Traditional prison reform hasn't yielded lasting positive change!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

Transformation, not Reformation!

by Steve Fair

     On May 7^th, thirty men graduated from Oklahoma Baptist University (OBU) with Bachelor of Arts degrees in Christian Studies.  It was a historic moment because these 30 men are incarcerated at Lexington Correctional Center.  They are serving time.  They have labored for four years to earn a degree and according to one graduate the Lexington facility is already a more peaceful, safe place than it was before because of the influence of the thirty.  The graduates were commissioned as field ministers and will serve in correctional facilities across the state to provide mentorship, pastoral care and guidance to their fellow inmates.  They are still inmates and will continue to serve time, but they will be given an opportunity to make a difference in the life of other inmates. 

     This program started back in 2020 when Oklahoma Southern Baptists, in cooperation with the Oklahoma Department of Corrections (ODOC), launched the OBU Prison Divinity Program (PDP) to provide incarcerated men with an accredited Christian liberal arts education.  Students’ complete coursework in theology, biblical studies, ethics, and pastoral ministry, culminating with a practical internship under the supervision of prison chaplains. 

     Applicants have to be high school graduates, have at least twelve years left on their sentence, be a security level 3 or 4, and not have any misconducts in the past six months.  Participants in PDP don’t receive special consideration for early release or parole.  Three observations:

     First, PDP could transform Oklahoma.  The state’s violent crime rate is 10% higher than the national average and the property crime rate is 19% higher.  Oklahoma ranks #15 in the U.S. for violent crime.  Oklahoma recidivism (return to incarceration) rate is around 1 in 4. 

     PDP is targeted toward violent offenders- only security levels 3 & 4 can apply.  In the ODOC system, security levels 3 &4 are considered maximum security.  The thirty field minister graduates will be working with men in prison whose hearts need transformation.  Instead of attempting behavior modification, they will be pointing their fellow inmates to an eternal transformation, not moral reformation. 

     Second, PDP is good public policy.  Kudos to Governor Stitt and ODOC Director Steven Harpe for their willingness to establish the program.  The U.S. Department of Justice partners with faith-based agencies for reentry into society.  Several states have established partnerships with faith-based organizations to address criminal behavior, most focusing on reentry programs, but PDP is groundbreaking.  It addresses the most violent in prison.  It reaches out to those deemed unreachable.   It communicates they still have worth and value- even while serving time.

     Traditional approaches to prison reform have not yielded significant, lasting positive change.  Recidivism hasn’t been reduced.  PDP seeks to change the person’s heart, not just their behavior.

     Third, PDP is privately funded.  No tax dollars are used.  There is no cost to the student.  Oklahoma Baptists, through the Cooperative Program and State Mission Offerings have paid the bill. 

    PDP is modeled after a faith-based ministry and rehabilitation program implemented at Louisiana State Penitentiary.  Once called ‘the bloodiest prison in America,” Warden Burl Cain established a branch of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary that changed the environment in the prison.    

     Time will tell as to whether God will regenerate and transform hearts through the efforts of the first graduates of PDP.  What is certain is those thirty men have been changed by the grace of God.  

Well-intentioned mandated FEEL GOOD programs are bankrupting America!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

FEEL GOOD PROGRAMS!

by Steve Fair

     On Wednesday, Oklahoma Congresswoman Stephanie Bice (R-OK), and Pennsylvania Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan, (D-PA), introduced the More Paid Leave for More Americans Act.(MPLMAA) The legislation attempts to chart a path toward a national paid leave policy in the U.S. According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, the U.S. is one of just six countries in the world without a national paid parental leave policy.  If it passes both chambers and is signed by President Trump, it would establish a competitive grant program run by the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL).  It would create a modest ‘incentive’ for states to establish their own paid family leave program. 

     “We’ve had conversations with leadership, but more importantly, we’ve had conversations with committees and with the White House. We have really done our due diligence to make sure everybody knows the importance of this,” Rep. Bice said.  Bice and Houlahan are confident they can get the bill through Congress and signed into law.  Three observations:

     First, who pays the bill for MPLMAA?  Obviously, the federal grant portion will be paid by taxpayers.  The private portion will be paid by the end user consumer of the good or service provided by the business.  Business must ‘pass on’ any costs to stay in business.  They aren’t sponges- they can’t absorb increased costs.  When government mandates taxpayer empathy and charity to fellow citizens, it always requires money.  To fund sensitivity programs, government has to take from the needy and give to the greedy.    

     Second, MPLMAA has unintended consequences.  Here are two: first, small businesses will reduce the number of full-time workers so they do not have to provide the benefit.  Business has to adapt to survive and avoiding government overreach is a viable solution.  The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enacted in 1990, provides an illustration of ignoring unintended consequences. The effect of ADA was the reverse of the intent- which was to protect the disabled in the workplace. Within five years of ADA's passage, employment for disabled men fell to 49 percent, compared with 60 percent before the law was enacted. Employers, faced with the cost of accommodation and the threat of litigation, chose the rational option: they cut back on hiring the disabled. When the cost of hiring a worker rises, demand for that worker falls. Second, MPLMAA will affect employee morale and productivity.  When employees go on paid leave and their position must be held open, those left at work have to take up the slack, usually with no extra compensation.  When multiple employees simultaneously take leave or take unannounced vacations, it disrupts a business operation.   

     Third, MPLMAA is socialism.  It takes away individual incentive and gives government more authority in a family’s life.  Instead of mandating paid family leave, the feds should look for ways to reduce regulations on employers so they can experiment with alternative work arrangements.  Congress should change the tax code to reflect the social importance of family.  Implementing feel-good schemes, like MPLMAA, which are meant to protect the vulnerable is not conservative policy.  Well-intentioned, misguided government mandated safety nets are bankrupting America. 

