2010

ELECTION

PREDICTIONS

I predict Republicans will gain the following in the Tuesday mid-term elections. In addition, I predict Jason Hicks will be elected District Attorney in District 6 and the GOP will SWEEP the statewide elections in Oklahoma.

57- U.S. House Seats
8- U.S. Senate Seats
4- Oklahoma State House Seats
3- Oklahoma State Senate Seats

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

by Steve Fair

Tuesday is Election Day. While the results of the midterm elections are not known yet, pundits are predicting a great night for the GOP, but on Wednesday the governing and the ‘accountability’ begins.
*****
As General Douglas McArthur said, “No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation.” The responsibility of being a citizen in this country and state requires vigilance. We must work to insure those elected yesterday are held accountable. Lots of promises and pledges were made during the campaign cycle. Most of the time, those guarantees and oaths are forgotten by elected officials as soon as the votes are counted. That’s because the citizenry at large fail to pay attention and hold them accountable by staying informed. Most people in the US mistakenly believe their only responsibility in the political process is to vote.
*****
But as James Bovard says, “Voting is no substitute for the eternal vigilance that every friend of freedom must demonstrate towards government. If our freedom is to survive, Americans must become far better informed on a day to day basis.” Thomas Jefferson said, "No nation is permitted to live in ignorance with impunity."
*****
Staying informed requires personal sacrifice. Instead of just listening to Fox News, it requires citizens to actually do personal research on what their elected officials are really doing. It may require voters to attend meetings on nights that are inconvenient or give up some of their recreational time to stay informed. Bottom line; If American citizens stayed consistently informed, the political progress in American would be dramatically reformed, taking power away from political donors and campaign consultants giving it back to the citizens.
*****
Currently, on the average, it costs upwards of over one million dollars to run for a U.S. House seat. Just twenty years ago, the amount was half that. It costs over two hundred thousand dollars to run for the Oklahoma State Senate. With that much money required to run for office, candidates have three choices. They can fund a campaign themselves, which would allow only the rich to seek elective office. They can appeal to a broad small donor base, which requires a lot of time and work or they can appeal to a small number of big donors who often want more than just good government from their ‘investment.’ If the public as a whole ‘stayed informed,’ campaigns would require less money. Most of the expensive advertising would be unnecessary because the ‘informed’ electorate wouldn’t need to be educated on the candidate’s position.
****
When candidates buy TV, radio, print, direct mail, to ‘inform’ the public on their positions, the message is designed to get votes, not inform. Often the real positions of the candidates don’t square with what they really believe. Inconsistency and hypocrisy are staples on the campaign trail and unfortunately the citizenry have come to expect it. What the general public fails to recognize is by not ‘staying informed,’ they have created the current political process they claim is so corrupt.
*****
Paying attention to what is happening in your government for ninety (90) days every other year just before an election isn’t vigilance. Voting every time the polls are open is not in and of itself vigilance. Being a faithful Party worker or campaign volunteer doesn’t necessarily make you vigilant. Being vigilant requires you remain watchful and alert. It means you are on the alert for danger and pitfalls on what your government may be doing or not doing. Vigilance requires commitment and sacrifice. Staying informed is a critical component of vigilance.
*****
As Wayne LaPierre of the NRA says, “Freedom is never an achieved state; like electricity, we’ve got to keep generating it or the lights go out.” The elections are over- now the work begins for not just those who will be elected Tuesday, but also for the vigilant.

THE SECOND AND FINAL DEBATE!

A critique and scoring of the Tulsa debate

Congresswoman Mary Fallin and Lt. Governor Jari Askins squared off in their second and final debate tonight in Tulsa. After brief opening statements, they fielded thirteen(13) questions from a group of media panelists. Most of the questions were not issue oriented and therefore a waste of time, but the fact is most people who watch or listen to a debate are not swing voters anyway. Here is how I scored it tonight.

Question #1
Asked the importance about the historical election of Oklahoma's first woman Governor, Fallin said gender shouldn't matter and Askins used her time to cite her experience.

ADVANTAGE: TIE

*****
Question #2
Asked about State Question #755- the one about Oklahoma judges not following Sharia Law, Fallin stated clearly and definitely, she supports passage of 755- didn't want to make the same mistake twice. Askins supports passage of 755 as well.

ADVANTAGE: TIE

*****

Question #3
Asked why Oklahoma has so many women in prison per capita, Askins said it's because Oklahoma doesn't spend enough on community based counseling. Fallin said it's because we are a poor state and need jobs and economic development. Askins' answer was the classic liberal answer to everything- throw government/taxpayer money at the problem.

