SQ#836 would move Oklahoma to the left!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

SQ#836 IS FLIM-FLAM!

by Steve Fair

 

     On June 24^th, the Oklahoma Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a lawsuit filed by the Oklahoma Republican Party challenging the constitutionality of SQ# 836.  Justices did not immediately issue a ruling.  SQ#836 aims to change Oklahoma’s primary election system from closed primaries to an open system.  The OKGOP maintains SQ#836 violates the First Amendment rights of association by forcing the Party to accept votes from those not registered with the Party.  They contend political parties have the right to determine who participates in their nomination process.

     Proponents of SQ#836 were represented by former U.S. Attorney Robert McCampbell.  He pointed out the US Supreme Court has ruled that a top-two primary system does not violate political party associational rights.  Three observations:

     First, changing the primary election will move Oklahoma to the left.  The motivation behind SQ#836 is because Democrats are losing at the ballot box.  D’s tried, with limited success, to get their candidates to run as Republicans.  That made it difficult for primary voters to identify the sheep from the goats.  The Democrat’s next strategy is to eliminate branding.  They want to make Party affiliation insignificant.  They want to blur and obscure a candidate’s values/positions so they can get more progressives elected.    SQ#836 is the springboard to a more liberal state government.  No true conservative is supporting it. 

     Second, changing the primary election will promote hijinks.  SQ#836 would increase the practice of candidates deceitfully positioning themselves as a conservative to win an election.  SQ#836 is a Trojan house.  Proponents are selling the fairness/harmless/beneficial of it, but fail to disclose the hidden danger and malicious intent it actually promotes.  SQ#836 would encourage candidates to practice deceit and chicanery.  It is already next to impossible to discern the genuine from the bogus in the current system.  Flipping to a primary where those not registered in a Party can determine the Party’s nominee is asinine.

     Third, changing the primary election will empower special interests. Proponents of SQ#836 trumpet how it will bring fairness, equity, and honesty to the primary system.  But what is fair about a system where those who don’t want to be a part of an organization want to tell that organization how to operate?  SQ#836 would draw special interest money like flies to sugar.  Mass marketing of empty suit light weights would put the power in the hands of big donors.  Trade associations and industries are already buying legislative seats in Oklahoma.  SQ#836 would take it to the next level.

     SQ#836 isn’t about fairness.  It’s about control.  It’s about winning elections.  Every registered voter in Oklahoma can already participate in primary elections.  They just have to register with the Party that aligns with their values.  That is just common sense.  Outsiders shouldn’t pick a Party’s nominee.  SQ#836 is a scam promoted by flim-flam artists.   Unfortunately, some of those bilkers have an ‘R’ by their name.  If the Oklahoma Supreme Court rules against the OKGOP, then SQ#836 advocates will start gathering signatures to get it on the ballot.  They have to gather 173,000 statewide in a short window.  Oklahomans should decline, reject, repudiate and spurn requests to put their John Hancock on the petition, not matter how persuasive the solicitor.  SQ#836 is not OK.   

 

SKELETONS RARELY STAY IN THE CLOSET!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

SKELETONS

by Steve Fair

     In Numbers 32:23, Moses warns the tribes of Reuben and Gad their unfaithfulness will be exposed.  The scripture presents the principle that misbehavior and wrongdoing, deliberate or not, will eventually be discovered and have consequences.  Secrets are rarely kept forever, and actions always have repercussions. 

     This week at a Coldplay concert in Massachusetts, a “kiss cam” was displayed on a big screen.  A blond woman and a silver-haired man ducked and ran off when they saw their images on the big screen.  Turns out the pair were married, but not to each other.  The man resigned his CEO position at an Artificial Intelligence (AI) data company he co-founded as a result of the incident.  Video of the “kiss cam” has gone viral.  Three observations:

     First, secrets rarely remain secrets.  It’s human nature to share with others, even the most private things.  Keeping secrets is psychologically draining and sometimes people just have to tell someone their innermost thoughts.  People tell others secrets to strengthen their bond with others.  They may be seeking support or help by bearing their soul.  Mistakes and leaks often reveal secrets through careless conversation and indiscreet actions.  In the modern world, data breaches expose emails, texts, social media posts the user thought were confidential.  Cameras are everywhere.  You can’t even run a stop light without getting caught!  “You can run, but you can’t hide,” has never been truer.

