Putin is the 'devil' you know!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

UNSTABLE RUSSIA!

by Steve Fair

     A failed coup in Russia is dominating the news.  Led by Yevgeny Prigozhin, a businessman, who founded a paramilitary organization called the Wagner Group, the rebellion failed, but his soldiers were not defeated.  They simply stood down and stopped marching toward Moscow to ‘avoid bloodshed’.  For his part in the uprising, Prigozhin was exiled to Belarus by the Kremlin.  He has yet to turn up there and speculation is he has never left Russia.  Prigozhin is a long-time ally of Vladimir Putin(his caterer), but recently has been critical of Russia military leaders, accusing them of incompetence after several of his Wagner mercenaries were killed in the war against Ukraine.  Three observations:

     First, be careful what you wish for.  While Putin is far from reasonable, he is the devil you know.  Who comes to power after Putin could be- and probably will be- far more radical.  Many believe, including some in Russia, the Wagner Group has been used by Russia for ‘plausible deniability’ to obscure the true casualties and costs of Russian foreign wars.  Millions of rubles have made their way into Prigozhin’s pockets with Putin’s blessing, but just who is Wagner?

      The Wagner Group has 50,000 soldiers, many of which are former convicts.  Think Dirty Dozen times 4,000!  Think Blackstone, but with no ethics/values.  The group derives their name from Richard Wagner, a German said to be Hitler’s favorite composer.  Many in the group espouse Neo-Nazi ideology and foreign analysist believe Wagner is more dangerous and radical than the Kremlin.  Wagner used Russia military bases, is transported by Russian military aircraft and uses Russian health care services, so they clearly had the support of Russian leadership.  Wagner is very popular with the Russian public.  The group is patriotic to the motherland and Prigozhin is treated like a rock star by the Russian public.  The danger is the distinct possibility a radical, who wouldn’t hesitate to hit the nuke button, comes to power in Russia. 

     Second, isolation/insulation is hard to accomplish in today’s world.  Technology has made the world smaller.  The Internet has made it possible for people across the world to interact with each other in real time.  The web has given people access to news (fake and real), information, and resources they didn’t have access to before.  Russia has attempted to keep their citizens isolated and shielded, but 86% have access to the web.  In America, it is 93%- China 75%.  Prigozhin, who posts numerous times a day on social media, used technology in his coup attempt.  Access to information makes despotism difficult.  Russia and China citizens have observed how other governments work and gotten a taste of liberty.  It’s next to impossible to put the genie back in the bottle.   

     Third, expect Russia to be a major topic in the 2024 election.  If Putin is overthrown, President Biden will take credit- and so will former President Trump.  If Prigozhin comes to power and Russia becomes a radical state, inculpation by both will transpire.  If Ukraine wins the war, both will take credit for the victory.  No matter what takes place, the American public has not heard the end of Russia. 

     Relations between America and Russia has not been good for over a century.  Some say it is because the U.S. won the Cold War.  A 2018 poll found that 85% of Russians had a negative opinion of America.  Bois Kagarlitsky, a Russian intellectual, says this bitterness by Russians is ironic.  “We want to be like America.  We are angry that America is allowed to invade minor nations and we are not,” Kararlitsky says.   The key issue is motive.  The United States’ stated purpose for war is to defend or to liberate- Russia invaded Ukraine to conquer.  Therein lies the contrast. 

Catholic School to get Oklahoma tax dollars!

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

THE RELIGION OF THE UNRELIGIOUS!

by Steve Fair

         On June 5, Oklahoma became the first state in the country to approve a religious charter school.  The 3-2 vote will allow St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual Charter School’s application to receive Oklahoma tax dollars.  Immediately after the vote, Dr. Robert Franklin, the board chairman resigned.  Franklin said those who voted to approve did so in direct violation of the state constitution.

     Governor Kevin Stitt applauded the approval, calling it a win for religious and education freedom.  Attorney General Gentner Drummond said the move was unconstitutional and a blow at the heart of religious liberty.  Drummon vowed to challenge the school board’s decision in court.  So did Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a liberal think tank. Ryan Walters, Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction, says he urged the board to approve and believes their action gives parents more choices in their child’s education.  Three observations:

     First, government money always comes with strings.  While St. Isidore may get tax dollars, with those funds comes the long arm of government.  Many religious private schools understand that and do not/will not accept government money because they don’t want government poking its unwanted nose into their business.  With tax money comes rules and regulations.  Taking tax dollars invites scrutiny and submission to an overreaching government.   

      Second, tax dollars are already being used to teach a religion-Secular Humanism.  John Dewey, often cited as the most prominent American intellectual in the first half of the 20^th century, is considered be the father of modern public education.  Dewey believed humans can be ethical and moral without a belief in religion or God, aka secular humanism.  Dewey was responsible for transferring some of his radical, secular ideas to the classroom and shaped today’s public education.  Public school textbooks are screened to exclude any reference to religion or God.  They must be secular or non-religious. 

     In 1961, the no-religion/no God ‘secular humanism’ and ‘atheism’ were acknowledged to be a religion in a Supreme Court case.  In Torcaso vs. Watkins, Justice Hugo Black wrote: “The state, nor the federal government, can constitutionally force a person to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.”  Among the non-religions cited by Black were Secular Humanism.  Black was far from a conservative, but he recognized unbelief was actually a belief system.  Much like when the apostle Paul declared the ‘unknown God’ to the Greeks, Black’s ruling recognized cynicism was confidence.  It takes more faith to believe no one created the world than to believe someone did.

