Finally!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

FINALLY!

by Steve Fair

Real workers compensation reform is within sight in Oklahoma!  Senate Bill #1062, authored by Senator Brian Bingman, (R-Sapulpa) passed the State House 74-24 last week.  It now heads back to the Senate for approval on the House amendments that were added and then to the Governor’s desk for signature.

SB#1062 will move Oklahoma from a judiciary workers compensation system to an administrative system. Oklahoma is one of only a handful of states that still uses the court system to settle workers comp disputes.  It is an adversarial system that reduces the amount of payment to injured workers and forces Oklahoma employers to pay some of the highest workers comp insurance rates in the country.  Under the current system, workers who are injured on the job could wait years for a benefits judgment due to the slow and costly legal process under the current judicial system.

SB#1062 will implement a system similar to Arkansas.  Back in the early 1990s, Arkansas moved from a system similar to what Oklahoma has to an administrative system.  Since then, workers compensation insurance premiums to employers have dropped steadily.  Last year, Arkansas’ workers comp premiums were 63% of the national average, Oklahoma’s was 147% of the national average.

"There's too much litigation in Oklahoma," said Allyn Tatum, a former Arkansas Workers Compensation Commission chairman and Tyson Foods executive.  "In Arkansas," said Tatum, "the incentive is for employers to put employees back to work, and for employees to go back to work."

In an interview with Capitalbeatok, Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner John Doak said, “Workers’ Compensation reform is a subject that I identified as critical and important to our state from the moment I was elected. Oklahoma has one of the highest average costs of Workers Compensation benefits in the nation at a rate of $830 per employee. Because Arkansas and Texas are under $300 per employee, this has not only had an impact on our state economy, but also limits the growth of local businesses.”

Oklahoma Labor Commissioner Mark Costello told CapitalBeatOK what might, politically, be the most significant thing about anticipated passage of the administration system, saying, “The days where trial lawyers dominated Oklahoma politics for their own economic interests are at an end. After all, it is workers’ comp, not lawyers’ comp. 

Three observations about worker’s comp reform:

First, don’t expect existing Oklahoma businesses to start hiring more workers immediately because of the reduction in workers comp premiums.  It takes some time for the impact of a price reduction to filter its way to the public.  The long term impact will be significant, particularly on the recruitment of new businesses to the Sooner state.  For years, the knock on Oklahoma by potential businesses was we didn’t have right-to-work; we had high workers compensation premiums and a state income tax.  Two out of three of the issues have been addressed and the legislature is making progress on the income tax (reducing it to below 5%).

Second, credit the Republican-led legislature with having the courage to address the issue.  Past legislatures have nibbled around the edges of workers comp reform for years, making some progress, but still leaving the lawyers in the system.  They were simply afraid of upsetting the powerful trial lawyer lobby who didn’t give up easy.  When Senator Anthony Sykes, (R-Moore) presented workers comp reform two years ago, he was attacked relentlessly by the trial lawyer lobby.  While Sykes didn’t waffle or crack under the pressure, their tactics were effective enough with other legislators to derail a total change in the system. 

Third, workers compensation reform(SB#1062) is a win-win!  Oklahoma’s injured workers will get more money in settlements.  Oklahoma employers will pay lower premiums.  The system will be more civil and less adversarial.  What’s not to like about that? 

Thanks to the legislature and Governor Fallin for addressing an issue that others have simply kicked down the road.

Common Core is Rotten!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

COMMON CORE IS ROTTEN!

by Steve Fair

The American Diploma Project(ADP) was created in 1996 by the National Governors Association and some private sector business leaders to help states raise academic standards in public schools to better prepare students for college and life. The American Diploma Project had specific goals:

First, it aligned standards and assessments with the knowledge and skills required beyond high school. Second, ADP required all high school students to take challenging courses that actually prepare them for life after high school. No more basket weaving or hay hauling. They were supposed to take more math and science. Third, the project asked state education leaders to hold schools accountable for graduating students.

Fast forward a few years and the ADP has morphed into Common Core Standards. The Common Core State Standards Initiative brings diverse state curricula into a common one size fits all for all states. Just another in a long line of failed attempts by the feds to fix the public school system, Common Core has become the flavor of the month.