     Second, God sees all.  Yahweh sees all and knows all.  He is omniscient (all knowing).  He is omnipresent (everywhere all the time).  God is aware of everything that has happened, is happening and will happen.  Proverbs 15:3 states: "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good." This verse highlights God's constant awareness and observation of both righteous and wicked behavior.  Even if a person successfully fools every person on earth, they just can’t sneak it past God.   Hebrews 4:13 says: "And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account." 

     Third, we reap what we sow.  Generally, in life, one receives the consequences of their actions- both positive and negative. Whether one believes in God or not, the law of cause and effect is universally recognized, so we should be conscious of the actions we take, as they will determine our harvest. 

     In the political arena, secrets are known as “skeletons in the closet.”  They are hidden things that happened in someone’s past that might affect their political campaign or career.  Exposure of skeletons are used to undermine an opponent’s reputation and influence constituents. 

     The Jeffery Epstein client list has dominated the recent news cycle.  Accusations of a cover up and speculation on who is on the list- if it exists- rage.  Passionate opinions condemn the inconsistency of past statements about the list.  

      Even if skeletons don’t fall out of Epstein’s closet, the participants in his sordid enterprise will be exposed- in this world or the next. The disclosure might not as public as a big screen “kiss cam,” but be not deceived, God is not mocked.  They will pay the price for their perversion.

USA Reformation will be God Initiated!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

POLITICS OR PIETY?

by Steve Fair

     In 1953, future U.S. president Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) was serving in the U.S. Senate from Texas.  LBJ faced criticism from conservative tax-exempt organizations in his home state of Texas- two of which were Facts Forum and the Committee for Constitutional Government.  They pointed out LBJ’s liberal views to Texas voters in his 1948 campaign for Senate, and Johnson vowed to shut them down.  LBJ believed their accusations of his liberalism would harm his political standing in the conservative Lone Star state.  He sought to neutralize their influence on legislation and political campaigns by stopping donations to those 501(c)3 groups by removing their tax-exempt status.  The ‘Johnson Amendment’ banned any tax-exempt organizations, including churches, from political activism and endorsing of candidates.  Long time critics of the amendment say it is selectively enforced.  According to the Free Speech Center, religious organizations are the target of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) more often than secular groups. 

     Historically, the IRS has rarely enforced the Johnson Amendment against churches. The only known instance of a church losing its tax-exempt status over the amendment involved newspaper ads being run on behalf of a candidate.  But that will likely be changing. 

     Last week, the IRS entered a consent decree stating the ‘Johnson amendment’ does not prevent a "house of worship" from speaking to its congregation, through customary channels of communication on matters of faith in connection with religious services, concerning electoral politics viewed through the lens of religious faith.  The action came after two Texas churches sued the IRS, asserting the ‘Johnson Amendment’ violated their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and exercise of religion.  Three observations:

     First, the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional, but remains the law of the land.  In regard to the Johnson Amendment, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has ruled in the past tax benefits given to 501(c)3 nonprofits are a “form of subsidy administered through the tax system.”  Two federal Courts of Appeals have ruled the Johnson Amendment constitutional, but until the U.S. Supreme Court formally rules on the Johnson Amendment as how it applies to religious organizations, this is not over.  The IRS compromise reached this week may stop enforcement, but it doesn’t remove the Johnson Amendment from the statutes.

