OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE HAS A SLEW OF NEWBIES!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LOOKING BACK!

by Steve Fair

 

      2025 is here and 2024 is in the books.  Here are the top four political stories in Oklahoma for 2024:

     First, President Trump won a non-consecutive second term.  Trump joined Grover Cleveland as the only president to win back-to-back terms.  Over 1 million Oklahomans voted for Trump on November 5^th.  Trump got two thirds of the vote and won all 77 counties in the Sooner state for the third straight time.  Only one other state- West Virginia- had every county vote Red.  The last time Oklahoma went blue was for Lyndon B Johnson’s winning campaign in 1964. 

     The last time a Democratic candidate was able to have more votes in a county in Oklahoma than the Republican was in the 2000 election. Al Gore was able to get more votes than his opponent, George W. Bush, in seven Oklahoma counties. It wasn't enough to swing the state in Gore's favor.  Bush still handily won the state, but it's worth noting no Democrat candidate has been able to replicate what Gore did since 2000.

     Second, Oklahoma voters sent eight Republican incumbent legislators home.  State House A&B Chair Kevin Wallace, (R-Wellston) lost an August primary runoff, as did Senators Roger Thompson, (R-Okemah) and Blake Stephens, (R-Tahlequah), and Rep. Dean Davis, (R-Broken Arrow).  In the June primary, Oklahoma state Senate floor leader Greg McCortney, (R-Ada), who had been tapped as the next leader in the upper chamber was defeated.  Senators Jessica Garvin, (R-Duncan), and Cody Rogers, (R-Tulsa), as well as Rep. John Talley, (R-Stillwater) also lost their reelection bids.  The common denominator in unseating the incumbents appears to be their being out of touch with their constituents, especially on tax cuts.    

     Coupled with legislators who choose not seek reelection and those termed out, the number of freshmen lawmakers elected was historic.  When the Oklahoma legislature conveys the first week of February, there will be 31 new greenhorns (17 in House/14 in Senate).  A staggering twenty percent of the two chambers will be new. 

     Third, the 2026 race for governor begins.  With Governor Kevin Stitt termed out, the race is open.  The GOP field is expected to be crowded.  Lt. Governor Matt Pinnell, Attorney General Gentner Drummond, outgoing Speaker of the House Charles McCall, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters, lead the field.  Drummond and McCall can ‘self-fund,’ which can be a game changer in a crowded primary.  U.S. Congressman Kevin Hern, (R-Tulsa) had been eying the race, but announced he will not run. 

     Fourth,  the tribes and the state remain at odds.  With Governor Kevin Stitt taking the stand the Tribal Gaming Compact did not automatically renew and the tribes saying it rolled over, a clash was inevitable.  A federal court ruled back in 2020, the compacts did renew, but Stitt has continued the fight.  He Stitt asked the nine-member Oklahoma Horse Racing Commission (he appoints all 9 members) to not allow horse tracks to offer gaming machines or share in the participating tribal fund revenue starting Jan. 1, 2035, unless authorized by the governor. The panel voted 9-0 to do that on a nonbinding resolution.

     The U.S. Supreme Court ruling on McGirt restored the five civilized tribe’s reservation and tribal sovereignty often conflicts with Oklahoma state interests.  From water rights to criminal law enforcement, McGirt has the potential transport the state back to before statehood.

     2024 voters sent two clear messages: (1) they don’t like the direction elected officials are taking their government, and (2) they want radical change.  They would rather have a novice in office than an experienced politico who doesn’t listen to them.  2025 will reveal if their message was received.  

SQ#835 removes all rules in the primary!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LAW OF THE JUNGLE!

by Steve Fair

 

      Political Parties hold primary elections to determine their nominees for the general election.  There are four types of primaries: Open, which means anyone can vote in a Party’s primary election regardless of Party affiliation. Closed, which means only those registered in the Party can vote in the Party’s primary.   Semi-closed, which means those registered in the Party and Independent voters can vote in the primary.  Jungle, which means all candidates, regardless of Party affiliation, run against each other at once.  The top two then go to the general election.

     In November, a group called Oklahoma United (OU) announced a plan to eliminate Oklahoma’s closed primary system and replace it with a primary where candidates would run on one primary ballot with their Party affiliation listed by their name.  All registered voters would vote regardless of Party affiliation and the top two would move to the general election.  Oklahoma United believes the Sooner state’s current primary system ‘disenfranchises’ the 480,000 Okies registered Independent and aren’t fair.  They point out that Oklahoma’s voter turnout is dismal and ranks near the bottom in the U.S.    

     The proposal requires a change to the Oklahoma State Constitution and would have to be approved by voters.  OU is attempting to gather signatures to get it on the ballot.  If they are successful, it would likely be on the 2026 general election ballot as State Question #835.  Three observations:

     First, the current system is logical and fair.  Voters registered in a political Party have the right and responsibility to select their nominee.  If a voter wants to be involved in the primary, they should align with their values and affiliate/register with the Party consistent with their convictions.  That is sensible and rational.  The Baptists don’t allow the Methodists to vote on calling their pastor.  The Rotarians don’t open their officer elections to the Ambucs.  Letting those who aren’t willing to align philosophically with the Party to have a voice in who represents the Party makes zero sense.