TAXPAYERS PAYING FOR FREE LUNCH!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

FREE LUNCH

by Steve Fair

     Back in 2020, Oklahoma voters narrowly approved Medicaid expansion.  The expansion provided health care to around 200,000 previously uninsured low-income adults aged 19-64 whose income was less than $17,000 a year individually or up to $29,000 for a family of three. Back then, the federal government was paying 90% of the cost, while the state paid 10%.  Supporters of the expansion said Oklahomans would be fools to turn down ‘free’ money.  But as is often the case, the ‘free’ money the federal government was supplying to expand Medicaid is being cut.  That cut will put a great deal of pressure on Oklahoma state government.  Three observations:

     First Medicaid expansion was a short-term solution to a long-term problem.  More than 900,000 Oklahomans- 1 in 4- depend on Medicaid.  Oklahoma is among one of the unhealthiest states in the U.S.  It is also one of the poorest. Back in 2020, rural health care providers (hospitals) needed the Medicaid expansion money to help their bleeding bottom line.  The providers and recipients were willing to take the bait offered by the feds for ‘free’ money, even if they recognized it was temporary.    

     According to the Legislative Office of Fiscal Accountability (LOFT), if the feds stop funding Medicaid expansion, it will cost state taxpayers over $200 million annually starting next fiscal year.  That $200 million has to come from somewhere, so basic services (public safety, etc.) will likely be impacted. 

     Second, government should not be in the health care business.  Government’s function, according to Article 1, section 8 is to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the country.  Liberals interpret “general welfare” as the founders endorsing socialized, taxpayer funded health care.   While it is true, "general welfare" has been interpreted to include health care programs, like Medicare and Medicaid, the Supreme Court has never interpreted it as the U.S. Constitution explicitly guaranteeing right to health care.  Like pretty much everything else it touches, government involvement in health care has led to degradation and decay, not discovery and development.

     Third, free money doesn’t exist.  Somebody is always paying the bill.    Like everything else, taxpayers pay the cost of Medicaid expansion.  Government has no ‘free’ money to give.  The only money government has is what is collected from hard working citizens and then returned less a large handling fee. 

     Years ago, bars provided a ‘free’ lunch to patrons who purchased at least one drink.  The ‘free’ food was unusually high in salt, so the customers would buy more beer.  In his book, “There’s no such thing as a Free Lunch,” economist Milton Friedman points out the patrons were not really getting a free lunch, but were being duped by the bar.  The purchasers all eventually paid for their ‘free’ snack. 

     Back in 2020, Oklahoma voters-prompted by elected officials and health care providers- prioritized immediate gains over long-term consequences.  Just slightly over 50% of voters approved the expansion of Medicaid, but now 100% of Oklahoma taxpayers will pay for that non-existent free lunch.

GOP NEEDS TO DEVELOP AND NOT DIVIDE !

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

PURPLE OKLAHOMA?

by Steve Fair

     Thirty years ago (1995), there were 1,823,748 voters registered in Oklahoma.  62% were registered Democrat, 33% were Republican, and 5% were Independent. As of January 2025, the numbers are much different- there are 2,470,437 registered voters in the Sooner state:  52.6% are registered Republican, 26.6% Democrat, 20% Independent, and 1% Libertarian.

     Oklahoma voted Democrat in all but two presidential elections through 1948, but has not gone Democrat since, except in the landslide win for Lyndon Johnson in 1964.   In 2024, Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris by 66% to 32%, the sixth consecutive election the Republican nominee has won by over 30%.  Every county in Oklahoma voted for Donald Trump the last three elections.  All members of the Oklahoma federal delegation (2 Senators/5 Representatives) are Republican.  All statewide elected officials are Republican.  Republicans dominate county offices.  How did the Republicans flip voter registration in Oklahoma?  First, Oklahoma is a conservative state.  As the national Democrat Party became more liberal on social issues, conservative Democrats changed their Party affiliation and joined the Republicans. Over 70% of Oklahomans identify as Protestant, and most of those voters are socially conservative. They support the Republican Party's platform on abortion, same-sex marriage, and gun control.  Second, the oil and gas industry is a major player in the state.  The GOP tends to be more supportive of the energy sector than the Ds.  The Democrat’s war of fossil fuel didn’t set well with the thousands who make their living in that industry.  Third, Oklahoma is a rural state.  Almost two thirds of the state’s population is in rural areas.  Rural voters tend to be more conservative and traditional in their values.   But the GOP shouldn’t take their dominance for granted.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma is changing.  The state is gaining population, after years of little growth.  Oklahoma's population grew about 1% last year.  The OKC and Tulsa urban areas show the highest levels of net migration.  Rural Oklahoma population  remains flat and some rural counties have experienced population declines.  Many of the new Okies are from western states and they bring with them their politics and values (not as conservative).  That trend has been reflected in voting in the urban areas in recent elections.  GOP margins have declined and are thinner than in years past in the larger population areas.

     Second, Oklahoma Republicans have underperformed.  From elected Rs not

delivering on campaign promises to GOP Party leaders constant infighting, Republican creditability with the average Oklahoma voter has been shattered.  That’s why 1 in 5 Oklahoma voters are registered Independent, even though the GOP doesn’t let them vote in their primary. A cynical, skeptical, and suspicious public view GOP elected officials and Party leaders as grandstanders and self-promoters.  They detect little to no difference between the Ds and the Rs.  Past strategies to educate voters has been abandoned by the GOP for boasting, bragging and self-glory.  Until the Republican Party resumes making the main thing the main thing, expect the average voter to be lukewarm to the GOP. 