Forty five states, including Oklahoma, has adopted Common Core, but not without controversy. In a letter sent to Governor Fallin last month, a number of state pastors wrote, “Let’s restore American exceptionalism and reject the [Common] Core Curriculum. We’re smart enough to make decisions about our own children and our own schools. Let’s return Oklahoma schools to Oklahoma control.”

One of the holdouts is Virginia and officials maintain that the state’s Standards of Learning are sufficiently challenging and they don’t want the feds to tell them how to run their schools. The fact is there is no indication or proof that higher standards result in higher student achievement. In a 2009 study by Russ Whitehurst of Brookings Institute found there was little or no detectable difference in scores between students from states with weak content standards as compared by to states with higher standards.

More recently, Tom Loveless from the Brookings Institute wrote a research paper entitled, “Predicting the Effect of Common Core Standards on Student Achievement. Loveless came to the same conclusion as Whitehurst; there is no direct coalition between higher standards in education and student achievement.

So why is Common Core a bad idea:

First, Common Core usurps local control over education. The quality of education in the U.S. has been in decline since we started to nationally fund the education system. Clearly these ‘one size fits all’ programs have failed to produce the results promised. Not to mention, the U.S. Constitution clearly delegates the federal government no power to determine the content, methods, testing, or staffing procedures of local American schools.

Second, we don’t know how much Common Core will cost. According to Eagle Forum, Common Core will cost the state of Washington $300 million to implement in a time when they already face a 2 billion dollar deficit. Oklahoma State Representative Gus Blackwell, (R-Laverne) said that taxpayers shouldn’t pay for a program that little is known about. Last week, Blackwell filed a House Joint Resolution to stop further implementation of Common Core until more is known about how much it will cost.

Third, we have absolutely no proof Common Core will result in better education. Take your pick- from the National Defense of Education Act in 1958 to Head Start to No Child Left Behind, the federal government’s track record of improving education has proven to be dismal.

At the recent Republican National Committee meeting in Hollywood, we unanimously passed a resolution stating that Common Core education standards are a bad idea and should be rejected by the states. At Saturday’s Oklahoma state GOP convention, the delegates unanimously approved a platform with a plank opposing the implementation of Common Core in Oklahoma.

I have talked to dozens of teachers through the years(I’m married to one) who have improved their student’s test scores and achievements, but not one educator has cited ‘higher standards’ as the reason the improvement happened. Curriculum is certainly a factor, but how teachers are trained, motivated and supported in the classroom is the key.

Term Limit the Judges!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

TERM LIMIT THE JUDGES!

by Steve Fair

The Oklahoma Supreme Court is no friend to the unborn.  In December, the nine member panel voted to overturn HB #1970 that would have simply required certain abortion-inducing drugs be administered in the way deemed safest by the FDA.  The liberal Oklahoma Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional because they said HB#1970 violated the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1992 ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.   They also overturned HB #2780, which required that women have an ultrasound performed and described to her within an hour before having an abortion.

~~~~~

HB #1970 was defeated by a unanimous opinion from all eight judges and HB #2780 was defeated by seven of the judges. One judge recused herself from the case of HB #2780 because she had issued an injunction against the law in 2010.

~~~~~

After the actions of the State Supreme Court, Oklahoma State Attorney General Scott Pruitt filed a petition on March 4^th for review of HB #1970 with the U.S. Supreme Court. “We have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review Oklahoma’s law that seeks to provide full and accurate information to women about the outcomes of abortion,” Pruitt said. “We have an obligation to protect our citizens and to make sure a life-altering abortion is held to the highest medical standards.”

~~~~~

Last Monday, Americans United for Life filed a brief with the high court supporting Oklahoma's appeal. “Lives have been lost through cavalier use of dangerous, life-ending drugs,” said the group's president and chief executive officer, Charmaine Yoest.  Seventy nine (79) of Oklahoma’s 149 legislators, a majority of the two chambers, joined in the petition with AUL.

Yoest said the abortion industry is big business and it’s all about money.  The abortion industry's motivation in adopting protocols that endanger women and girls is as transparent as it is chilling.  Their flagrant misuse of abortion-inducing drugs means abortion providers can push these drugs on more women and pocket larger profits than they would receive if they followed the protocols put in place by the FDA. Oklahoma's law was enacted to stop this dangerous and exploitative scheme,” Yoest said.

