OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE HAS A SLEW OF NEWBIES!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LOOKING BACK!

by Steve Fair

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SQ#835 removes all rules in the primary!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LAW OF THE JUNGLE!

by Steve Fair

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PLAY THE HAND YOU'RE DEALT!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LEVERAGE

by Steve Fair

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

LYING LIAR WHO LIED!

by Steve Fair

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

KICKING & SCREAMING!

by Steve Fair

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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