     Third, Oklahoma GOP politics has become nasty.  Name-calling, backbiting, talebearing, gossiping is unrestrained.  Professing Christians proudly proclaim their spiritual superiority and ‘thank God they are not as other men are, even this poor fellow Republican.’  Loving thy neighbor has been cut from Bibles with a penknife, in the name of standing for righteousness.  There is no tolerance for an opposing view.  Instead of civic debate, there is required harmony.  Failure to agree (heresy) results in being burned at the stake.  If the nastiness continues, the Oklahoma GOP will whittle the base down to where they can handle it. 

     Oklahoma is trending purple.  The urban areas will continue to grow at a faster rate than the rural areas, resulting in a more progressive/liberal state.  The GOP better get their act together and start developing instead of dividing before the Ds take over Oklahoma politics.

SQ#836 would change Oklahoma- and not for the better!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

DIVIDES & DILUTES!

by Steve Fair

     For nearly a century, the Democratic Party ruled Oklahoma.  When Republicans took control of the state House in 2004, it was the first time in over 75 years the GOP had a majority in the legislature.  Oklahoma was a one-party state and corruption ruled.  From Supreme Court bribery scandals to payoffs to county commissioners, Sooner tax dollars lined the pockets of crooks. Dishonesty and duplicity have been reduced since the GOP took over state government and while Oklahoma government isn’t perfect, it’s better than it was when the Ds were in control.

     A group called Oklahoma United is planning to run an initiative petition drive to get State Question #836 on the ballot.  They want the Sooner state to move to a top-two primary, where all candidates are listed on the same ballot, regardless of Party affiliation.  The top two would go the general election.  It is possible the top two would be from the same Party.  They have to get 173,000 signatures to get SQ#836 on the ballot.  Three observations:  

     First, it’s about winning elections.  Democrats face an uphill battle in elections.   Republicans now dominate Oklahoma government.  The GOP has super majorities in both chambers.  All statewide offices are held by Republicans.  County officials are overwhelmingly Republican.  Instead of educating the public on the virtues of being a Democrat, the Democratic Party’s response is to get their candidates to register R and run as a Republican.  For voters in Oklahoma, winnowing out the chaff (Republicans in name only) from the wheat (true Republicans) has become difficult.  Party affiliation used to mean something, but now it’s just a brand to win an election.

     Second, a political Party should choose their own nominee.  It shouldn’t be necessary to state the obvious, but Republicans should choose the Republican nominee- Democrats the Democrat- Libertarian the Libertarian. The Baptist don’t let the Methodist vote on who their pastor is going to be.  The Rotarians don’t let the Ambucs vote in their officer election.  Their processes are closed- as they should be.  A closed process doesn’t exclude- it simply prevents outsiders from ‘raiding’ a Party primary and nominating a weaker candidate. 

     Third, Party affiliation is a person’s first vote.  Party affiliation should be a matter of conviction, not convenience.  People often align with a Party so they can vote in primary elections or based on family tradition or geographies. While no political party is perfect or has all the answers, there is a distinct difference between the two major parties and honest citizens should align with the Party that reflects their convictions.  If someone wants to vote in the GOP primary, register Republican.  This isn’t brain surgery. 

     The Oklahoma Republican Party filed a lawsuit last week in an attempt to block SQ#836 from reaching the ballot.  The GOP says it petition violates the U.S. Constitution’s first Amendment associational right’s clause.  It also states SQ#836 is a radical change to how current elections are conducted in the Sooner state and that is not disclosed in the petition.   Whether the state GOP will win in court remains to be seen.

     Oklahomans can do three things to stop SQ#836: (1) Don’t sign the petition. No matter how pretty the young lady is with the clipboard, resist signing.  If the group fails to get the required signatures, SQ#836 will not be on the ballot.  (2) Recognize SQ#836 is not about fairness- it’s about control.  There is nothing ‘fair’ about open primaries.  Open primaries are not more moral/ethical/righteous than a closed primary.  Open primaries actually promote gamesmanship, deception, subterfuge, chicanery and treachery.  (3) Recognize Party affiliation is important.  It’s not about exclusivity- it’s about values.

     Educate your family and friends.  Get the word out- liberals are trying to change Oklahoma- and not for the better.  SQ#836 doesn’t ‘unite’ Oklahoma- it divides and dilutes. 

Trump’s tariffs will work- if Americans will be patient.

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

TARIFFS

by Steve Fair

     A tariff is a tax placed on goods when they cross national borders, typically when being imported into a country.  The fee is ultimately passed down to the consumer in the form of a price increase.  Tariffs are paid for by the end user.  For example, a widget tariff on imported widgets will likely raise the price of all widgets, even those made in the U.S.  Domestic manufacturers often capitalize on the sell environment and raise their prices to maximize profit. 

     This week, President Donald Trump imposed a 10% tariff on all imports on all countries effective at midnight April 5^th.  Trump said the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) provides him the authority to address the large and persistent U.S. trade deficit.  Trump also says he will impose individualized reciprocal higher tariffs on countries with which the U.S. has the largest trade deficits.  Three observations:

     First, the U.S. trade deficit needs to be addressed.  In 2024, the United States had a $1.2 trillion trade deficit, with significant deficits with China, Mexico, Vietnam, Ireland, and Germany.  The United States has one of the lowest simple average most-favored-nation (MFN) tariff rates in the world at 3.3%, while many of our key trading partners like Brazil (11.2%), China (7.5%), the European Union (5%), India (17%), and Vietnam (9.4%) have simple average MFN tariff rates that are significantly higher.  Americans have the most disposal income of any country in the world and the U.S. is the largest consumer market in the world.  Trump’s imposing of reciprocal tariffs simply helps to level the playing field.