ADVANTAGE: FALLIN

*****
Question #4
Asked about a recent report the Oklahoma State Teachers Retirement fund is the third worst in the country, Askins said “ We need to fix it before it hurts our bond rating.” Fallin said, "We need to keep the promise we made to the participants in the plan." While neither gained a clear advantage with their answer, Askins has a creditability gap on this issue. She was in the legislature for twelve years when the Democrats were underfunding the retirement systems and she was in the Democrat House leadership.

ADVANTAGE: FALLIN

*****
Question 5
How can Oklahomans get better physically fit? Why are we so unhealthy?

I hate FOOD POLICE questions- could be because I sell food- but nevertheless both begin to talk about 'government mandated' education of mothers on how to feed and care for their families. Both cited good programs (Regional Food Bank's Kids backpack program and Farm to school program), but Fallin missed an opportunity to tie this back to her JOBS theme. Fallin's answer was too liberal to give her an advantage on this question.

ADVANTAGE: TIE

*****

Question #6
Will Mary Fallin endorse Sarah Pallin for President?
Stupid question and has nothing to do with the issues in a campaign for Governor of Oklahoma, but it was asked anyway. A better question would have been WHO DID YOU VOTE FOR IN 2008 FOR PRESIDENT? Fallin evaded the answer, citing the names of friends she has who are considering a run at the White House. Askins said she hadn't met Pallin, but would go grizzly bear hunting with her if invited. She talked about her turkey hunting experience and how she bagged her first gobbler this year.

ADVANTAGE: TIE

*****
Question #7
Is funding common education a worthy goal?
Askins answered this question well. She said, “Oklahoma should never strive to be average, but to be excellent.” There is just one problem- the reason Oklahoma is at the bottom in education is because Askins and her Party(Democrat) failed to get money to the classrooms during their "100 year reign of terror" in Oklahoma. Fallin fumbled this question, but eventually managed to say she favored administration sharing. Neither breached the "C" word (Consolidation). Fallin appeared to not be prepared for this question.

ADVANTAGE: TIE

*****

Question #8
How do we get Oklahoma moving forward economically?
Fallin hit her three key points out of the park on this question. "I will focus on reducing our tax burden, educating our workforce and right sizing government," Fallin said. "I will create a governor’s task force on what holds Oklahoma back economically." Fallin said. Askins cited the success of the Quality Jobs Act and how important it is to have seed capital available for people who want to start a business.

ADVANTAGE: FALLIN

*****
Question #9
Another stupid non- issue oriented question. Stating that Governor Henry will be remember as the 'Education Governor," the question was; "How do you want to be known as Governor? Askins had a very good answer. "I want to be known as the Governor who focused on children," she said. Referencing her meetings with Speaker Designate Chris Steele, (R-Shawnee), Askins said she has always had a keen interest in protecting and helping children. Fallin used her time to go back to her three point message, however this was a question that required sensitivity and Fallin fumbled with her answer. "I want to be known as the Governor who gave children and all citizens of Oklahoma a better future." Fallin said. It was a direct slap at Askins response. Askins was specific, clear, concise and believable. On this question, Fallin came across as a politico.

ADVANTAGE: ASKINS

*****
Question #10
Citing Askins TV ads about her conservative credentials, Jari was asked-"What is your greatest conservative accomplishment?" This was perhaps the one opportunity that Askins had to 'knock it out of the park.' She failed! "I pushed legislation to create a trust to save the tobacco money instead of spending it like a lot of other states did," Askins said. While that is somewhat conservative, Askins missed to chance to tout her pro-life and pro-gun stances, but she didn't. Fallin said, "To me a conservative is a person who not only talks the talks, but walks the walk." Fallin cited her 96 rating by a conservative organization, her pro-life, and pro-gun stance. A very awkward moment for Askins.

ADVANTAGE: FALLIN

*****

Question #11
Asked if they would support a change in Medicare matching funding in Oklahoma and would you put it to a vote of the people, Fallin was evasive and unclear. “We need to keep our fees low, because they are passed on.” Fallin said. Askins was more prepared for this question, citing several issues with the State's Medicare matching funding and concluded by clearly answering the question and stating, “I support putting it to a vote of the people.”

ADVANTAGE: ASKINS

*****
Question #12
The questioner rambled on about how important the Tulsa area and NE Oklahoma is and how they haven't seen Governor Henry (who cares) in Tulsa much and finally asked "What is your style of leadership?" “Coming from Duncan, Oklahoma, I don’t favor OKC or Tulsa- I understand the issues that both metro areas face.” Askins said. “I think a Governor needs to be available. I have paid a lot of attention to Tulsa." Fallin said. The answer to this question should never change the mind of an undecided voter- a waste of time.

