "The graphic sexual content of these books is so extreme that I think any average parent or citizen, regardless of how they feel about homosexuality, would be shocked at these books being recommended to young people," Sprigg said. GLSEN Executive Director Eliza Byard defended her group's recommendations, telling FoxNews.com in a written statement:
"Some of the books that might be used with young adult audiences contain mature content, as is true of many memoirs and works of literature. Because of the presence of mature content in some of the works, GLSEN provides very clear guidelines throughout, recommending that adults review each book to make sure the book is suitable."
*****
"It's like Jennings just doesn't realize he's working with kids here.... You need a totally different set of rules when you're working with kids," said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality.
*****
Safe is defined as being free from danger or the risk of harm; "a safe place"; "a safe bet." It’s obvious that Jennings is working to create a “safe” enviroment for homosexuals in the public school system. The only students that will not be ‘safe’ are those who don’t agree with his liberal agenda. He should resign and go back to promoting his liberal agenda unfunded with taxpayer money!

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

‘HE TOLD US SO’
by Steve Fair

In November 1996, Oklahoma voters went to the polls to vote on SQ 676. The proposal read in part, “This measure would limit the fair cash value of real property for property tax purposes. The fair cash value would not increase by more than 5% in any taxable year.”

*****
Oklahoma citizens were told the change would rein in ‘loose cannon’ county assessors across the Sooner state who were assessing taxes with no statutory guidelines or legal restraint. The proposal was supposed to give them a ceiling increase by allowing them to assess a maximum increase in property tax of no more than five(5) percent per year.

*****
Property tax is an important source of revenue for schools, vo-techs, and county government. Schools get about 60% of the money, Vo-Techs, county and city government get the rest. Property tax are caulated by using four factors- the market value of the property, an ‘assessment ratio’(currently 11%), less homestead exemption and applying the county millage (tax rate per $1000). Because property tax assessment wasn’t widely understood by the average Oklahoman, any proposal to rein in their increase was met with approval.

*****

The late Jack Edens was a popular radio talk show host at KTOK in Oklahoma City. Knowledgeable in fiscal issues, Edens passionately railed against the proposal, stating it was "full of fishhooks" and would be interpreted that property tax increases of 5% annually be ‘mandated.’ Edens was dismissed by most people as being an alarmist. A month after he gave an impassioned plea at the Republican 4th District Convention at Duncan’s Simmons Center, Edens died of a heart attack. Edens’ warning was ignored and Oklahoma voter passed the measure in November 1996 and amended the state constitution. 808,429 voters supported the initiative, and 290,433 voters opposed. Edens was right on target and the measure had ‘unintended consequences.’ In some parts of the state, property taxes have more than doubled in 14 years.
*****

In Oklahoma’s two largest counties, property taxes are up over 35% in just five years. "This (property tax) is the fastest-growing tax in the state," said State Representative Russ Roach, (D- Tulsa). Roach said the law is intended to allow growth counties to raise property taxes up to 5 percent a year instead of a mandated 5 percent. "What was intended to be a tax increase ceiling has instead become an annual tax increase floor," Roach said. In July, Roach asked the Attorney General for an opinion on Article 10- section 8B of the State Constitution(SQ 676).

*****

In response to the request, an opinion was released in September by Attorney General Drew Edmondson which said, “the assessor must increase the assessed fair cash value by 5 percent each year until it is within 5 percent of the actual fair cash value." In other words, the only way this boondongle can be changed is by amending the constitution to avoid almost routine property tax increases every year.

*****
"It is clear to me that the AG's opinion says the citizens will have to change the law if they want relief from what has become an almost automatic 5 percent increase in property taxes each year," Roach said.

*****
Last session, State Senator Jim Reynolds, (R-Moore) authored SJR 5 which would have let Oklahomans vote to lower the current property tax cap of five percent to three percent. SJR 5 passed the Senate and moved to the House where it stalled and was not voted on.

“House Speaker Chris Benge, (R-Tulsa) must be credited with effectively killing the bill. In doing this he’s denied seniors and hard-working Oklahomans the opportunity to voice their opinion on ever increasing property taxes. The intention was to keep the annual property tax increases under that cap, but instead, numerous county assessors have raised property taxes the maximum five percent each year,” Reynolds said. "Property tax relief is due for Oklahomans," Reynolds said. "It affects everybody, senior citizens, baby boomers and newlyweds."

*****
State Representative Jason Murphey, (R-Guthrie) has proposed legislation that places a temporary freeze on property tax assessments. This freeze would take place over a two year time period after which time the cap on new assessments could never be higher than 2.5% and could be as low as 0%. Murphey has also announced he will introduce a bill increasing the amount allowed for homestead exemption. It has been more than twenty years since any adjustment has been made to homestead.