     Second, the Oklahoma United proposal is a jungle primary.  OU is positioning/marketing SQ#835 as an open primary proposal, but it’s a Cajun (Louisiana) style jungle primary.  Jungle primaries promote ‘vote-splitting.’  That is where the Party with the most candidates in the primary are more likely to lose because the vote is spilt.  Supporters of a jungle primary believe it helps more moderate candidates get elected, but there is no clear evidence that is the case. OU’s proposal ‘disenfranchises’ the current engaged/active voter.  It seeks to increase low information voter turnout and dilute the knowledgeable grassroots voter influence in elections.  

   Third, citizen engagement is the solution.  If more Oklahomans paid attention to their government, voter turnout would improve.  Political Party leaders spend more time infighting than educating voters.  If Party leaders would commit to schooling Oklahomans on what is happening in OKC and in their local county courthouse, voter apathy would vanish.  Pedagogy isn’t as fun as taking photos with celebrities and attending glitzy events, but making lasting change is rarely amusing.

     Rudyard Kipling wrote, ‘the law of the jungle,’ is to survive.  Anything goes in the jungle.  SQ#835 seeks to remove all the rules and impose the law of the jungle in Oklahoma.  Don’t sign the initiative petition.  Don’t try to fix what isn’t broke.

PLAY THE HAND YOU'RE DEALT!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LEVERAGE

by Steve Fair

 

     Democrats in Congress appear to be changing their strategy from resisting to cooperate with incoming President Donald Trump.  In 2016, Congressional Democrats were militant and united in their opposition to Trump.   That resistance doesn’t appear to be materializing for Trump’s second term.  Three observations:

     First, Democrats are soul searching.  They lost both chambers of Congress and the presidency. American voters were clear they didn’t buy into the liberal policies of Biden/Harris.  The scheme to be ‘against Trump’ as a campaign theme miserably failed at the ballot box.  Since the election, prominent Democrats have abandoned the ‘save our democracy’ rhetoric because the average voters didn’t buy the threat.  They recognize they are out of touch with the average American and are assessing their political positions. 

      Bernie Sanders supporters circulated a petition this week calling for a massive overhaul of the DNC.  The group wants to (1) ban dark money in primaries (good idea), (2) invest more money in the state Party apparatus, (3) hold consultants accountable, (4) commit to a progressive platform and small donor strategy in fundraising.  They believe the Democrat Party has abandoned their roots and need to get back to basics.  It remains to be seen if a grassroots takeover of the DNC materializes.  

     Voters dealt Democrats a two-seven offsuit hand in November.  They have few options but to play it out and hope they can wind up with a pair.

     Second, political polarization may be eroding.  It has been popular to be against anything/everything your political opponent is for.  That mindset hasn’t disappeared, but some politicos got the message voters sent in November.       Hassan Martini, a Democrat political consultant, says it is important people aren’t categorized as left or right.  “The Democratic Party should look into each person’s comments and actions on an individual basis,” Martini says.  Martini (and others) wouldn’t likely be saying that if the election results had been different in November, but a spirit of collaboration is good for the country.

     Third, Americans are optimistic.  In a CNN polls, most Americans approve how President Trump is handling his return to the White House.  70% of Americans expect Trump to make significant change and 54% approve of how he has handled the presidential transition thus far.  The stock market has soared since Trump won.  The anticipation he will loosen government regulations on business and impose tariffs on imports have fueled a bullish spirit on Wall Street.  Consumer confidence in policy is critical for successful economic policy.  Trump has expanded hope that personal finances will improve in his second term.

     Many of the liberals adamantly/ staunchly opposed to Trump in his first term appear to have dialed down the lunacy/insanity in the second.  They seem to have adapted to the circumstances.  Like a riverboat gambler, they’ve learned to ‘play the hand they’re dealt.’  A pragmatic accepting of reality has been absent in politics for too long.  To accomplish a goal, one must use the resources which are actually available and to recognize the limits of the circumstances. 

     Leverage is the power to influence the other party in a negotiation to accept your conditions. It's the factor that gives one party more influence over the outcome.  In any negotiation, leverage is critical.  Trump said in The Art of the Deal, “Don’t make deals without it(leverage).”  In November, voters gave Trump leverage.    

BIDEN'S LEGACY WILL BE ONE OF LYING, DECEIT, AND FABRICATION!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LYING LIAR WHO LIED!

by Steve Fair

 

     On Sunday, President Joe Biden issued an eleven-year blanket pardon of his son Hunter.  This came after he had repeatedly promised he wouldn’t pardon him.  Back in June, Hunter was convicted of three felony counts related to the purchase of a revolver and lying on the gun-purchase form.  At that time of his conviction, the White House issued a statement saying: President Joe Biden said he would accept the outcome and “continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal.” But Joe was apparently lying.  Three observations:

     First, Hunter’s pardon is historic.  The pardon covers an 11-year window that includes much of the time President Biden was Vice President.  During the investigation into Hunter’s infamous laptop, Joe Biden was implicated in many of the business dealings Hunter was engaged in with foreign governments.  Many believe President Biden is making sure the Trump justice department can’t go after the he or Hunter after Trump takes office.  Other presidents have pardoned family members, but this one is a clear abuse of power.   