ADVANTAGE: TIE

*****

Question #13
Instead of a question, this panelist editorialized about all the hurting in Oklahoma. "What can you do in the first 100 days in office that will help improve all the hurting in Oklahoma," she asked? Fallin knocked it out of the park on this answer. She said, “The best thing I can do is to create the best business climate possible in Oklahoma." Askins' answer was equally good. “There is no silver bullet to solve our problems in the first 100 days. I believe working with the legislature on a balance budget early will be best thing I can accomplish in the first 100 days," Askins said. Problem with Jari's answer is when she was in the legislature and Governor Keating (a Republican) was in office, the Democrats in the legislature(and she was in leadership) did not WORK with the Governor, so while the answer was good, her creditability is lacking.

ADVANTAGE: FALLIN

*****

CLOSING STATEMENTS
Fallin hit her three(3) points: Jobs, educating Oklahoma's workforce, and right sizing government. She also said she would send a signal to Washington that we will not tolerate unfunded mandates. Askins reminisced on how she came to the decision to run for Governor and said she ran because she is a 'decision maker.' "You must be able to lead and to discern," Askins said. "I will build a team that looks like Oklahoma. I will make the tough decisions," Jari concluded.

ADVANTAGE: TIE

*****

FINAL TALLY
TIE:SEVEN(7)

FALLIN: FIVE(5)

ASKINS: TWO(2)

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

STATE QUESTIONS AND JUDGES
by Steve Fair

Voters usually have less information about the state questions and the judges on the ballot than they do about the elective races. This year’s ballot has eleven (11) state questions and six(6) judges.
*****
The proposal getting the most attention is SQ #744, which if approved, would tie common education funding to a ‘regional average’ of Oklahoma’s surrounding states. If approved, this proposal would result in increased taxes and/or reduced funding to other state agencies. The problem with SQ #744 is it does not provide a funding mechanism- only a spending one.
*****
You have probably seen the pro 744 TV commercials that imply by cutting state legislator’s perks and benefits the money to fund 744 would be there. That is simply not true. If all of the 149 legislator’s perks and benefits were given to common education it would only provide three days worth of funding. Passage of 744 would be devastating to other state agencies and take funding decisions out of Oklahoma legislators hands and give it to the surrounding state’ lawmakers. In my opinion, of the eleven state questions SQ 744 is the only one that should be voted down, the others should be approved. Now a quick look at the judges.
*****
Up until 1966, Oklahomans elected judges in partisan statewide elections. Voters knew the judge’s Party affiliation, convictions and values. Judges had opponents and campaigned just like the other statewide elected officials. Using the excuse that elections cost the judges a lot of time and money and was undignified for the judiciary, they effectively lobbied the Oklahoma legislature to place a State Question on the ballot. That proposal was approved by the voters and amended the State Constitution to the current ‘judicial retention’ system. Since Oklahoma implemented the judicial retention system, not one Oklahoma appellate judges has failed to be retained. Obviously, the lack of information on their performance in office has given the judges an advantage at the ballot box.
*****
The truth is most voters don’t know anything about the judges. Bear in mind that every one of the six judges were appointed by a Governor. It stands to reason they reflect the values, views and opinions of the Governor who appointed them. Keep that in mind when you cast your vote on whether to retain or remove.
*****
There are six judges on the 2010 retention ballot. The two Oklahoma Supreme Court justices up for retention are Steven Taylor and James Winchester. There are four justices on the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals on the ballot- Deborah Barnes, Doug Gabbard, John Fischer, and Larry Joplin. Governor Blackjack Henry appointed all but Winchester and Joplin. Winchester was appointed by Governor Keating, Joplin by Governor Nigh. In my opinion, all but Winchester should be removed.
*****
Finding information on the judges is difficult. None of them published a flyer of how they voted on key rulings, or a statement of their judicial philosophy. In my opinion, that should be the very least they are required to do. That would help voters make an informed decision on these important offices. I have published a brief bio of each of the six judges on the blog http://stevefair.blogspot.com/search?q=here+come+the+judges. The Norman League of Women Voters has published the six judges’ answers to some survey questions on their website. You can access that information at http://norman.ok.lwvnet.org/2010_judicial_retention.html .
*****
Voting gets underway this week in Oklahoma. According to the US Census Bureau, the most common excuse people give for not voting is they didn’t have time. Oklahoma has made it more convenient for voters to cast their ballot in recent years. You can vote in-person absentee on Friday from 8am to 6pm, Saturday 8am-1pm, or Monday 8am-6pm at the County Courthouse. On Tuesday November 2nd, all regular polling places are open from 7am-7pm.
*****
One of my favorite quotes about voting comes from John Quincy Adams who said, “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

JONES VISITS ALL 77 COUNTIES AND COURTHOUSES

Momentum has Jones on verge of victory!