~~~~~

Michelle Movahed, staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, the New York-based group that filed legal challenges to the state measure, said clearly the law is unconstitutional. “The law had only one purpose — to make it impossible for women to access a medically proven safe, effective and legal alternative to surgical abortion,” she said. “We are confident that the nation's highest court will reject this latest effort to chip away at women's constitutional rights and uphold the sound decisions of the state district judge and the Oklahoma Supreme Court.”

~~~~~

On a related note, the state of Indiana passed and signed into law last week similar legislation to the two bills just described.  The legislation in Indiana treats currently unregulated abortion-inducing drugs, such as RU-486, the same as surgical abortions by requiring women seeking either type of abortion to undergo a pre-procedure ultrasound and receive a state-designed "informed consent" brochure featuring color photos of fetuses at various stages of development.

~~~~~

How did conservative Oklahoma get such liberal thinkers on the state Supreme Court?  It doesn’t make sense.  Seven of the nine current members were appointed by a Democrat Governor, six by Henry,- just two appointed by a Republican. 

~~~~~

An Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice is appointed by the Governor for life or until they are not ‘retained’ by the voters.  The Oklahoma Judicial Nomination Commission, a fifteen member group of attorneys and non-attorneys, interview and vet possible candidates and then present finalists to the Governor who makes the final decision.  After appointment, the justices serve until the next general state election. At that time, they must face a ‘retention election.’ If retained, they begin a six-year term. 

~~~~~

Here’s the rub- Oklahoma has never turned a judge out of office since we begin using the retention ballot system.  Clearly the retention ballot system doesn’t work.  There is no way we have not had judges who needed to be out of office.  But no one knows anything about the judges so many just don’t vote or vote yes.  

~~~~~

It is past time Oklahoma enacted term limits for judges.  Legislation proposing that has been proposed in the last couple of sessions, but hasn’t gotten anywhere.  Contact your State Senator and Representative and ask them to support judicial term limits or go to a system where voters directly elect Appellate Court judges.  

~~~~~

So long as these appointed and retained liberals are on the Oklahoma Supreme Court, no baby is safe in the womb.  We must stand up for those who can’t stand up for themselves.

The Iron Lady!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

THE IRON LADY!

by Steve Fair

The ‘Iron Lady’ passed away on Monday.  Margaret Thatcher, former Prime Minister of Great Britain was 88.  Thatcher was the daughter of a grocer, who was also a Methodist preacher.  Maggie rose to become the first and only female Prime Minister of Britain.  She was a chemist and a lawyer, but she was best known for her uncompromising style of leadership.  She was unapologetically a conservative.  Thatcher and former President Ronald Reagan shared a unique friendship because they both believed in the free market system and private enterprise.  Thatcher served as Prime Minister of Great Britain for eleven(11) years, the longest in modern history.

Thatcher got the nickname, “Iron Lady” after a Soviet Union journalist described her that way in an article because she would not compromise in her stance against communism.  But she wasn’t just tough on foreign policy, Thatcher expected people to take personal responsibility in her country and described the attitude of most Brits in 1985 in the following way:

“I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!" "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbor and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations.”

What made Thatcher unique in the political world? 

First, Maggie was a risk taker.  Her stand against labor unions in England was one that was risky from a political standpoint, but it was right for the country.  Great Britain’s manufacturing base was leaving the country.  Jobs were being lost, productivity was down and the country was headed to a welfare state (sound familiar?)  Thatcher correctly pointed out the country’s economy was headed to ruin.  She persuaded enough members of Parliament she was right and Great Britain made some strategic changes that turned their economy around.

Most elected officials base their votes/positions on issues on how it will impact their next election, but Thatcher never worried about that.  She was willing to risk her political future on a righteous cause.  That is the stuff great leaders are made of.

Second, Thatcher was unwavering after she determined the right course.  She never governed based on polling data.  When told that taking a stand against organized labor in England would end her political career, Thatcher simply shrugged the admonition off and stayed the course.  Effective leadership can get lonely.  Good leaders are often standing alone.  Thatcher was ethical and consistent in her positions.  Unlike the majority of politicians, who are guided by the political winds, Thatcher didn’t change.  There were times in England when Thatcher was not popular with the average citizen.  But her determination and resolve to stay the course changed not only her country, but the world.