     Second, Joe Biden has never been creditable.  Lying and cheating are a longtime pattern of behavior in Joe’s life.  As a student in law school, he lifted five pages from a law review journal and tried to pass them off as his own. In 1988, he was running for president, but was forced to drop out of the Democrat primary after it was disclosed, he had plagiarized a speech by a British politico.  During the 2020 campaign, statements and speeches were often word for word from policy papers written by others, with no attributing to the author.

    Imitation is often said to be the sincerest form of flattery, but what Biden does isn’t imitation.  He willfully steals the work of others and passes it off as his own. Taking credit for someone else’s intellectual work shows a lack of integrity and honesty. 

     Third, Biden lies with impunity. Biden hasn’t faced punishment or any negative consequences from the mainstream media for his double-dealing.  They are willing accomplices and collaborators in the effort to deceive America.  They aren’t alone.  Democrat Party leaders echo/recapitulate Biden’s lies.  When confronted with the truth, both groups flip the script, play victim and attempt to make the public question true reality.  Lies like the economy is flourishing and the border is secure didn’t fool the average citizen in November.  Democrats have a ‘creditability gap,’ (words and actions don’t align) with voters.  

     Democrats have been calling President Trump a liar since he appeared on the political scene.  According to the Washington Post, Trump made 30,573 false or misleading claims during his first term- an average of 21 per day.  Some of what they called lies were mere mistakes in pronouncing words.  Ironically, the Post was not been as diligent in tracking President Biden’s falsehoods the past four years.       

     In 2003, former U.S. Senator Al Franken, (D-Minnesota), wrote a satirical book titled, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.  In the book, Franken attacked conservatives, implying Republicans spun reality and prevaricated the truth.  He attacked hyperbole, exaggeration, and sensationalism- characteristics that always accompanies politics. 

      Both Parties engage in exaggeration.  They often embellish the truth in an attempt to make something much bigger, better or worse than it actually is.  They caricature issues and consequences of actions.  But there is a fundamental difference between exaggeration and lying.  What President Biden did when he promised to not pardon Hunter wasn’t hyperbole, exaggeration or sensationalism.  It was a clear statement of anticipated action.  But it turns out, it was a lie- a deliberate fabricated statement intended to deceive the American public. Biden’s legacy is he is a lying liar who lied.

Legislators sometimes do the right thing after exhausting every other option!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

KICKING & SCREAMING!

by Steve Fair

     In 2017, State Senator Anthony Sykes, (R-Moore) championed judicial reform in Oklahoma.  He authored four bills that sailed through the state senate, but never got a vote on the state house floor.  Senate Bill #708 (SB708) would have added the prerequisite a district judge have served as lead counsel in three jury trials before they ascended to the bench.  Sounds reasonable, but SB708 never got a vote in the house.  Senate Bill #779 (SB779), also authored by Sykes, would have changed the number of judges each judicial district could nominate.  Didn’t get a vote in the house. 

     Sykes’ Senate Joint Resolution #43 (SJR43) would have sent to a vote of the people a proposal to change Oklahoma’s system for filling appellate court justices/judges’ openings.  If approved, it would have removed the current Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) from vetting candidates and submitting finalists to the governor. SJR43 was approved by the senate on a vote of 38-5, but never got a vote in the house.   

     The more things change, the more they remain the same.  In the 2024 legislative session, Senator Julie Daniels, (R-Bartlesville) authored Senate Joint Resolution #34 (SJR34).  It was virtually the same language that was in Sykes’ bill seven years before.  SJR34 passed the state senate 32-14.  It did get a vote in the state house, but failed 60-36, when 24 Republicans joined all Democrats to not let their constituents vote for judicial reform.  To see how your legislator voted on SJR34, go to: http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=sjr34&Session=2400.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahomans want judicial reform.  For the first time since Oklahoma went to a retention ballot, a justice/judge was removed.  Supreme Court Justice Yvonne Kruger, 87, who served for 37 years on the high court was not retained.  Two other justices were retained by razor thin margins.  For the first time ever, Oklahoma voters paid attention to a portion of the ballot they had been ignoring.  Kruger was the most liberal of the three and paid the price at the ballot box.  Lawmakers on the wrong side of judicial reform are destined to bear the brunt if they continue to disregard their constituents.

     Second, voters should make the decision on judicial reform.  When the JNC was created, it was in response to a bribery scandal at the Oklahoma Supreme Court.  Advocates for reform claim the JNC system puts too much power into too few hands and is easily manipulated.  

      Oklahomans deserve a more transparent process that gives the governor the power to nominate a judge and lawmakers (state senate) the sole authority to approve or reject it- a system that mirrors the federal system.  Critics of SJR34 argue the existing selection process works well.  They contend it relies on a mix of legal experts and lay people and removes partisan politics and undue outside influence.  The problem is current justices/judges have struck Not giving voters the opportunity to make the decision on such an important issue reveals haughtiness and a detachment from representing the people.