State Auditor and Inspector candidate Gary Jones(pictured aboved @ the Roger Mills County Courthouse near the 'Records Vault') says he feels that he is on the verge of victory after visiting all 77 counties and county courthouses in Oklahoma. In early October, Jones set a goal of visiting every county courthouse before the November 2nd election. Craig County in Vinita was the first visited by Jones and on Thursday Roger Mills County in Cheyenne became the seventy-seventh (77th).

*****

“People across our state know the Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector is one of the most important elected offices in our state,” said Jones. “I believe it is critical that we have an Auditor that is trustworthy and honest. Nowhere is it more important to have that trust than in the rural parts of our state, especially our county courthouses.”

*****

Jones is known for his tenacity in rooting out corruption and making government more efficient. “I’m running because as a citizen of our great state I have uncovered more fraud and corruption in state government than the last three Auditors combined,” he said.

*****

Jones believes tax dollars should be spent efficiently and free of corruption and waste. “If there is waste or corruption, taxpayers lose,” he said.

*****

Jones has picked up several important endorsements during his campaign, the biggest being from United States Senator Tom Coburn, who is also known as the taxpayers’ watchdog.

*****

In addition Jones is receiving support from county officials in all 77 county courthouses. “I have support from sheriffs, county clerks, court clerks, treasurers, assessors, district attorneys, and county commissioners. No one works closer with the auditor’s office than county officials. Those that know the most about the State Auditor are overwhelmingly supporting me. I am proud to have their support,” said Jones. "I have traveled every corner of Oklahoma, from Boise City in the Panhandle to Idabel in far Southeastern Oklahoma, from Miami in Ottawa County to Hollis in Harmon County, and all points in between. I have been listening to citizens and those individuals elected to serve their communities. County officials are concerned that it has been as long 4 or even 5 years since their county has been audited. They don’t feel that they are getting their questions answered and they aren’t getting the support they need to get their jobs done."

*****

While virtually all county officials have praised the help they receive from the field and support staff of the auditor’s office, they don’t hesitate to point out a problem exist in room 100 at the state capitol, the Auditor and his senior staff.

*****

As a former Comanche County Commissioner, Gary Jones understands the importance of being able to get accurate advice in a timely manner to aid elected officials and their employees to follow the law as they work to serve the citizens of their respective counties. Jones also understands the importance of getting audits done promptly to protect the taxpayer’s interest and ensure that elected officials and their employees are following the law.

*****

Gary Jones is running because he’s always had a sense of purpose, determination and the ability to focus on getting the job done. “I’m running because I believe we must have someone who has dedicated his or her life to doing what is right for the citizens of Oklahoma. I’m running because no one will outwork me and no one will be more responsible to taxpayers of Oklahoma.” said Jones

http://bretburnsda.com/thenumbers.htm

Last week, Bret Burns ran an ad in the Chickasha paper claiming he has personally handled over 34,000 cases in his 18 year career. The person behind bretburnsda.com has done the math and found that would be next to impossible unless Burns is super-human. You can read the entire article at the link above, but here is one excerpt.

*****

"If we were to believe Bret's claims that he has personally handled 14,000 felonies and 20,000 misdemeanors over his 18 year career... That would mean 34,000 cases total. There are 52 weeks in an average year, with 5 working days, for an average of 260 days. For 18 years, that's 4,680 days. That would mean that Bret would have been handling 7.264 NEW CASES every single day he worked for 18 years!"

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

OKLAHOMA BECOMING MORE RED!

by Steve Fair

The latest voter registration data was released by the Oklahoma State Election Board last week and it shows Republicans have made significant gains across the state in voter registration since January 15, 2010. As of October 15^th, there is a total of 2,079,014 voters statewide. That compares to 2,038,620 in January 2010. There are an additional 40,394 voters in Oklahoma. During the ten(10) month period, Republican voters increased by 28,599(+3.4%), Democrats by 313(+Even) and Independents by 11,482(+4.8%).

*****

Republicans are the majority party in twenty two(22) of the state’s seventy seven(77) counties, including the state’s five largest counties. Voters registered Democrat are 48.1% of the total in the state, Republicans are 40.5%, and Independents are 11.4%.