     Second, American consumers killed manufacturing.  Past administrations (Republicans and Democrats) willingness to open the American market to the world resulted in a flood of lower priced goods Americans loved. Low import tariffs for foreign manufacturers resulted in a competitive advantage over domestic manufacturers.  Corporate America responded by closing domestic manufacturing facilities and moving production facilities to low labor countries.  President Trump campaigned on bringing manufacturing back home, which he believes is critical to U.S. national security.  But until patriotic America consumers are willing to pay a higher price for goods made in America, manufacturers remain on a race to the bottom.

     Third, access to the U.S. is a privilege.  Because of the low threshold (tariffs) to enter the largest market in the world, foreign manufacturers have thrived and hurt domestic manufacturers.  Trump says he wants to impose the ‘Golden Rule’ on other countries: treat us like we treat them.  According to a press release from the White House: “The United States will not longer put itself last on matters of international trade in exchange for empty promises.”  Tariffs are necessary to ensure fair trade, protect American workers, and reduce the trade deficit. 

     Some theorical economists have little faith in the law of supply and demand.  They believe imposing high tariffs result in a “deadweight loss,” which is a loss of economic efficiency when a good is not produced.  Deadweight loss is an oversimplified, impractical model that is not real world.  Supply and demand work.  Higher prices result in lower demand.  Lower demand results in lower prices, which spurs higher demand.  The cure for higher prices is higher prices.  Trump’s tariffs will work- if Americans will be patient. 

DON'T CHEAT TO MAKE RURAL OKLAHOMA RELEVANT!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

ROADBLOCK NOT GUARDRAIL

by Steve Fair

     In Oklahoma, citizens have the ability to collect signatures to place a new statute or constitutional amendment on the ballot.  They can also get a veto referendum on the ballot to ask voters to uphold or repeal an enacted law.  Oklahoma is one of 26 states that has a mechanism/tool for citizens to petition and enact legislation and bypass the legislature.

     The most impactful initiative petition effort in Oklahoma history happened in 1991, when a group of rag tag citizens from across the Sooner state banded together and got State Question #640 on the 1992 ballot.  They didn’t pay professional signature gatherers to get voter John Hancocks.  They personally stood outside Wal-Marts and went door-to door.  Getting those 230,000 signatures was a high threshold, but they were successful.  Their efforts were rewarded when voters approved SQ#640 in March 1992 with 56.2% of the vote.  SQ#640 amended Article 5, Section 33 of the Oklahoma Constitution restricting how taxpayer money is spent.  Under SQ#640, a revenue bill can only become law if: (1) it is approved by a 3/4 vote of both legislative chambers and then signed by the Governor, or (2) it is referred to a vote of the people by the legislature and approved by a majority. 

     Since passage of SQ 640 in 1992, Oklahoma voters have approved only one state question to raise taxes: SQ#713, which increased tobacco tax in 2004.  No revenue bill had gotten the 3/4^th margin in the legislature until 2018, when HB#1010 was passed- the largest tax increase in Oklahoma history.  SQ#640 has resulted in Oklahomans keeping billions of their money in their pockets instead of sending it to 23^rd and Lincoln.

     This week, the Oklahoma Senate made it harder for citizens to get something on the ballot.  Senate Bill 1027 (SB#1027) authored by Sen. David Bullard, (R-Durant) and House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, (R-Bristow) would cap the number of initiative petition signatures that could be gathered from each county.  It passed the state senate along Party lines.  If SB#1027 becomes law, only 10% of the signatures of a petition could come from Oklahoma or Tulsa County.  In the other 75 counties the max number would be 4%.  According to Bullard, the current system allows petitioners to only solicit in urban areas to get the required signatures.  He wants to make signature gatherers to ‘diversify’ and get signatures from throughout the state.  Bullard said SB#1027 puts ‘guardrails” on the Oklahoma initiative process.  Three observations:

     First, SB#1027 violates the concept of one man/one vote.  The founding fathers believed in the one man/one vote concept so much that they required the government conduct a decennial census.  The purpose is to assure fair apportionment of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the states, based on population.  SB#1027 would make some Oklahoma citizen’s voice stronger than others.  It flies in the face of ‘equal and fair’ representation. 

     Second, SB#1027 isn’t a guardrail- it’s a roadblock.  Oklahoma’s initiative process doesn’t need to be reformed/revised/amended.  This isn’t the first time (and likely will not be the last time) the legislature has attempted to ‘manage’ the initiate petition process.  What misguided lawmakers fail to understand is in when they make it harder for liberals to get State Questions on the ballot, they do the same to conservatives.   SB#1027 is not conservative legislation and antithetical to liberty and freedom.    

     Third, SB#1027 would not change Oklahoma demographics.  Bullard and Hilbert believe they can legislate rural Oklahoma to significance.  The issue is the population shift in Oklahoma.  Urban areas are growing and are more liberal.  It could have a long-term impact on Oklahoma politics.  The key is educating, not legislating.  SB#1027 sends the message that urban citizens are not as important as rural.

     Contact your state representative and ask them to oppose SB#1027.  It is a roadblock, not a guardrail and a poke in the eye to citizens who championed SQ#640.   

PLAYING THE VICTIM IS USED TO GAIN AN ADVANTAGE!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

VICTIM?

by Steve Fair

     A victim is described as a person who suffers because of some adverse act by another person.  Victims are duped, tricked, swindled or deceived by others. 