     Third, judicial reform will be addressed in the 2025 session.  The squeaky wheel always gets the grease.  Those who complain the most are the ones who get attention.  Oklahoma voters spoke loud at the ballot in November when they voted out Kauger.  The past reluctance of state house leadership to push for judicial reform will likely diminish with new leadership.  The old leadership balked and stymied judicial reform.  Expect to see opportunists and self-promoters to seize the judicial reform mantle and use it to further their political career.  Beware of the ‘johnny come latelys.’

     Real reform rarely happens in Oklahoma at the legislative level.  Lawmakers are often dragged kicking and screaming to do the right thing after they have exhausted every other option.  Oklahomans are demanding judicial reform.  Let the kicking, screaming and self-promoting begin.

 

Two percent of employed Americans work for the government!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

VOLUNTARY TERMINATIONS!

by Steve Fair

         Republicans since the 1930s have championed the concept of ‘smaller government.’  That wasn’t always the case.  Lincoln and Republicans in the 1860s believed expansion of government’s footprint would save the nation.  Democrats, who controlled the southern states opposed growing government.

     Twentieth century Republicans and Democrats reversed their beliefs and under the leadership of President Franklin Roosevelt the Ds became advocates for more bureaucracy.  1930s Republicans opposed many of FDR’s New Deal policies and the script was flipped.  Three observations:

     First, policy positions are about votes.  In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, both Parties took positions they believed would influence western voters.  As America expanded west, appealing to those voters was critical to electoral success.  Tell ‘em what they want to hear was the order of the day.  Not much different than today.  In the early days of western expansion, businesses needed infrastructure, a stable currency and help with tariffs.  Both Parties willingly provided the help, but Republicans took the position of less government regulation. 

     Second, neither Party is for limited government.  Both want government regulation.  They just differ in how much they want.  Republican elected officials claim to want government downsized/rightsized/optimized during campaigning, but fail to deliver on reducing government’s footprint when elected.  Republicans and Democrats are always trying to pin the federal deficit on each other, but the truth is both Parties have embraced deficit spending to keep government growing.  Congress has control of the purse and bears the bulk of the responsibility. 

     Third, will the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) work?  President Trump has appointed billionaires Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to head up the unofficial government agency.  In a Wall Street Journal op/ed last week, they wrote the aim to cut $500 billion of the next year’s federal budget.  That’s a start, but the U.S. government spent $1.7 trillion more in 2023 than they took in.  The total federal budget was $6.13 trillion in 2023.  Musk claims America is headed to bankruptcy if spending isn’t reigned in. There are nearly 3 million federal employees.  About 2% of employed Americans work for the government, a number that has remained stable for the past decade.  Government is the 15^th largest employer in America, larger than the agriculture and mining industries.   

        Musk and Ramaswamy say they will target spending that is unauthorized by Congress, as well as programs agencies implement that aren’t in line with legislator’s intentions.  They also want to cut the number of federal employees.  Since COVID, a large number of federal employees work from home.  Musk and Ramaswamy want to require them to be in the office five days a week.  They predict that policy change will result in ‘a wave of voluntary terminations.’ 

     Musk is not timid when it comes to making hard decisions.  When he bought Twitter (now X) in 2022, he slashed the workforce by 80%.  The company went from 8,000 employees to 1,500.  The diversity and inclusion departments, and the content moderation teams were the most impacted.  The layoffs shocked the social media industry and many believed it would tank the company.  Because Twitter was losing money, Musk said the cuts were necessary to make it viable.  The newly branded X is not yet profitable, it is moving closer. 

     The duo may actually begin the process of fulfilling a century old GOP promise to reduce the size of government, but don’t believe it until you see it. 

Trump’s legacy could be saving America from bankruptcy!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

SAVE AMERICA FROM BANKRUPTCY!

by Steve Fair

     President elect Trump has moved quickly to build his second term cabinet.  He has filled more than half of his fifteen (15) cabinet level positions.  Florida Senator Marco Rubio for Secretary of State, Fox News host and military vet Pette Hegseth for Defense Secretary, and Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz for Attorney General are his picks for the major cabinet positions. 

     North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum is his choice to be Secretary of the Interior.  Robert F Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, is his pick for Secretary of Health and Human Services.  Former Georgia congressman Doug Collins has been chosen to lead the US Department of Veterans' Affairs.  South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem has been nominated for Secretary of Homeland Security.  Former Democrat Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard has been nominated to lead the CIA.  President-elect Donald Trump has selected former New York Rep. Lee Zeldin to serve as his administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.  Liberty Energy CEO Christ Wright has been tapped to lead the Energy Department. 

     The only positions left unfilled are: Treasury, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, HHS, Transportation, and Education.  Three observations on Trump’s picks:

     First, Trump values loyalty.  All his cabinet level appointments are vocal supporters of Donald Trump.  Unlike in his first term, where he appointed experienced politicos, Trump seems to be choosing personal friends.  These picks would likely execute out his decisions without pushback.  President Trump has long said he made a mistake in his first term in choosing the wrong people to help him execute his plans.    