*****

In my home county-Stephens County- there are just 459(+1.7%) new voters since January. There are now 26,064 total voters in the county. 14,610(56.1%) are registered Democrat, 9,214(35.3%) are Republican, and 2.240(8.6%) are Independent.

*****

Since January 2010, Democrat voters in Stephens County have declined by 96(-1.3 percentage point), Republicans have increased by 428(+1 percentage point), and Independents increased by 127(-.4 percentage points). Stephens County voter registration grew slightly less than statewide- 1.9% vs. 1.7%.

*****

Bottom line- Oklahoma is becoming redder. Makes sense since Oklahoma means 'Red People,' in Choctaw.

*****

Statistics can bore you to tears or be used to understand behavior. As Scottish poet Andrew Lang said, “An unsophisticated forecaster uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than for illumination.” So what can we learn from these numbers?

*****

First, the statistics reveal that Oklahomans are aligning their political party affiliation with their voting habits. Oklahoma is a conservative state where the majority of the citizens are conservative thinkers. They are pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, fiscally conservative and somewhat ‘Libertarian’ in their thinking. Oklahoma has not voted for the Democrat nominee for President since 1964.

*****

In 2008, Oklahoma was the only state in the country where all counties voted for John McCain. Four of the five members of Congress representing Oklahoma are R’s as are both U.S. Senators.

In 2004, Oklahoma voters gave Republicans control of the State House.

*****

In 2006, Senator Anthony Sykes, (R-Moore), then a little known political outsider beat a Democrat incumbent to give the Republicans a ‘tie’ in the Senate. In 2008, Republicans won outright control of the State Senate.

*****

Republicans are making inroads in County Courthouses. The county elected officials in the five largest counties in the state in population are mostly Republican. It has taken rural Oklahomans a little more time to align with their convictions, but that is happening in increasingly large numbers. In Little Dixie, (Durant) which is a heavily Democrat area in registration, a former aide to Senator Tom Coburn, Josh Brecheen, is leading in recent polls over Democrat incumbent State Senator Jay Paul Gumm. Twenty years ago that would have been unheard of, but in 2010, it’s the norm.

*****

Secondly, the stats reveal that Independents may have peaked in Oklahoma. Voters often register independent because they are disgruntled Republicans who want to send a message to Party leadership. Independents, as a percentage, declined in Oklahoma in the past ten months.

*****

Thirdly, the numbers reveal that it is not just the larger counties in Oklahoma where Republican have made significant gains. Many rural counties are electing Republicans to county offices for the first time in state history. The gains Republicans have made in the state legislature have not been in the larger metropolitan areas. It has been in rural Oklahoma where many of the voters are registered Democrat. As those voters have become more comfortable having Republicans representing them, they have aligned with their convictions and changed parties.

*****

What the numbers don’t reveal is the motivation behind the changes. A recent poll may. Rasmussen did a poll in late September which revealed that over two thirds of Oklahomans disapprove of the job Barrick Obama has done as President. That same poll showed that one third of Oklahoma voters identify themselves as a member of the ‘Tea Party,’ and trust Republicans more than Democrats on the handling of the economy, taxes and immigration by wide margins.

*****

A recent Sooner Poll conducted for The Tulsa World shows the Republican candidate leading in every statewide race. A ‘sweep’ of the statewide offices is very possible. The key is voter turnout. There is no excuse not to vote in our state. Oklahoma has in-person absentee balloting. You can vote the Friday, Saturday or Monday before November 2^nd at the County Courthouse.

*****

If Oklahoma voters elect a Republican Governor, it will be the first time in state history Republicans will control the State House, Senate and the Governership at the same time. If that happens, it would be historic, but making history doesn’t guarantee effective leadership- it only provides the opportunity.

WHY HAVE THE DEMOCRATS

GONE NEGATIVE?

by Steve Fair

This week Steve Burrage, the Antlers banker appointed to fill an unexpired term as State Auditor, began running an ‘attack’ ad against his opponent Gary Jones. In the TV spot, Burrage is NEVER mentioned- only his opponent. The ads are a clear 'hacket' job and should make The Oklahoman blush after their endorsement of Burrage because in their words 'he was a known quantity.' If The Oklahoman has any integrity, they will condemn Burrage's ads and retract their recommendation.

*****

Kenneth Corn, a termed out State Senator who has never held a real job, is running ‘attack’ ads against Todd Lamb, his opponent. The latest numbers has Lamb leading by double digits and this may be Corn's HAIL MARY pass. It's gonna be tough on Corny when he has to get a real job!