*****

Its clear Oklahoma voters should be given the chance to fix the ‘unintended consequences’ of SQ 676. The lack of courage by House Republican leadership in not getting this issue voted on before the end of session is disappointing. Granted, budget shortfalls and tax revenue shortages make it a difficult time to deal with this issue, but it’s the right thing to do and will send a message that Republicans don’t avoid the tough issues- even in tough times.
*****

Jack Edens didn’t live long enough to get to say, “I told you so,” about the effects of SQ 676, but his example of looking out for the citizens of Oklahoma should be followed by elected officials on both sides of the aisle.

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

PAY ATTENTION!
by Steve Fair

Almost a year before the 2010 elections, the field is already getting crowded in the races that will be on the ballot. Oklahomans will elect a U.S. Senator next November. Currently the only announced candidate in the race is the incumbent, U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, a Republican. Coburn will be tough to beat and no well-known Democrat has announced in the race. Governor Henry cannot seek another term, but what he plans to do politically is still subject to speculation. At age 46, and having approval ratings that have never gotten below 60%, it’s likely Henry will be on the ballot in the future.

The list of candidates running for Henry’s job include state Attorney General Drew Edmondson and Lt. Governor Jari Askins who are vying for the Democrat nomination. U.S. Congresswoman Mary Fallin and State Senator Randy Brogdon are the Republican candidates.

With Askins not running for re-election as Lt. Governor, three candidates have announced their candidacy to replace her. State Senator Todd Lamb, (R-Edmond) and State Representative John Wright, (R-Tulsa) are the Republicans seeking the seat and State Senator Kenneth Corn, (D-Howe) is the announced candidate for the Democrat nomination.


Because Edmondson is running for Governor, the AG’s race is open and three candidates have announced. Former Governor Keating’s son-in-law and U.S. District Judge Tim Leonard’s son, Ryan Leonard is seeking the GOP nomination. He has a primary opponent in State Senator Clark Jolley, (R-Edmond). Jolley was re-elected to the state senate in 2008 and would not lose his seat if he weren’t elected AG. That’s something that should be changed in Oklahoma. Elected officials shouldn’t be able to run for another office without resigning the one they hold. The ‘safety net’ should be eliminated. Jim Priest, an attorney and Church of the Nazarene lay minister, has announced for the Democrat nomination. Priest, 54, will be a formidable candidate in the race.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Sandy Garrett has announced that she is not seeking re-election. Two Republicans have announced: Dr. Janet Barresi, an Oklahoma City Dentist, and Dr. Shawn Hime, former Enid School Superintendent. State Senator Susan Paddack, (D-Ada) has announced her candidacy for the Democrat nomination.

Oklahoma voters will also elect a Labor Commissioner, a State Auditor and Inspector, an Insurance Commissioner, State Treasurer, and a Corporation Commissioner in 2010. Jason Reese is the only announced GOP candidate for Labor Commissioner. Incumbent Labor Commissioner Lloyd Fields is expected to run for re-election. Fields, a Democrat, won the 2010 race by less than 3,000 votes statewide, so Republicans are optimistic they can regain an office they held for twelve years under Brenda Reneau.

The State Auditor’s race has not drawn an announced GOP candidate. The current office holder is Steve Burrage, a Democrat, who was appointed to the post by Governor Henry after Jeff McMahan was convicted on fraud charges in federal court. Gary Jones, the current Republican State Chairman, was the parties’ nominee for this office the past two cycles, but has indicated he will not run this cycle.

Kim Holland is the State Insurance Commissioner. She will likely seek re-election. Several Republicans have indicated interest in the race, but have not announced. Current State Treasurer Scott Meacham has announced he will ‘retire’ from politics, making the Treasurer’s race an open race. Two Republicans have announced. State Representative Ken Miller, (R-Edmond); the chairman of the State House A&B committee and former State Senator Owen Laughlin from Woodward will battle it out for the GOP nomination. No Democrat has announced for the post.

State Corporation Commissioner Dana Murphy is up for re-election in 2010 after winning a close race in 2008. Murphy is up for a full term and will likely face opposition, even though she has no announced opponent. Murphy’s race against Democrat Jim Roth was the most expensive Corporation Commission race in state history.

U.S. Congressman Tom Cole has at least one announced opponent for the GOP nomination; R.J. Harris from Norman has been campaigning since early this year. No Democrat has formally announced.

Locally, there will be State legislative races and county races for County Commissioners Districts 1 and 3. Each County Assessor and County Treasurer are also up in 2010.

With ten statewide races, a congressional race, local races, and state questions on the ballot, 2010 shapes up to be a year that will require informed voters to pay attention. Don’t go into the voting booth uninformed. Study the issues and candidates. Be an educated voter.