          Second, placing loyalty above competence is dangerous.  Several of Trump’s appointees don’t appear to be qualified.  For example, Lee Zeldin is nominated as the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but has little history with climate or regulatory issues. Pete Hegseth, a Fox News weekend co-host tapped to serve as secretary of defense, but has no Pentagon experience. Clearly both agencies need reform, but putting someone in charge who has little experience is risky.  Placing loyalty above competence could result in failing to accomplish what Trump ultimately wants to attain.  Hopefully, Trump will have these advisors on a short leash.

      Third, change is coming.  Based on Trump’s picks for the cabinet, it will not be business as usual in Washington.  Trump’s picks are unconventional and unorthodox.  They will ‘shake things up.’  Government is past due for reorganization, restructure, reform, and transformation.  Change happens in the private sector on a regular basis, but change in government is scarcer than hen’s teeth.  The problem with change without a clear purpose is it often leads to confusion, inefficiency and demoralization, making things worse, not better. 

    A potential game change is Trump’s appointment of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy as heads of a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).  Their stated marching orders are to: (1) dismantle government bureaucracy, (2) slash excess regulations, (3) cut wasteful expenditures and (4) restructure federal agencies.  Just the stated goals of DOGE should strike fear in the hearts of government bureaucrats. 

     America’s major challenge is fiscal!  Government spends more than they take in and waste is rampant.  Both political Parties have shown no resolve to address out of control spending.  Trump promised he would balance the federal budget in his first term, but didn’t even come close.  If Musk and Ramaswamy are effective and reduce government’s footprint, Trump’s real legacy would be that he saved America from bankruptcy.

Democratic Party has become a home for radicals!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

ELECTION POSTMORTEM!

by Steve Fair

         Last week, America elected Donald J. Trump to a second term.  Trump is only the second U.S. President to serve non-consecutive terms.  The first was President Stephen Grover Cleveland who served as the nation’s 22^nd and 24^th president.   Cleveland was the first Democrat elected president after the Civil War and served from 1885-1889 and from 1893-1897. 

     As expected, Republicans flipped the U.S. Senate (53-47) and will also retain the majority in the U.S. House.  Overall, it was a stellar day for the GOP. 

     Tuesday was the third consecutive presidential election where pollsters missed prognosticating actual results.  Across all the battleground states, pollsters contended VP Kamala Harris was leading.  They claimed Harris was going to put Iowa in play, that Georgia and North Carolina would vote blue, and Harris would win the popular vote.  None of that happened. 

     Polls are only as good as the collected data and Trump supporters clearly don’t participate in polls or don’t answer honestly, which shews outcomes.  Pollsters have become less accurate than meteorologists and main stream media anchors.   Three reasons Trump won a second term:

     First, Harris misread what was important to voters.  She thought her pro-abortion stance would motivate infrequent and first-time voters to flood the polls, but that didn’t happen.  She deemphasized border security and the economy.  Harris was not able to differentiate herself from President Biden.  Her statement she wouldn’t have done anything different than Biden came back to haunt her. 

     Second, Americans voted with their wallet.  Harris attempted to convince voters they were economically better off than they were four years ago.  But it wasn’t true.  Food and gasoline costs more.  Wages haven’t kept pace with inflation.  A Gallup poll found 52% of Americans thought they and their family are worse off today than they were four years ago.   

     Third, the Democratic Party has become a home for radicals.  For years, the Democrats positioned and marketed the Party as home for the working man/the average Joe.  But recently, ‘average Joes’ are being pushed out of the tent.  Pro-life, traditional marriage conservative Ds face hostility from those sporting ‘co-exist’ bumper stickers.  Those who preach tolerance don’t practice it. 

     Those ‘old school’ conservative Democrats in the Rust Belt states voted for Trump last week.  It remains to be seen if they will permanently leave the Party and join the GOP.   

     Democrats are pointing fingers of blame for the thrashing.  Many hold Joe Biden liable for not dropping out sooner.  Others claim the Ds have abandoned their ‘working man’ image and are out of touch with what the average American finds important.  Whatever the reason for the trouncing, in the near future, Democrats face a fight between radicals and centrists over control of the Party.  

     What will a second Trump term look like?  ‘America First’ in domestic and foreign policy, tightening of the southern border, loosing of government regulations, and judges who exercise judicial restraint.  What it will not be is the end of democracy.  Plato observed democracies inevitably fail because they always birth a tyrant.  Trump is a despot in liberal’s minds.  But Democrats misread voter’s concerns in the 2024 election, so their prophesy and analytical skills are dubious.

The ‘end justifies the means,’ mentality saturates politics in 2024!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

CHANGING VALUES!

by Steve Fair

     The theory of consumption values (TCV) asserts individual’s buy stuff based on five values: functional, emotional, social, epistemic, and conditional.  Economists, sociologists, psychologists, marketers, and political scientists are continually studying what influences people’s decision-making processes and how they can capitalize on that knowledge. 

     Consumer behavior is always changing.  In the United States, for example, 75% of consumers tried a new way to shop after the COVID-19 pandemic. On-line shopping has exploded in growth.  Brand loyalty is at an all time low.  Vitamin consumption is at an all time high.   

     Personal values significantly influence consumer behavior, guiding individual preferences and decisions. These values, shaped by cultural, family, and personal experiences, dictate what products, services, or candidates people find essential or desirable.  How does consumer behavior reflect America’s values?