     In modern America, many believe they are victims based on the color of their skin, religion, economic status, sexual orientation, gender or indebtedness.  They hold a pity party and cry about how everything and everyone in their life is predatory toward them. 

     The solution to modern victimhood seems to be to shout louder about your victimhood.  Moral authority in modern culture is directly proportional to how many ways a person can claim to have been to have been victimized.  The more victim categories people are in, the more empowered and authoritative they are.  Pick the right victim level and you can have a ‘free pass’ to do and say almost you want in modern America.  Three observations:

     First, there are real victims.  There are those in society who experience harm as victims of crime, abuse, natural disasters, and social injustice.  It is important a society acknowledge and address their needs.  Showing compassion and understanding to those who in need is a mark of a civilized Christian society.   Throughout the Bible, oppressing innocent victims is condemned by God.  People do suffer unjust evil at the hand of others.    

     Second, there are fake victims.   There are those who falsely portray themself as a victim to gain sympathy, attention, or to manipulate others for personal gain.  They falsely accuse others of wrongdoing and fabricate stories to promote themselves.  These self-entered, conceited narcissists never take personal responsibility for their actions.  The actions of "fake victims" undermine the credibility of genuine victims.  It makes it more difficult for true victims to receive support and justice. 

     Third, there are no victims.  Jesus, who was the ultimate innocent victim, did not adopt a victim mentality.  He recognized God is sovereign over all things.  Jesus (1) trusted the Father, (2) did not repay evil for evil, and (3) loved His enemies. Playing the victim can distort reality, damage relationships and suck the joy out of life.  Embracing a philosophy that everything happens for a reason is biblical.  John MacArthur says, “The default position of all fallen human beings is to blame someone else for our condition, blame someone else for our issues, and blame someone else for our troubles. We say to ourselves: I’m basically a good person but I’ve been affected by bad people.“ MacArthur says those who paint themselves as a  victim seek to avoid facing their own shortcomings.   

     Victimhood drives modern morality and politics.  Identity politics divides society into victims and oppressors.  Liberals and conservatives perceive different victims.   In the past, calling yourself a victim was synonymous with weakness.  Now it is used to gain an advantage over your opponent.  Playing the victim is cowardly.  Blaming events, circumstances in the past as a reason to misbehave in the present is spineless and shows weak character.

     Holocaust survivor and author Edith Eger, 97, says, “Suffering is universal, but victimhood is optional.”  

 

SAY NO TO THE OKLAHOMA FOOD POLICE!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

FOOD POLICE!

by Steve Fair

     “Should you be eating that?” people ask.  While trying to be helpful, they come across as bossy, overbearing, and intrusive.   The food police are everywhere- external and internal.  The internal judgmental voices in your head that condemn you for eating a piece of cake and those eternal self-righteous, pharisaic do-gooders who try to protect yourself from yourself.  The internal police you control- the external not so much.  In America, what you eat is under bi-partisan attack.

     Ten Republican led state legislatures are currently considering barring SNAP (Food Stamp) recipients from using their benefits to buy candy, soda and other items that are high in sugar and fat.  Similar federal legislation was considered in Feb. 2024 that would have done the same thing.  “American tax dollars should not be used to pay for junk food and endanger the health of the most vulnerable Americans. The fastest way to Make America Healthy Again is to encourage balanced diets and stop subsidizing unhealthy food choices," U.S. Senator Mike Lee, (R-Utah) says. 

     The Oklahoma state legislature has gotten into the act.  Senate bill # 4, (SB4), authored by Sen. Kristen Thompson, (R-Edmond), would ban 21 specific food ingredients in Oklahoma.  SB4 passed the Republican controlled Agriculture and Wildlife Committee by a 10-1 vote and now goes to the full Senate for consideration.  Only one lone Republican opposed it in committee.  SB4 has the exact same language as dystopian laws in California and Vermont.  Three observations:

     First, the government has no right to tell citizens what to put in their body.  The irony is that many of the same people who pitched a fit about mandatory COVID vaccines support telling people how to eat.  What inconsistency and hypocrisy! Liberty and freedom preaching zealots telling you what to eat expose their socialist side.     

     Second, the food police put undue burden on the food industry.  Ingredients bans, required declarations, warnings and other state mandates currently cost the industry (and ultimately the consumer) billions.  Some food processors elect to withdraw or not do business in states where the volume doesn’t warrant the increased packaging costs.  Consumers in those states have less choices and less freedom.

     When the feds last year were mandating what could be purchased with food stamps, the National Grocers Association (NGA) issued the following statement: “No consumer purchases have ever been subjected to this Orwellian level of snooping by the Federal government, and it would set a terrifying precedent of intruding on the most private areas of our lives.”    

     The temptation to restrict what recipients of SNAP can buy presents an ethical/moral dilemma for conservative Republicans:  Do they really believe in individual liberty or do they attach strings to a gift?  Sadly, many abandon their principles and side with special interests.

     Third, SB4 is unnecessary and intrusive.  The disappointing thing is Republicans authored it and passed it- not northeast liberals.  Oklahoma has become California.  It’s not likely any of the legislators who voted for SB4 campaigned on banning food ingredients.  Unnecessary cookie cutter legislation crafted by special interests is introduced by clueless lawmakers who campaign on seeking wise counsel from constituents, but never do.

     Evelyn Tribole,  the author of six books on cooking and health, says, "Unless you killed the chef, there is no morality or guilt in what you eat.” 

Just say No to the Food Police in Oklahoma!