Third, Thatcher accomplished all this as a woman.  Thatcher had to overcome the stereotype that a female leader just couldn’t handle the pressure or be tough.  Like Esther in the Bible, Maggie proved that women can lead and can do so quite effectively.  She surrounded herself with competent staff and advisors who shared her vision for Great Britain.  

We need more political leaders like Thatcher- male and female.  We need elected officials who are ethical, unwavering and risk takers.   The ‘Iron Lady’ truly made the world a better place to live.

COBURN IS RARE POLITICIAN!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

COBURN IS RARE POLITICIAN!

by Steve Fair

“Washington is broke,” U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, (R-Muskogee) said as he opened his town hall meeting in Duncan on Monday evening.  “We have too many career politicians in Congress who have no real world experience,” Coburn said.  At the town hall, Dr. Coburn fielded questions ranging from illegal immigration to gun rights.  Several in the audience were concerned about Coburn’s public support of expanding background checks for gun sales.  “No one has a stronger record on the second amendment than I do,” Coburn said.  ”I do think we need to make sure we are trying to keep guns out of the hands of known criminals and those who have mental illness that has them living in an alternate reality.” 

First, Washington is broke- both fiscally and operationally- and it is broke because the American people have elected politicians who have broken it.  We don’t have to look any further than in the mirror to find out who is to blame.  People stopped paying attention to their government and holding their elected officials accountable.  It appears there is some ‘awaking’ in the citizens of our country- aka Tea Party- and that is encouraging, but unless these new ‘experts’ on politics stay hooked up, we can only expect the same government we have always had.  Washington is broke, but we can’t permanently fix Washington without fixing what is broke in our own city, county and state.  Permanent change must begin from the bottom up.  We need to flush out career politicians from the courthouse to the Whitehouse.  As Coburn correctly said- “they(career politicians) have no point of reference in life other than government.” 

Second, the 2^nd amendment is critical to our country’s survival- even to those who hate guns.  Those who are furiously protective of the second amendment understand that.  The second amendment isn’t about duck hunting- it was put there by our founding fathers to insure us the right  to protect ourselves against our own government.  Even if you don’t own a gun, you should stand up for the 2^nd amendment and applaud those who seek to defend it. If it weren’t there, it’s likely America wouldn’t have survived 230 plus years.  Our founding fathers understood the nature of man and how that power corrupts, hence they included the 2^nd amendment as a means for citizens to protect themselves from an overreaching, tyrannical government.

Third, Oklahoma and America is going to miss Tom Coburn in the U.S. Senate when he completes his second term in 2016.  Senator Coburn is a rare politician.  He doesn’t really care if he doesn’t get re-elected, but he really cares about America.  Dr. Tom served three terms(six years) in the U.S. House representing the people of Little Dixie (SE Oklahoma).  He then came home to Muskogee in 2000 to practice medicine when he could easily have won re-election and stayed in Congress.  While Senator Don Nickles decided to not seek a fifth term to the Senate in 2004, Coburn jumped in late and easily won the GOP primary. 

In a field that included the popular Mayor of Oklahoma City, a sitting Corporation Commissioner and the good doctor, Coburn made one of the shortest but most effective campaign speeches ever at the 2004 Oklahoma State Republican Convention.  His two worthy opponents had waxed long and eloquent detailing their political pedigrees and credentials to the weary delegates.  When it came time for Dr. Tom to speak he stepped to the microphone and simply told the OKGOP delegates; “You know who I am and you know what I’ll do.”  As he left the stage he was given a standing ovation.  I whispered to then State GOP Chairman Gary Jones, “The primary race is over.”  Why did Coburn evoke such a response from a seasoned crowd of politician groupies?  Because Coburn is a rare politician- he really does what  he says he will do.  He has never made votes or decisions on how it will impact his ‘likability’ numbers or his donor base.   

Senator Coburn has served Oklahoma well- by the time he leaves the Senate, he will have given eighteen years of his life serving Oklahomans in Washington and not only Oklahoma, but America owns him a debt of gratitude. 