     First, America’s moral values have plummeted.  In a recent Gallup poll, 54% of U.S. adults rated the countries’ moral values as poor.  Another 33% rate them as only fair, 10% good and only 1% excellent.  Republicans are more negative about the values of the country than Democrats, but 83% of all Americans believe the values in the U.S. are on the slide.  Republicans (65%) attribute the decline to lack of religious training, Democrats (63%) believe it is a combination of issues in the home and the overall culture.    

      A University of Chicago study found Republicans and Democrats were not that different in their core values, but neither group want to hear that. Nine out of ten Ds and Rs surveyed agreed fairness, compassion and personal responsibility should be guiding values in life for an individual.  Yet only about a third of either group believed the opposing Party actually practices those values.  Skepticism, cynicism, and mistrust fuel a lack of civility. 

      Second, consumer behavior reflects America’s changing moral values.  In the first half of 2024, shoplifting in the U.S. was up 24% vs. 2023.  What was once considered dishonesty and thieve, shoplifting has now become mainstream.  A recent study found shoplifting is now more common among those with some college education and earning middle class income than the poor. 

     Some people steal because they believe large corporations are profiteering and they are righting a wrong.  They believe the company will absorb the loss, but retailers are not sponges.  They pass the cost of the pilfering by raising prices.  Everyone pays for light fingered Louies’ purloining in higher prices.

     The ‘end justifies the means,’ mentality saturates politics in 2024.  Unethical and immoral behavior is considered acceptable. Win at any cost is the order of the day and anyone who preaches restraint is branded a wimp and a weakling.   

     Third, America’s moral values are always reflected at the polls and at the grocery shelf.  When angry Americans hoard toilet paper, rip retail clerks, and have no tolerance for shortages, they get impatient, angry, entitled elected officials. .    

     In a self-governing system of government, citizens get the government they deserve- every time.  That is consistent with TCV: people buy products and vote for people who align with their personal values.  When filching merchandise from a retailer has become acceptable behavior, who is surprised by elected officials with similar values?

OKLAHOMA'S VOTER TURNOUT IS TERRIBLE!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

MIGHTY MOUSE!

by Steve Fair

 

     This week early voting starts in the Sooner state.  Voters can vote on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday from 8am-6pm and Saturday 8am-3pm at their counties designated early voting site.  In most counties, that is the county courthouse or election board office.  Go the Oklahoma state election board website for the early voting location in your county.   In 2022, 122,000 Oklahoma voters cast their ballot in-person absentee, meaning they voted before the Tuesday election.   2024 is a presidential election year, so that number is expected to be double.

     Oklahoma has 2,301,188 registered voters in Oklahoma.  52% are registered Republicans, 28% Democrats, and 19% are Independents.  Turnout is expected to be lower than 2020.  There is only one statewide race on the ballot.

     Oklahoma’s voter turnout is terrible.  In 1996, 49% of Oklahoma’s registered voters turned out for the general election.  That ranked #26 among the states and slightly higher than the national turnout numbers (48.1%).  Fast forward to 2020 and 61.5% of America’s eligible voters showed up, but only 51.5% of Oklahoma’s voters.  Only Texas had poorer turnout, 51.3%.  With a high-profile U.S. Senate race in the Lone Star state this year, it’s a safe bet Oklahoma will be at or near the bottom in turnout in 2024.

     Why are Oklahomans not voting? Clearly, they are not prioritizing getting to the polls.  They wrongly believe their vote doesn’t matter.  Here are three possible reasons for Oklahoma’s voter apathy: (1) they have brought into the notion the system/machine/process is rigged and it doesn’t matter who they vote for, the ‘establishment’ is going to win and install their lackey.  There is certainly unrefutable evidence special interests and big donors control the process, but when average folks quit participating in the process, it makes it worse, not better, (2) they believe their vote is irrelevant or pertinent.  Because Oklahoma is not a ‘battleground’ state, why waste your time?  There is a lot more on the ballot than the presidential election and those state and local races impact a voter’s life more than the POTUS race, (3) they have poor examples in Oklahoma elected officials.  When lazy, slothful, apathetic non-voters roll out of bed one morning, wipe eye boogers from their eyeballs, file for office and win, it reveals that voting is not too important in the Sooner state.  Oklahoma voters didn’t punish such detritus in 2018.  That proves being a faithful voter is not high on many Oklahoma voter’s decision tree.

     Political Parties and campaigns spend a significant percentage of their monies on their Get Out to Vote efforts.  They know if they can reach their infrequent voters, get them up off the couch and to the polls they will win.  The problem is infrequent voters are very often ‘low information’ voters, paying attention to movements and personalities, but not issues and policy.  The infrequent voter is manipulated and exploited as a means to an end.  Once the election is over, they are ignored until they are needed in the next election.

     Oklahoma voters should repent of their unfaithful voter turnout.  One way to send the right message would be to add to the state constitution a requirement of candidacy to include a citizen/candidate to have voted in at least 75% the elections, they were eligible to vote in (every election) over the past 8 years. With early voting and absentee balloting available, there is no excuse for a citizen for not casting a vote.  

     Until Oklahomans stop voting for non-voter candidates singing “Here I Come to Save the Day,” they will keep getting Mighty Mouse elected officials and government. 