     Second, this deal will change campaign finance.  If donors can contribute to a church or any other 501 (c)3 group, receive an IRS approved tax deduction, and the donation be funneled to a candidate, ‘following the money’ becomes next to impossible.  Will churches and candidates be required to report campaign contributions from 501(c)3s like secular organizations have to?  Will the 501(c)3s need to disclose the giver?  If not, then this new position by the IRS could dramatically increase the number of ‘dark money’ groups involved in the political arena.  "Dark money" in politics refers to political spending by organizations that do not disclose their donors. This lack of transparency allows special interests to influence elections without public accountability. 

     Third, the policy could change the mission of churches.  Preaching repentance and faith may be put aside for proclaiming liberty and freedom-the doxology replaced with God Bless the USA.  Sermons may be on patriotism instead of peacemaking.  Fundraisers will replace fellowships.  Worship will focus on reforming the USA through activism.  Studying the Constitution instead of the Sermon on the Mount. 

     The mission of the Lord’s church is to preach the Gospel.  Jesus gave the Great Commission to His church in Matthew 28:19.   A church who veers or deviates from that commission- no matter their motive- is in danger of losing their candlestick.  Does a church have a right to get political?  Sure, but any church who puts politics over piety have lost their way.   They have sacrificed reverence for relevance.  America’s reformation will be God initiated, done in His timing and by His methods. 

Republicans proved they can do more than win elections!

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

REPUBLICANS CAN GOVERN!

by Steve Fair

     On Friday July 4^th, President Donald Trump signed into law H.R. #1 aka The Big Beautiful Bill.  Introduced on May 16^th, the legislation was passed by the House on May 22^nd, the Senate on July 1^st and the House again on July 3^rd- record time for a piece of federal legislation of this magnitude.   The bill is a budget reconciliation bill encompassing several areas, including tax policy, border security, immigration, defense, energy production, the debt limit and changes to SNAP and Medicaid.  It passed primarily along Party lines in both chambers, with Vice President J.D. Vance required to break the tie in the Senate to get it across the finish line.

     Critics of HR1 say it cuts two major social safety net programs and impose work requirements that will cost millions of poor Americans their benefits.  They claim the ripple effects will be felt across the country and not just by the poor.  Three observations:

     First,  Republicans collaborated.  For the first time in decades, Republican elected officials governed.  In years past, when the GOP had a majority in Congress and the presidency, they couldn’t agree on what sandwich to order for lunch, much less major legislation.   For the most part, the Republican caucus was cohesive and united.  Only five House members voted no on HR1 in May and just two- Massie of Kentucky and Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania- voted no last week.  Three Senators- Paul of Kentucky, Collins of Maine and Tillis of North Carolina- opposed it in the Senate.  As expected, every Democrat in Congress voted no. 

     Second, Trump campaigned on HR1.  Many of the tenets in the sweeping legislation are consistent with what he hawked on the campaign trail.  This not a ‘bait and switch’ bill- no matter what the Ds and mainstream media claim.  Trump told voters he would close the border, make tax cuts permanent, reform entitlement programs, and build the military.  HR1 does that.  The problem a lot of Republicans have with HR1 is it costs a ton of money.  Trump maintains the economic growth from HR1 will offset the spending.  That remains to be seen.  Trump campaigns as a fiscal conservative, but his walk hasn’t matched his talk when it comes to spending.

     Third, HR1 will affect mid-term elections.  It’s too early to tell if the ‘big beautiful bill,’ will be delightful or disagreeable to 2026 voters, but it will not be neutral.  If HR1 produces the results Trump says it will, Republicans will gain seats and the GOP will retain a united government.  If HR1 is a bust, Republicans will lose seats and the last two years of Trump’s term will be gridlock.

     The misinformation, caricaturing, and spinning on HR1, by both sides, has made it next to impossible to know what the sweeping legislation will actually do.  Democrats claim it will destroy America- Republicans assert it will save the Republic.  Time will divulge the ramifications of HR1.  But one thing for certain- for the first time in decades, Republicans proved they can do more than just win elections- they can govern.