TOTALLY FREE- NOT!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

NO SUCH THING AS FREE!

by Steve Fair

Three years ago last week, President Obama signed into law the Affordable Care Act- aka ObamaCare.  Oklahoma government and the majority of Oklahoma citizens haven’t embraced it.  In fact in November 2010, Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly voted to amend the state constitution to allow citizens to opt out of ObamaCare.  But that doesn’t mean ObamaCare is going away.

On January 1, 2014, all American citizens must have qualifying insurance coverage and large employers must provide that insurance or face stiff penalties.  That is also the date when the ‘health care exchanges’ will go into effect.  The exchanges are websites where citizens can buy health care insurance that is federally subsidized.  Thus far Governor Fallin and the Oklahoma legislature have rejected the federal money to establish a state government operated health care exchange.

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt has filed a lawsuit challenging the Internal Revenue Service’s unlawful attempt to impose ObamaCare’s taxes on exempt employers and individuals. “Oklahoma’s lawsuit has never been about the policy or politics of the Affordable Care Act; it is about the legality of the IRS rule and ensuring that the federal government complies with implementation of its own law,”  Pruitt said. Along with challenging the new IRS rule, the complaint asks the Court to recognize that the Supreme Court’s designation of the health care act’s individual mandate as a tax means it no longer conflicts with Oklahoma’s constitutional provision that says no law or rule can “compel any person, employer or health care provider to participate in any health care system.” 

The Cato Institute last week issued a reported titled, “50 Vetoes: How States Can Stop the Obama Health Care Law,” which urged other states to follow Oklahoma’s lead and refuse to establish exchanges.  They also said Pruitt’s lawsuit was one that could be the downfall of ObamaCare.  Thirty three other states have said they are not building exchanges, but none have the lawsuit challenging the authority of the feds to impose a tax without statutory authority.  You can read the entire report at http://www.cato.org/multimedia/daily-podcast/50-vetoes-how-states-can-stop-obama-health-care-law

"Oklahoma is in a unique position with the only active lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act to hold the federal government accountable in how it implements the law.  Now that the Supreme Court has deemed the ACA a tax, and therefore constitutional, the federal government must follow the law and proper procedures, and that is not being done,”  Pruitt said. If Oklahoma doesn’t build an exchange, neither the subsidies nor the penalties can come to the state, Pruitt argues.

“A critical mass of states exercising their vetoes over exchanges and the Medicaid expansion can force Congress to reconsider, and hopefully repeal, the rest of this counterproductive law,” the Cato report says.  Don’t bet on that.  So called trailer bills or clean up bills are seldom run and when they are they usually don’t make a great deal of difference.  That doesn’t mean states shouldn’t pressure their federal delegations to work for repeal of ObamaCare.  

One of the most controversial provisions of ObamaCare is the expansion of Medicaid.  Under OmabamaCare, the federal government would pay 100 percent of the cost of new benefits for the first three years of Medicaid expansion. After that, a share of the costs would be shifted to the states, with the state’s share capping at 10 percent in 2022. Fallin has argued that the state can’t rely on the federal reimbursement promises.

Three observations:

First, companies will not pay fines and penalties- their customers and clients will.    Any fine or penalty accessed to a company will be simply passed onto consumers in the form of a price increase.  In a down economy the last thing we need is increases in goods and services.  And think of the snowball effect these increases will have- every company will pass not only their health care increase down to the consumer, but the increase they received from their suppliers. 

Second, there is simply NO such thing as FREE healthcare.  Somebody pays for it.  Either the consumer, the taxpayer or the health care provider.  While it would be great to be able to provide health care to every American at no charge, the federal government simply cannot afford to do it.  America is drowning in a sea of debt and unless we get federal spending under control, we will not survive as a county. 

Third, we are quickly becoming a welfare state in America.  There are less Americans working as a percentage of our population than in the past thirty years.  Yet today, those same citizens are outraged while the government(taxpayers) balk at providing them food, healthcare, and free cell phones.  They fail to see that ObamaCare is just another way to give government more control over their lives and make them a slave to the government.

The ONLY free gift mankind has ever gotten is the gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ.  Rest assured, ObamaCare is not free, somebody is paying the bill and it is probably you.