POLITICOS LIKE TO POLL THE WIND!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

BLOWING IN THE WIND!

by Steve Fair

     An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy before a baby can survive outside of the uterus. It can happen naturally, also known as a miscarriage, or it can be induced intentionally through medical or surgical procedures. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) defines a legal induced abortion as a procedure performed by a licensed clinician to end a pregnancy that does not result in a live birth. 

     Until 1973, most states in the U.S. had laws stating an abortion could only be performed to save the life of the mother.  In 1973 in a controversial ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) in Roe vs. Wade ruled women had a Constitutional right to an abortion.  For 49 years, Roe was the law of the land, but in 2022, the SCOTUS overturned it, sending the legality of an abortion back to the states.  Democrats have blamed Trump for the ruling because he appointed three SCOTUS justices that voted to overturn Roe. 

     According to the Wall Street Journal poll, abortion is the number one issue for suburban women voters in swing states.  A Pew Research poll found 63% of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases- 36% say it should be illegal in all or most cases.  When broken down by religious affiliation, 73% of White evangelical Protestants think abortion should be illegal.  By contrast 86% of religiously unaffiliated Americans believe abortion should be legal.

    First, the GOP has downplayed the abortion issue.  For the past thirty years, the Republican platform was strongly pro-life.  During that time, the GOP campaigned on abolishing abortion.  Torn between an activist base wanting more restrictions on abortions and the mushy middle that does not, the national Party removed the pro-life plank that had been in the platform for over 40 years at the 2024 national convention.  The new language, approved by President Trump, deems abortion be left to individual states to decide. GOP candidates, at all levels, followed suit and have become tentative and timid on the issue, afraid they might offend a voter. Situational ethics and moral relativism is the order of the day, even in the Grand Old Party.

     Second, America has become less pro-life.  According to a recent Gallup poll, only 41% of Americans consider themselves pro-life.  That is down from 54% back in 1994.  Among Republicans, pro-lifers are still in the majority, but down by nearly a third in the past twenty years.  A sad fact is respect for life in the womb is on the decline in America. 

     One of the ways, Christian cultures have distinguished themselves from pagan cultures throughout history was by rejecting abortion and infanticide.  The decrease in spiritual interest in the U.S. is directly related to the sad trend to excuse the killing of unborn babies. 

     Third, God says abortion is wrong.  God is the Creator.  He created man in His image.  Life begins at conception and human life has value before birth.  It doesn’t matter what the creature thinks- the Creator dictates truth.  God’s Word says life begins in the womb.  It doesn’t matter what a politician says one way or the other- only God.  If a nation or people care more about winning an election than honoring their Creator, they are doomed to the ash heap of history. 

     Thank God, there are still Americans who believe it is wrong to kill the unborn.  While their Party standard bearers (candidates) may have deemphasized the issue, they have remained unbending.

     Politicians always like to ‘see how the wind is blowing,’ (poll) before taking a position on issues.  The answer to the life issue isn’t blowing in the wind- it’s found in the revealed Word of God.  Life begins at conception.

TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING THE DOUCEUR!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

JUDICIAL REFORM!

by Steve Fair

    

 

     Oklahoma has the distinction of having the political scandal resulting in more indictments of elected officials in American history.  In 1980, 220 county commissioners and suppliers were convicted for their involvement in a scheme of kickbacks paid on orders for county road-building supplies, like timber and gravel.  The scandal reached 60 of the 77 counties and the graft had been going on for as long as anyone could remember.  The federal government was the chief agents in exposing and cleaning up the corruption.  But wait- Oklahoma has many scandals. 

     There have been a number of other improprieties by public officials in the Sooner state.  In 1965, three Oklahoma Supreme Court justices were convicted of federal tax evasion charges for accepting bribes to decide cases over a twenty-year period.  Justices N.S. Corn, Samuel Welch, and Napoleon Johnson either resigned or were impeached after it was exposed their decisions could be brought.  Once again, the feds exposed it, not state officials.

     After the bribery scandal, then Governor Dewey Bartlett, (R-Tulsa) pushed for judicial reform.  With the Democrat led legislature’s cooperation, two state questions were drafted and placed on the July 1967 ballot.  Oklahoma voters approved, by a narrow margin (52-48), two state questions (#447 & #448) amending the State Constitution and creating the Oklahoma Court on the Judiciary.    

     The two state questions abolished elected justices of the peace, the county court system, and special courts (replacing them with 77 district courts).  It created the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC), replacing judicial elections with a retention system.  Appellate justices and judges are appointed by the governor from a list of three finalists provided by the JNC.  Once appointed, they face the retention ballot every six years.  Since Oklahoma went to the retention ballot system, no justice or judge has been removed.  Must be because they are doing such a stellar job.  But that could be changing…

     This election cycle, conservative think tank Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (OCPA) has targeted three justices on the November retention ballot to dump.  Citing the justice’s inconsistency in rulings and overturning of conservative legislation, OCPA calls for Oklahoma voters to make history and kick the trio to the curb.  A ‘dark money’ group, allegedly associated with OCPA, has spent around $250,000 in broadcast media ads urging voters to not retain the three.  There is an opposing group planning to mount a campaign to keep the justices.  Expect the ‘battle of TV ads’ to be coming to your home soon.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma needs true judicial reform.  The current system wasn’t overwhelmingly popular when it was approved back in 1967.  Fifty-seven years ago, critics of #447 & #448 feared there would be no accountability for judges if they were not directly elected.  Their fear has been realized.  Lifetime appointments and a confusing retention ballot system has resulted in an activist judiciary in Oklahoma.