Opinion/Editorial

THE OKLAHOMAN IS ‘IN A STEW!’
by Steve Fair

Gary Jones, state Republican chairman, filed a lawsuit last week against his former political opponent Jeff McMahan and McMahan’s wife Lori along with four other defendants. Jones is seeking reimbursement of nearly $250,000 for what he personally spent on the 2002 and 2006 State Auditor and Inspector races.

Jones alleges, and Steve Phipps verified in McMahan’s trial, the two elections were “stolen” from him. Jones lost both elections by razor thin margins. In an opinion/editorial on Thanksgiving Day entitled, “Jones’ stew: State GOP chairman can’t let elections go,” (http://newsok.com/jones-stew-state-gop-chairman-cant-let-elections-go/article/3420341?custom_click=pod_headline_opinion-oklahoman-editorials) The Oklahoman said. “We’d like to think the state’s GOP chairman has better things to do. Surely Oklahoma’s court’s do.”

Is Jones’ lawsuit sour grapes? Does the state GOP chairman have better things to do than sue his former political opponent? Is this a frivolous lawsuit?

Let’s address these questions in reverse order. First, do the courts have better things to do? Is this a frivolous lawsuit? According to a legal dictionary a “frivolous” lawsuit is defined as, A baseless lawsuit that is filed with little or no prospect of success.

Jones’ lawsuit is not baseless as the editorial itself admits. The Oklahoman says, “his opponent each time, Jeff McMahan, proved to be as crooked as the day is long, and now is serving eight years in prison for accepting illegal campaign contributions.” There is no doubt Jones’ was cheated in both elections and the federal court system bore out that fact with the conviction of the McMahons and Phipps.

Does Jones’ have a prospect of success with this lawsuit? Only a jury knows, but he certainly deserves his day in court for having the two elections stolen from him. The implication by The Oklahoman that political candidates relinquish the right to legal recourse when opponents lie, cheat and steal to win an election is flat wrong. The lawsuit is not frivolous and if Jones wins, it will act as a deterrent to like-minded cheats and crooks that seek to “steal” future elections.

Second, does the state GOP chairman have better things to do than sue his former political opponent? I’m not sure what The Oklahoman thinks the GOP chair’s job involves, but it’s not one of “going gently into that good night” or overlooking corruption. The chair is charged with leading by example and with making sure GOP candidates are treated fairly in elections. The chair coordinates the state party’s efforts to recruit candidates, train them, and exhort them to play by the rules in the elective process. Jones’ filing of this lawsuit sends the message the GOP plays by the rules and expects everyone else to play by the rules or face the consequences. That’s a huge part of what the GOP chair’s job should be- lead by example. Jones filing of the lawsuit is consistent with that mantra.

Third, is Jones’ lawsuit sour grapes? The contention Jones’ can’t get past the two elections he had stolen from him is probably accurate, but who could? It’s human nature to play the “what if” game in our mind. Jones ran competitive well-organized campaigns that needed ‘just a little more’ to get over the top. He lost both elections by less than 40,000 votes statewide. Secondary statewide races are tough races to raise money for, hence the reason Jones ponied up nearly a quarter of a million of his own money in the two races. The input of the illegal campaign contributions likely resulted in Jones’ close defeat. Some say Jones should just duck his head, sigh and go on? Even some Republicans agree with this 'laissez faire' approach, but those same Rs are not very courageous and avoid the “tough” issues like the plague, so their creditability is seriously lacking. The “right” thing to do is insure cheats and crooks are sent a message that stealing elections has consequences and the best place to send that message is through the court system by hitting these cheaters in their pocketbook.

The Oklahoman endorsed McMahan when he ran in 2002. In 2006, they were presented compelling evidence of McMahan’s illegal campaign finance scheme, but instead of endorsing Jones, they chose to “stay out of the race.” They endorsed no one. In either year, the race was so close, an endorsement by the state’s largest newspaper would likely have swung the election in Jones’ favor.

Instead of attacking Jones for filing a lawsuit against people who wronged him, The Oklahoman should be apologizing to the people of Oklahoma for helping get McMahan elected. As to their catty, immature comment about Jones’ “mental anguish” in the editorial, it was The Oklahoman who gave the citizens of Oklahoma five years of “mental anguish” by promoting a crook for elective office.

Jones’ shouldn’t let those elections go. They exposed major corruption in Oklahoma government and in the elective process. Oklahoma citizens are better off because Gary Jones had the courage to run for office and to expose corruption in the elective process.

The definition of stew is, “to be in a huff; be silent or sullen. Jones isn’t the one “in a stew-“ it’s The Oklahoman and wimps who wrongly believe McMahan and his cronies are the only ones that want to steal elections. This lawsuit sends a message that if you cheat, you pay!