Incarceration Rates must be dealt with!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

Incarceration rates must be dealt with!

by Steve Fair

According to the US Department of Justice, Justice Reinvestment is a data-driven approach to improve public safety, reduce corrections and related criminal justice spending, and reinvest savings in strategies that can decrease crime and strengthen neighborhoods. The purpose of justice reinvestment is to manage and allocate criminal justice populations more cost-effectively, generating savings that can be reinvested in evidence-based strategies that increase public safety while holding offenders accountable. States and localities engaging in justice reinvestment collect and analyze data on drivers of criminal justice populations and costs, identify and implement changes to increase efficiencies, and measure both the fiscal and public safety impacts of those changes.

In his last year in office(2012), former Oklahoma Speaker of the House Kris Steele, (R-Shawnee), embraced the justice reinvestment plan and authored HB #2131 which was designed to make the criminal justice system more efficient and cost-effective. The bill was signed into law in May.  At the time of the bill’s signing, Steele said, “It’s (HB #2131) increasing public safety and it's being more responsible with taxpayers' resources.” Steele’s goal was to decrease the number of non-violent offenders in Oklahoma prisons by implementing a system that provided alternate punishment to incarceration.

The JRI plan starts by establishing a bipartisan working group of elected and appointed officials to work with criminal justice policy experts. This working group then consults with prosecutors, public defenders, judges and corrections and law enforcement officials to work through two phases in a 2-3 year period.  In Phase 1, they analyze data, develop policy options, and adopt new policies.  In Phase 2, they implement the new policies and evaluate how well they are working. 

At the time, JRI was lauded as a great idea by The Oklahoman.  In an editorial, they wrote, “This proposal also would apply the brakes to the runaway train that is Oklahoma's prison population. Instead of growing by more than 2,500 to a total of 29,720 in fiscal year 2021, as is projected, the inmate population would increase by about 600 during that time. Beginning in fiscal year 2014, the slower-growing prison population would save the state $13 million annually.”

After the establishment of the JRI working group, co chaired by Steele and Oklahoma County DA David Prater, nineteen total members were appointed to start the process.  The Working Group was supposed to be the supreme authority in the implementation of JRI, but evidently that is not the case. 

Last week, during the Working Group’s meeting, Governor Mary Fallin’s Chief Counsel Steve Mullins called the Working Group an ad hoc committee that didn’t have the authority to implement JRI.  After a heated exchange, Steele and Prater resigned.

Interestingly just the night before the meeting, the Oklahoma House passed HB # 2042 authored by Representative Jason Murphey, (R-Guthrie) by a 57-35 margin.  If it passes the Senate and is signed into law, it would formalize the implementation of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative.  “The JRI initiative is part of a ‘smart on crime’ philosophy that I have long advocated for,” said Fallin. “I am absolutely committed to seeing this initiative succeed. We need to get non-violent offenders whose crimes are related to addiction and substance abuse the help they need to get sober and be constructive members of their community. That’s why it’s so important we get JRI right.

The Tulsa World attacked Murphey’s bill calling it a ‘backstab’ of Steele.  In an editorial they said; “Conservative lawmakers elsewhere, such as Texas, have instituted JRI reforms with stunning results. Texas has its lowest violent crime rate in 30 years and closed a prison because of declining prison growth. If Oklahoma does nothing, someday it will end up with a court ordering it to depopulate prisons. State leaders had the chance to do this themselves, systematically and rationally. But, oh no. Our leaders are smarter than those in Texas and elsewhere, right? What's the real reason they don't want to contain prison growth?”

The bottom line is Oklahoma has a high incarceration rate and needs to address it.  Oklahoma's rate of female incarceration is more than twice the national rate and is increasing every year. Oklahoma's incarceration rate ranks fourth nationally for males and first for females. Approximately 24,000 people are incarcerated in Oklahoma today.  JRI has worked in other states.  Oklahoma government must commit to seeking other alternates to just throwing lawbreakers into the slammer.

On a personal note, the Stephens County Republican Party lost a true friend last week when Ed Hicks died.  Ed was unapologeticly Republican, but more importantly he was a patriot.  I remember him giving me a picture of his grandchildren years ago when I was running for the State Senate and telling me that was why he was so passionate about his country.  Ed put his money where his mouth was when it came to politics.  I will miss him.