     Second, liberals control Oklahoma’s appellate courts.  That is because the JNC is loaded with liberals.  Many members of the commission may have an “R” behind their name, but their values are not conservative.  The JNC’s recommended appointees have made recent rulings not based on the state constitution, but on their personal value system.  The JNC system may have removed bribery from getting a favorable ruling, but it hasn’t removed unfair rulings.

     Third, the judiciary should be fair and impartial.  The Oklahoma Code of Judiciary Conduct says those two components are ‘indispensable to our system of justice.’  Justices and judges are to be independent, competent and trustworthy.  The current system’s ‘unintended consequences,’ have been legislating from the bench and no accountability to the public.

     Oklahoma voters can send a powerful message in November.  By removing three liberal justices, they can tell the legislature to reform the judiciary system in Oklahoma. 

     Sadly, not much has changed since the 60s- justices/judges are still making rulings favoring their liberal friends, but now the taxpayers are paying the douceur.

U.S. taxpayers fund ALL FEMA programs!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

FEMA IS A DISASTER!

by Steve Fair

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was created in 1978 during the Carter administration by executive order (EO).   After FEMA’s creation Congress expanded its scope of authority.  FEMA handles dam safety, disaster assistance, earthquake monitoring, and procuring medical supplies during a pandemic, in addition of a dozen other functions.  FEMA’s motto is, “A Nation Prepared.”

     After 9/11, Congress created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).  FEMA was absorbed into the new cabinet level agency, along with 21 other federal agencies.  The FEMA director reports directly to the Secretary of Homeland Security.  President George W. Bush appointed Oklahoman Michael D. Brown as FEMA director.    Brown warned the absorption into DHS of FEMA would ‘sever FEMA from its core functions.’   DHS’s priority was and remains counter terrorism, not disaster relief.  Brown’s 2003 prophecy came true when Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana in 2005.   FEMA’s response to the hurricane was late and unorganized.  Brown was forced to resign, but the lack of training of FEMA personnel and DHS’s deemphasis of FEMA’s core function was the real issue.  FEMA has around 3,000 full time employees. 

     FEMA, along with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), administers the Shelter and Services Program (SSP), a federal grant program that gives money to illegal immigrants.  President Trump has claimed FEMA’s slow response in North Carolina is due to FEMA being out of money because they gave the money to illegals.  FEMA responded by adding a ‘rumor’ tab on their website.  They say they have money and the SSP and disaster relief are not connected.  They say the appropriated monies for two separate programs and are earmarked and can’t be used for any other purpose.  Three observations:

     First, FEMA is a disaster.  Since its creation, it has been a joke. Prior to FEMA’s creation, the federal government responded to disasters in a variety of ways.  More than a hundred times in 150 years, Congress passed ad hoc legislation for relief or compensation after a natural disaster.  They let local authorities administer the monies.  FEMA has evolved into a bureaucratic nightmare.  Billions of tax payer dollars are wasted and fraud runs rampart.  Brown’s prognosis the agencies core mission would be compromised has come to past.  The agency has morphed into a social services behemoth and response to natural disasters has become secondary. 

     Second, the money comes out of the same bucket.  Shelter and Services and Disaster Relief may be earmarked, but bureaucrats are only interested in not co-mingling monies when it is convenient.  U.S. taxpayers are funding both programs. Taxpayers expect FEMA to be more interested in helping their fellow U.S. citizens displaced by a hurricane and flooding than getting an illegal immigrant a hotel room like the local Marriott.

     Third, the president controls FEMA response.  The costs of a disaster to a state or local government can escalate quickly.  Federal assistance becomes fully available with the approval of the president and at the request of the state’s governor.  North Carolina Democratic Governor Roy Cooper declared 25 of the state’s 100 counties disaster areas after the hurricane swept across the western half of the state.  Cooper has praised President Biden and the federal response.  But residents in the Tar Heel state affected by the disaster haven’t been as complimentary.   Rumors of activated National Guard troops and volunteers being hindered, blocked and thwarted by FEMA abound.  Once again, FEMA has failed to ‘manage’ a national emergency and the Biden/Harris administration controls FEMA.

     After Trump’s remarks regarding FEMA’s lack of response, the liberal media went into ‘fact checking’ mode.  Not surprisingly, they found Trump’s comments inaccurate and FEMA’s response to be stellar.   Who fact checks these so-called fact checkers?  Today’s mainstream ‘fact checkers’ appear to be biased, one-sided, partisans editorializing under the guise of journalism.  Americans aren’t fooled- they recognize their fellow citizens in North Carolina need help and the feds aren’t providing it.  [S1] 

     At a news conference in 1986, President Ronald Reagan said, “the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Truer words were never spoken.