*****

Brett Burns, incumbent DA for District #6, has come out swinging against his Republican opponent Jason Hicks. He ran an ‘attack’ ad in the Chickasha paper. Burns' ad has a half page full of criminal mug shots- people who he has supposedly put in the pokey. The ad attacks Hicks for his so-called 'lack of experience.' The real question is not who Burns has prosecuted, it's who he hasn't. People tell me there have been a number of embezzlers that Burns has not prosecuted. Burns appears to be too cozy with DEFENSE attorneys- particularly those outside the district and gives their clients flavorable treatment over the average Joe. One law enforcement official told me he was sick of Burns selective prosecution. Hicks, a Duncan Republican, is clearly the front runner in the two largest counties in the district.

******

What is up with these Democrats going negative?

*****

Negative campaigning is nothing new- it’s been around since the founding of the republic. John Quincy Adams went ‘negative’ in the 1828 presidential election against Andrew Jackson. If Adams were alive today and the same things said, charges would be filed. Check out the original 'Coffin Handbills' at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_Handbills

*****

Negative campaigning, also known as “mudslinging", is trying to win an advantage by referring to negative aspects of an opponent or of a policy rather than emphasizing one's own positive attributes or preferred policies. Does mudslinging work? Some say it only works when you are ahead, when you are behind or when you are even. In other words, it works all the time. Some contend that while the voting public say they despise the mudslinging commercials, they secretly love them. But who is influenced by negative ads?

*****

According to a 1995 study by Stephen Ansolabehere and Shato Ivengar negative ads have a greater impact on Democrats than on Republicans. The study showed that base Republicans will vote no matter what (and will vote only for a Republican), but Democrats can be influenced to either stay home and not vote at all or to switch sides and vote for a Republican. This led them to conclude that Republicans benefit more from going negative than Democrats. Ansolabehere and Ivengar also said that negative campaigning suppressed voter turnout among independents. They also conclude that mudslinging works most effectively with uninformed or under informed voters.

*****

So when should a campaign go negative? Cathy Allen, president of Campaign Connection of Seattle, suggested negative campaigning might be the 'proper course' during political contests in the following situations:

• when taking on an incumbent;
• when being significantly outspent;
• when there is irrefutable information that the opponent has done something wrong;
• when the candidate has little name recognition

IN OTHER WORDS- WHEN A CANDIDATE IS LOSING!

*****

The latest Sooner Poll numbers show Burrage and Corn both trailing their opponents. http://soonerpoll.com/poll-finds-republicans-poised-to-sweep-oklahoma%e2%80%99s-november-election/

*****

That explains why Oklahoma Democrat candidates are going negative. THEY ARE LOSING, but it’s not likely their tactics will work this election cycle. Oklahoma voters are engaged and motivated. They want to know where the candidates stand on the issues and negative ads turn off informed voters.

*****

Ed Rollins, former Reagan advisor, wrote an insightful column on why Democrats are going negative nationally. You can read the column at http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/10/06/rollins.democrats.negative/index.html?eref=rss_latest&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_latest+%28RSS%3A+Most+Recent%29

Weekly Opinion/Editorial

VOTE YES ON SQ #748

by Steve Fair

When the 2011 Oklahoma legislature conveys next year one of the most important tasks they will tackle will be re-districting. Re-districting is the process of changing political borders. This often means changing electoral districts or constituency boundaries usually in response to periodic census results. In Oklahoma the legislature draws the boundaries for the congressional, state legislative and the county every ten years- the year immediately following a U.S. Census.

*****

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, re-districting is done by the state legislature in thirty six states. Seven states use a bi-partisan commission to do re-districting. Some Oklahoma voters mistakenly think that State Question # 748 would take the legislature out of redistricting, but that is not the case.

*****

State Question #748 is on the November ballot after passage of a Joint Resolution by the Oklahoma legislature. The authors of SQ #748 are Senate Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, (R-Oklahoma City), and Speaker of the House Chris Benge, (R-Tulsa). If passed, SQ #748 would amend the state constitution by dissolving the current ‘Redistricting Commission,’ which functions if the Oklahoma legislature fails to come to an agreement on re-districting. Currently, the commission is made up of the Attorney General, the State Treasurer and the Superintendent of Public Instruction, all liberal Democrats.

*****

If approved, SQ#748 would expand the commission to seven members. The Governor, Speaker Pro-Tem, and the Speaker of the House would each appoint one Democrat and one Republican to the Commission and the Lt. Governor would serve as Chair of the commission. Keep in mind the commission would only function ‘if’ the legislature and the Governor failed to reach an agreement on re-districting.

*****

In our state history the Redistricting Commission has never functioned. They have never held a meeting or a hearing. There has never been a need for them to function- the legislature has always reached an agreement on re-districting. The commission is a safety net, placed in the constitution, just in case the legislature reached an impasse on re-districting. .