In a Golden Age, Ds will complain because everythings YELLOW!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

GOLDEN AGE!

by Steve Fair

     On Tuesday night, President Trump addressed a joint session of Congress.  In the hour and 40-minute speech, the president proclaimed, “America is back!”  He praised Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) for the cuts they have made in the government’s footprint.  Trump detailed many of his actions since he was sworn into office six weeks ago.  Throughout the speech, Trump was cheered by Republicans and jeered by the Democrats.  Many political pundits- on both sides of the aisle- called Trump’s speech, “brilliant, vivid, and a great hit speech.’”  Trump was just Trump- loud, boisterous, and high energy.  Three observations:

     First, Democrats looked mad.  From Rep. Al Green’s (D-TX) disrupting of the speech and being removed from the chamber to members holding up signs with political messages, the optics the Ds projected was anger.  Anger and indignation should be reserved for marches and protests, not a joint session of Congress presidential address.  Democrats didn’t applaud the 13-year-old cancer survivor Trump introduced during his speech.  Many rank-and-file Democratic members privately criticized their leadership for telling them to sit on their hands.

     Sen. Elissa Slotkin, (D-MI) delivered the Democratic response speech.  Spending the majority of her brief 10-minute presentation attacking Trump, Musk, and Republicans, Slotkin concluded by exhorting Democrats to: (1) Don’t tune out, (2) Hold elected officials accountable, and (3) Organize.  Good advice for all Americans.  The problem is elected Democrats are out of touch with America.  A CBS News poll (hardly a conservative source) conducted after the speech found a majority of viewers approved of Trump’s speech.  

     Americans are heeding Albert Einstein’s advice who said, "Stay away from negative people. They have a problem for every solution."  Negative people are only happy when they bring you down to their level. 

     Second, Trump loves political theatre.  It was the longest speech by a president to Congress in 61 years.  Waxing long and eloquent, Trump was informal and humorous.  The spectacle of the Democrat’s annoyance and crossness made Trump look good.  One of the president’s strengths is his ability to not get rattled under pressure.  Trump pointed to the Ds and stated: “these guys wouldn’t give me credit if I found a cure for a deadly disease.”  That comment was met with stone-faced, expressionless looks by the elist self-enthralled leftists.  Trump feeds off the reaction of his listening audience- positive or negative.  His style is politically unconventional, but in November Americans showed they are sick and tired of traditional politics.     

     Third, is America entering a golden age?  President Trump claims it is.  He ended his Tuesday speech saying, “My fellow Americans, get ready for an incredible future because the golden age of America has only just begun.”  What exactly is a ‘golden age?”  It is defined as a period of great happiness, prosperity and achievement.  

     America has many challenges.  A recent Pew Research poll found inflation the issue most Americans are most concerned about, followed closely by the unwillingness of elected officials to deal with it.  Americans are tired of empty promises.  They want action.  They want radical change.  That is why Trump was swept into office. 

     Americans are tired of living in a Dark Age.  They can use a little light.  When America enters the golden age, Democrats will probably complain because everything will be too yellow. 

Sausage Making is not a Spectator Sport!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

SAUSAGE MAKING!

by Steve Fair

     Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a former entertainer.  He played the part of the president in a popular Ukrainian TV show titled, “Servant of the People.’  He was elected by a landslide in 2019 after helping create the political Party title the same as his TV show- Servant of the People.   Zelenskyy’s presidential campaign was unconventional.  He used social media, stand-up comedy, and a YouTube channel to reach voters.  His message was anti-establishment and anti-corruption.  His campaign tag line was: “Bringing professional, decent people to power.”  He had little policy experience and had not sought public office before.

    This week, Zelenskyy visited the White House with the stated purpose to negotiate an end to the three-year war with Russia.  It didn’t go well.  Zelenskyy and President Trump got into a very public dispute.  Tempers flared and Zelenskyy was asked to leave the White House.  Reactions in the U.S. and around the world varied.  Three observations:

     First, Russia is America’s sworn enemy.  In the aftermath of WWI, the Soviet Union was formed as a Communist/Marxism form of government.  The U.S. opposed the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 and its ideology and the Communist leaders who came to power never forgot it.  Even though Russia and the U.S. fought together as allies against Nazi Germany, tensions persisted throughout WWII.  Following WWII, the Cold War began.  It was a period of competition and confrontation between the U.S. and Russia, marked by espionage, wars over the spread of communism and the build-up of nuclear arms.  President Reagan’s ‘peace through strength’ strategy resulted in the eventual economic collapse and breakup of the old Soviet Union.  But leadership in Russia has remained steadfast in their goal of destroying America’s capitalism economic system and reuniting the old Soviet Union.  No matter how friendly they appear, Russia remains America’s sworn enemy.

     Second, the Ukrainian government is corrupt.  Corruption goes back to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.  Politicians, organized crime and oligarchs seized the country’s vast natural resources as their own.  The U.S. State Department described Ukraine government as a Kleptocracy or Thievocracy- a government whose leaders use their power to steal the wealth of their people. 

Make no mistake- bribery, graft, and payola are alive and well in Ukraine.   

    Zelenskyy is not a noble champion of democracy, but unfortunately his acceptance as a champion of freedom and justice is bipartisan.  Democrats and Republicans alike are big fans of the smooth talker.  But since the war started with Russia, Zelenskyy has outlawed eleven opposition political Parties and invoked martial law.  He is ruling in his country as an unelected dictator. 

     An audit a year ago by Zelenskyy’s own defense secretary found $262 million dollars of fraud and kickbacks by members of the military and parliament.  Most of that money came from American taxpayers.  President Trump puts the amount of aid at $350 billion thus far- other sources claim it is ‘only’ $182 billion.  But whatever the number, the United States has sent more money to Ukraine than it cost to fight the Vietnam war.