*****

It’s highly unlikely the seven member commission SQ #748 would create would ever decide re-districting in the foreseeable future. With Republicans in control of both Houses of the legislature, the only possible roadblock would be a veto by the Governor that was not overridden by the legislature and that is not likely to happen.

*****

Some vocal critics of SQ #748 have said the measure is a ‘power grab’ by the legislature. They say the current system of having three statewide ‘elected’ officials deciding re-districting ensures the people’s voice in the process. They claim the three statewide elected officials are more accountable to the people because they had to stand for election at the ballot box. They say creating a commission of ‘appointed’ members will cause re-districting to become political and the members of the commission would only be accountable to those who appointed them. Some of my friends are among these critics and they make some valid points. I just happen to disagree with them.

*****

First, re-districting is political. Some of the biggest political battles in our nation’s history have been fought over re-districting. We have all heard the word gerrymander. The word gerrymander was used for the first time in a Boston newspaper in 1812. The word was created in reaction to a redrawing of Massachusetts state senate election districts under the then governor Elbridge Gerry. Gerry signed a bill that redistricted Massachusetts to benefit his Democratic - Republican Party. When mapped, one of the contorted districts in the Boston area was said to resemble the shape of a salamander. That still goes on today. District lines are drawn to protect incumbents or to insure the majority Party stays in power. The Party in power controls the process and draws the boundaries. That’s as political as it gets. It just reinforces the adage that ‘elections have consequences.’

*****

Second, SQ # 748 will give the leaders of the legislature and the Governor more power, but the way the provision is written, it creates a potentially more balanced commission than the current format. If the commission were to function today, it would be composed of three Democrats. Under the proposed rules, no more than four of the seven members would be from one political Party, a more balanced approach.

*****

Passage of State Question #748 will likely not have any impact on re-districting in Oklahoma in the foreseeable future, but it does add a balance to the process that is lacking in the current system. I would urge you to vote Yes on SQ #748.

OH.. YOU LEFT OUT A LOT OF STUFF!
Thorton Melon from Back to School

The Oklahoman has gotten it wrong AGAIN on the State Auditors race! In 2002, the Oklahoman endorsed Jeff McMahan. In 2006, the paper took ‘no position’ in the Auditor’s race- even after evidence of McMahan's misbehavior and crooked dealings were presented to the editorial staff. McMahan resigned in June 2008 after being convicted on charges of bribery and conspiracy. Governor Henry appointed Antlers banker Steve Burrage to complete his term. In their October 8^th edition The Oklahoman recommended Burrage be elected Auditor saying he was a ‘known quantity.’

*****

What is a 'Known Quantity?' According to Webster, it means someone whose character, personality, and behavior are recognized and understood. So, a 'known quantity' doesn't necessarily mean a person of strong character, convictions or values- it just means they are 'known." They could be a crook, a liar, a cheat and be a 'known quantity.' That begs the question- just how much does The Oklahoman know about Steve Burrage and if they knew some of the things listed below, why did they leave them out of their endorsement in today's paper?

*****

The editorial fails to mention that Burrage contributed $2,300 to the John Edwards presidential campaign, $1,000 to the Andrew Rice campaign and is clearly a partisan Democrat? In fact Burrage and his family gave $13,000 to the failed Edwards for President campaign. Edwards and Rice are LIBERAL DEMOCRATS! Is this the type of ideology we want from an elected official in Oklahoma?

*****

The Oklahoman fails to mention how Burrage has clearly botched the Broken Arrow school audit. They also left out the fact Burrage is years behind in performing county government audits. All this, while he travels the state at taxpayer expense to speak to civic clubs on how good of a job he is doing.

*****

Shouldn’t voters know that Burrage’s bank was the one used by former State Senator Gene Stipe and Steve Phipps to funnel taxpayer dollars to their non-existent dog food plant? In the interest of full disclosure, shouldn't the paper tell voters his brother was Stipe's lawyer?

*****

Why hasn't The Oklahoman polled county elected officials across the state asking them their opinion of the job Burrage is doing? Several county elected officials have stated they have been 'cussed out,' by the Auditor. That is inexcusable behavior from an elected official- period! Where is that in the op/ed?

*****

The office of State Auditor is arguably the most important statewide office Oklahoma voters will decide in November. The Auditor is the people’s watchdog and makes sure tax dollars are spent where they are supposed to be and are properly accounted for. It’s critical we have someone above reproach in that office. Burrage fails that test. It’s disappointing the Oklahoman again has failed taxpayers by endorsing a ‘known quantity.’ The last 'known quantity' they endorsed for the race- McMahan- wound up in prison!

*****

In 2010, ‘known quantity,’ ain’t good enough!

Weekly Opinion/EditorialPROTECT THE KIDS!
by Steve Fair

The problems the Oklahoma Department of Human Services has experienced in child welfare cases have been well publicized. The death of two young Oklahoma girls has some people questioning the judgment of child welfare case workers and judges.

*****
Kelsey Briggs was just three years old when she was murdered on October 11, 2005. The cause of death was blunt force trauma to the abdomen. Her stepfather was arrested on first degree murder. Her mother was later charged with two felonies of Child Abuse and Enabling Child Abuse. In April 2006 Kelsey's body was exhumed for a second autopsy where sexual abuse was documented. The stepfather's charges were amended to add the sexual abuse.

*****

Aja Johnson was a seven year old Geronimo girl who was kidnapped and murdered by her stepfather, Lester Hobbs, after he had killed her mother in late January of this year. Aja’s badly decomposed body was found along with Hobbs body near Norman in March, nearly two months after she was kidnapped.

*****
According to Kathie Briggs, Kelsey's grandmother, Yolanda Hunter, a DHS Lincoln County case worker, was one of the primary caseworkers in the Kelsey Smith-Briggs and Aja Johnson child death cases. Hunter retired in July at her own request.

*****
After Briggs death, the legislature contracted in 2009 with an independent firm Hornby Zeller Associates to ‘audit’ the Oklahoma child welfare system. According to the study, Oklahoma had nearly twice the U.S. average of children in state custody. Thirteen children out of every one thousand in Oklahoma were in DHS custody. The audit criticized Oklahoma DHS for failing to acknowledge they were a part of a larger child welfare system.

*****
"Too many of DHS’ relationships reveal a lack of respect for those other parties, with foster parents treated as dispensable, judges treated with disrespect by not providing workers with the proper training to appear in court, and parents’ attorneys and Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) not getting straight answers,” the audit report states.

*****
State Representative Ron Peters, (R-Tulsa), Chairman of the State House Appropriations Subcommittee on Human Services said in 2009, "If we can just get the number of kids coming into the system down to the national average, we’ll have half as many kids coming into the system. That addresses the workload issue. It addresses the stress levels. It addresses a lot of things.”

*****
Some observations about the Oklahoma child welfare system:
*****

First, Peters' statement about getting the number of children in state custody to the national average is callous and lacks compassion. Citing statistical goals is appropriate if we are dealing with reducing the number of bureaucrats in state government, but not abused children. Hitting numbers should not be the focus of what the DHS Child Welfare team does. They should be protecting the kids first- and statistics shouldn’t be a factor in the case.

*****
Second, blaming DHS workers and judges for violent acts against children is misguided and unfair. Case workers and judges are only human and don’t have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight when they make their evaluation/judgment. That doesn’t excuse shoddy, sloppy, inconsistent investigative work by a lazy case worker or poor judgment by a clueless judge, but if they have done all they can to insure the child is not placed in a dangerous environment, then making the case worker or judge the scapegoat is clearly wrong.
*****

Third, perhaps Oklahoma should think ‘outside the box,’ for the solution. Last week Peters released a study on the privatization of child welfare in Oklahoma. Peters, R-Tulsa, said. “I think that all options must be examined, including privatization. At the end of the day, we have to have a system that serves our children.” Is privatizing the way to go?
*****
Thirteen states across the U.S. have privatized some of their child welfare services, including Kansas. In a comprehensive evaluation of the privatizing of child welfare, Childrensrights, org says, “Public agencies should not expect to save money through privatization, given the real costs of developing, implementing, and overseeing a privatization initiative and the costs associated with providing a full array of services to children and families under expectations of higher quality.”
*****
But while Oklahoma may not save money, we could get “better” case work through the private sector. Sounds like something that should be explored
*****
Last week, Oklahoma Speaker of the House Designate Kris Steele (R-Shawnee) questioned several state child abuse experts on the contact DHS had with Aja Johnson before her death. “The thing that stood out to me is that there is a long track record of DHS involvement in the life of Aja and her family,” said Steele, R-Shawnee. “Did the state of Oklahoma do everything possible to try and protect this child? I'm not insinuating that did not occur. I just want to make sure.”

*****
Steele said he's considering legislation for next session that would require more background checks on family members before children are placed in a home, and more sharing of information between child welfare agencies and law enforcement. Steele is on the right track. In a down budget year, one area not to scrimp on is protecting those who can’t protect themselves.