     Third, Russia needs Ukraine’s resources.  That is Putin’s motivation and the primary reason he invaded Ukraine.  He needs their agricultural production to feed the Russian people.  Russia needs their natural gas, oil, and minerals.  He grew weary of trying to negotiate and decided he would simply take it.  Diplomacy almost always works when all sides seek a workable solution, but when talks broke down, Putin deployed troops. 

     The Russians and the Ukrainians share a language, a religion, and history, but it been far from brotherly.  Ukraine and Russia both trace their origins to Kyivan Rus’, an early medieval state formed in the ninth century.  Lenin had to fight a very strong Ukrainian national movement during a civil war waged from 1917-1921 to keep Ukraine in the Soviet Union.  Many Ukrainians believe Putin wants to eliminate their right to exist and identify as a separate people.

     Last week, Americans saw how the sausage is made.  The practical and often unpleasant, messy aspects of a process usually not made public were on display.  Some Americans were appalled/embarrassed/ashamed by President Trump and Vice President Vance’s behavior toward Zelenskyy and his being asked to leave the White House.  Zelenskyy played the victim because his goal is to get more of American taxpayer dollars.  This week, Americans learned that sausage making is not a spectator sport.   

EXECUTIVE ORDERS ARE OUT OF CONTROL!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

POTENTATE!

by Steve Fair

     Since January 20^th, President Trump has signed 73 Executive Orders (EO)- 26 on his first day.  That is more than any recent president has signed in their first 100 days.  Trump signed a total of 220 EOs in his first term.  

     What is an Executive Order?  An EO is a directive by the president issued to agents of the executive branch.  An EO can have a binding force of law upon federal agencies and do not require approval of Congress.  They are however subject to judicial review and interpretation.  Every president except William Henry Harrison has issued EOs.  Harrison was in office only 32 days when he died. The most famous EO was Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, which granted freedom to slaves.  Franklin Roosevelt signed the most EOs.  For years the Heritage Foundation have accused presidents of abusing EOs by using them to make law with congressional approval and moving existing laws away from their original intent.  Three observations:

     First, the U.S. president is not a king.  The founders refrained from making the Presidency into the image of the British monarchy, which they had just gained independence from. Instead, they created an executive who had to be both responsive and accountable to the citizenry and balanced against the other two branches of government.  While the president has broad authority, they are not a sovereign dictator.

     The founders debated for three weeks on what to call the nation’s chief executive.  Some wanted to call George Washington the Chief Magistrate.  Some preferred King.  One proposal for the title was Protector of the Liberties of the People of the USA.   The Senate thought president was a title that wouldn’t be taken serious by other countries, but ultimately agreed.  Today, the President of the United States is the most powerful position in the world.   

     Recently, main stream media and certain of those who oppose Trump and his policies are claiming his use of EOs has made him a dictator/monarch.  Republican elected officials are encountering hostile constituents at Town Hall meetings, which is nothing new.  CNN released a poll showing 52% of Americans disapprove of Trump’s first month in office.  Liberals are always attempting to gaslight Americans, so take most of what you hear and see in the media with a grain of salt.  Trump’s policies will likely work if given time.

     Second, EOs are overused.  Executive Orders have increased as years went by.  EOs were meant to be issued within the narrow confines of Article II of the Constitution.  That changed with President Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican.  He signed 1,100 EOs, almost as many as the previous 100 years combined.  21^st century presidents have issued EOs with more frequency because the country is polarized and getting laws passed is next to impossible.  That is because negotiation, deal making, compromise, accommodation, and collaboration have become dirty words in politics.  Working across the aisle for the betterment of the masses has become nonexistent.  Elected officials come home and boast to constituents of accomplishing nothing by standing up to the other side.  The result is gridlock and more EOs by the executive branch.

     Third, the use of EOs makes consistency impossible.  President Biden opens the border with an EO- Trump closes it.  When Biden entered office, he rescinded a record 42 of Trump’s EOs in his first 100 days.  Trump flipped them back when he was re-elected.  Both justify the action because Congress is dysfunctional and the only way something gets done is by EO. 

     The framers of the Constitution did not consecrate power in one office.  They set up a democratic representative form of government that gave the real power to the people.  If voters will hold federal elected officials accountable by calling out grandstanding and showboating by do nothings, EOs will not be as prevalent. If EOs continue to be the law of the land, then perhaps the title of president be changed to potentate.

Parents need to take responsibility for education!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

DRAMA REIGNS!

by Steve Fair

     The Oklahoma state Board of Education (BOE) is composed of six members appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the State Senate and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction.  Members must have a minimum of a high school education.  They serve staggered six-year terms with one member’s term expiring every year.  There must be one member from each of the five congressional districts and one at large member.  There can’t be two members from the same county.  Members serve with no compensation, but do get reimbursed for their travel expenses.  The State Superintendent of Public Instruction serves as chair of the body.   

     The current makeup of the board wasn’t always the case.  From statehood until 1971, the board was composed of the State Superintendent, the Governor, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General.  When David Hall was governor, the Democratic controlled legislature passed the 1971 Oklahoma School Code.  It is a chapter in the Oklahoma statutes that gives the governor basically total sovereign control over the state school board.  He can appoint and dismiss members at his will.  This past week, Governor Stitt did just that.  The governor replaced three members of the state school board because test scores haven’t improved and the board seemed more interested in grabbing headlines and creating drama than improving public education.  The three new nominees- Ryan Deathredge of Kingfisher, Michael Tinney of Norman, and Chris VanDehende of Tulsa must be confirmed by the State Senate.

     Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters condemned Stitt’s firing of the board members on social media.  “The governor has joined the swampy political establishment that President Trump is fighting against.  Every Oklahoman should be clear this move undermines Oklahoma kids and parents and an American First agenda,” Walters declared.    Three observations:

     First, Trump attracts self-promoters.  It’s common for successful people to be co-opted.  Leeches, sycophants and toadies, in all walks of life, cling to people of wealth, power or influence to further themselves and their agenda.  It has become popular to invoke Trump and MAGA to excite or build support for a cause.  It is become a never-ending competition to gain credibility and acceptability by flatterers and lackeys.  Instead of provoking, inciting and agitating, Superintendent Walters should focus on reforming Oklahoma education. 

     Second, the state school board should be reformed.  The current appointment process gives the governor sovereign control over education policy in the state.    The board member’s loyalty lies with the governor and they can/will be removed if they don’t do his will.  There is no independence.  With the Superintendent of Public Instruction, an elected official, leading a board with loyalties to another elected official, a clear contradiction exists. 

     Rep. Jacob Rosecrants, (R-Norman) has introduced a bill that proposes the Governor, Speaker of the House and Senate President Pro Tempore get two board appointments each instead of letting the guv have all six.  It has been proposed before and failed.  What is more realistic would be for Oklahoma voters to approve a constitutional amendment in which the State Superintendent of Public Instruction be an appointed position instead of an elective one.  Oklahoma is one of only twelve states who elect a State Superintendent.  That would remove the contradiction and put the sold responsibility of education policy in the state on the shoulders of the governor.

    Third, Oklahoma parents need to take responsibility for their kid’s education.  Instead of blaming government for not schooling their children, they should take equity in teaching their offspring the 3Rs. 

     For years, Oklahoma’s education establishment solution to low test scores was; ‘give us raises and more money.’  That hasn’t resulted in significant improvement in scores.  A combination of parents not paying attention to their child’s education, elected officials focused on peripheral issues, and an education establishment unwilling to change has resulted in Oklahoma’s education subpar results.   

    Sensationism, hype, and puffery incite passion and emotions, but they will not improve Oklahoma’s education system.  Identifying obvious deficiencies and unselfishly working together is the only way change will happen.  It’s unclear if Oklahoma’s elected leaders can put their egos aside for the good of the kids. It’s more fun when drama reigns.

USE THE OKLAHOMA STATE AUDITOR AS INTENDED!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

PAIN OF REGRET!

by Steve Fair

      On Monday February 3^rd, Governor Kevin Stitt delivered his next to the last State of the State address.  Stitt is term limited and will serve as the Sooner state’s governor until 2026.  The 3,869 word speech was delivered in 36 minutes to a packed chamber of legislators and guests.  The speech can be read in its entirety at: https://oklahoma.gov/governor/newsroom/newsroom/2025/governor-stitt-delivers-2025-state-of-the-state-address.html

     Stitt stated goals in 2025 are to, (1) protect Oklahoma taxpayers, (2) make Oklahoma the best in the U.S. to do business, (3) safeguard state’s revenue reserve, (4) defend the Oklahoma way of life. Stitt began the speech by reciting a laundry list of ‘accomplishments’ during his six years as governor and then exhorted the legislature to support his agenda. 

     Quoting Winston Churchill, the governor said, “the price of greatness is responsibility.”  “That means sacrificing now for future benefit.  The reality is there is going to be pain either way- the pain of disciple now, or the pain of regret later,” Stitt said. 

     Stitt said he would cooperate with the Trump administration in deporting illegal aliens who have committed crimes.  He supports students not having access to cell phones while in school and proclaimed his support of school choice.  “The government shouldn’t stand in the way of a parent’s right to educate their children in line with their values,” Stitt said. 

     Citing a recurrent theme Stitt has parroted since he started campaigning for guv back in 2018, he said:  “I am committed to having fewer state employees at the end of my term than when I took office in 2019.” Stitt said. He also announced the creation of DOGE-OK to identify waste, fraud and corruption in state government.  He also wants to cut taxes.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma has an office to find waste, fraud and corruption.  The State Auditor and Inspector is an elected official given that responsibility by the state constitution.  An ad hoc committee of private citizens should not circumvent an elected official’s duties.  During the gubernatorial campaign of 2018, Stitt promised to use the Auditor’s office to “audit everything not nailed down.”  Phrases like that resonate with Republicans during an election, but are often forgotten by elected officials after they take office.  Oklahoma doesn’t need an unaccountable to the citizens DOGE when they have the SA&I.  Use the constitutionally created office and stop the grandstanding!

      Second, Oklahomans are overdue for a tax cut.  Stitt pointed out that bordering states are cutting their state income tax rate and have lower rates than the Sooner state.  Oklahoma state government has been collecting much more than they need to operate, which has resulted in record rainy day funds.  Like a kid sent to the store with money, but never gives the change back to his parent, state government has been keeping the change.  It’s time for the taxpayer to keep more of their money.    

     Third, Oklahoma government should help all businesses.  Economic development doesn’t just mean recruiting new business.  It involves helping existing businesses grow and prosper.  Often the zeal to recruit a new business hurts an existing business.  As the old saying goes: “dance with the one who brought you.” 

     Stitt’s consistently stated goal since his campaign of 2018 until now has been to, ‘make Oklahoma a top ten state.’  Every speech or talk includes the same talking points: cutting taxes, rightsizing government, and making the state business friendly- so far unfulfilled campaign promises. 

     Stitt should unleash the SA&I on state government to do performance audits, cut hardworking Oklahomans tax burden, and help existing Oklahoma businesses (not just oil and gas).  That will help Okies avoid the pain of regret!