     Third, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has already ruled regarding use of tax dollars by religious schools.  In a 6-3 vote in June 2022, the SCOTUS ruled faith-based schools CAN get public money.  Chief Justice John Roberts  wrote the majority opinion saying Maine’s exclusion of religious schools not being able to get public funding violates the First Amendment. 

     After the SCOTUS ruling, AG Drummond’s predecessor John O’Connor, issued an AG opinion consistent with the SCOTUS ruling.  Drummond defeated O’Connor in the GOP primary and when he was sworn into office, he rescinded O’Connor’s opinion.  In the reversal, Drummond (a lawyer) contended the SCOTUS ruling was narrow and did not carte blanche open the door to religious schools getting tax dollars.  Clearly, Stitt and Walters (not lawyers) disagree. 

     Drummond’s position has angered many conservatives and school choice advocates in GOP ranks.  Some believe Drummond plans to run for governor in 2026.  If that is the case, angering conservatives by taking a stand against religion isn’t the way to the Republican nomination.

Indictment isn’t about documents- it is about 2024 election!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

NOT ABOUT DOCUMENTS!

by Steve Fair

    

     Former President Donald Trump made history when he was indicted last week by Department of Justice (DOJ) Special Counsel Jack Smith on 37 counts of mishandling sensitive government secrets.  Trump becomes the first president to be indicted for federal crimes in our nation’s history and if convicted faces decades in jail.  Trump’s personal aide, Walt Nauta, was hit as well with 6 felony charges of obstruction of justice for moving boxes (allegedly at Trump’s direction) of supposedly classified documents.  Trump will be arraigned in Miami on Tuesday in front of federal district judge Aileen Cannon.  Cannon, chosen at random, was appointed to the federal bench by Trump in 2020.   She is reportedly not recusing himself.

      Trump’s former Attorney General William Barr has been critical of his former boss.  Barr says the DOJ gave the former president ample opportunity to turn over the documents.  Barr says Trump would not have been indicted had he simply turned over the documents.  Barr says the government acted responsibly and Trump acted irresponsibly in the attempt to retrieve what Barr describes were government documents.   Fox News legal analysist, Andy McCarty said that if just half of what is alleged in the indictment is true that Trump is ‘toast.’  Four observations:

     First, indictments are one side of a story.  Every story/yarn- like a pancake- has two sides.  Indictments are allegations- not always factual claims.  Just because the DOJ says a law has been broken doesn’t mean it has.  It still has to be proven beyond a shadow doubt in front of a jury.  The most damning piece of evidence appears to be a voice recording of Trump telling a book publisher and others he was showing them classified documents, which is against the law.  Is it possible Trump was trying to ‘fan the flames’ by recording the meeting and hopes to use the indictment to his political advantage? 

     Second, Trump has been unequally treated.  Former U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton was not indicted by the DOJ for the same thing Trump is being indicted for.  That is selective enforcement/prosecution.  Hunter Biden’s secret payments from the Ukraine government and President Biden’s involvement in that has been largely ignored by the DOJ.  Americans are losing respect for the DOJ because the rule of law is not equally enforced.  

     Third, Trump should dial down the hyperbole.  Speaking to GOP activists at state conventions on Saturday, the former president called Smith ‘deranged,’ and said Smith’s wife ‘hates’ him.  Smith may have a political agenda, but he is far from insane.  Trump should focus on addressing the charges and not the prosecutor’s mental state.      

     Fourth, the goal is to derail Trump’s 2024 bid for president.  If he would agree to not run, the DOJ would no doubt drop all charges posthaste.  They want Trump to drop out.  Not likely to happen.  Plan B would be for Trump to win the GOP nomination and lose the general election.  More likely to happen.  Trump did not get the conservative Democrat vote in 2020 like he did in 2016.  Polls show the indictment could hurt Trump with those swing voters in the general.  Rest assured, this isn’t about documents- it is about an election.

     In the coming days/weeks/months, Americans should remember four things: (1) a guilty person can be framed.  (2) blind loyalty can create a false sense of security and can breed corruption.  (3) excusing punishment for misconduct because someone else is misbehaving is not an acceptable excuse to misbehave. (4) every American has a constitutional right to their day in court and burden of proof falls on the government. 

      The irony is that if the trial goes past the 2024 election and Trump is the newly elected POTUS, he could simply pardon himself on his first day in office.

Until citizens answer the CLARION CALL, expect more of the same!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

CLARION CALL!

by Steve Fair

 

     Last week, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled Senate Bill #1503, which banned abortions after a fetal heartbeat, and House Bill#4327, which banned abortion except in the case of rape or incest, were unconstitutional.  Both bills were passed in 2022 overwhelmingly in both legislative chambers and signed into law by Governor Kevin Stitt.  The vote to overturn was 6-3.  Justices Kauger, Winchester, Edmondson, Combs, Gurich and Darby voted to overturn.  Remember those names.  Justices Kane, Rowe and Kuehn voted to not overturn.   The ruling marked the second revoking of pro-life legislation by the state’s high court.

     In this week’s ruling, the majority opinion said the two bills were unconstitutional because they required a ‘medical emergency.’ before a doctor could perform an abortion.  A Tulsa abortion provider sued the state over the laws.  New York based Center for Reproductive Rights provided legal representation for the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case.  Attorney General Gentner Drummond said that despite the ruling, it is still illegal to get an abortion in Oklahoma.  Oklahoma’s ‘1910 law’(Title 21-Chapter 32, Section 861) makes it a felony punishable up to five years in prison for performing an abortion unless it is to save the life of the mother.

     “This court has once more over-involved itself in the state’s democratic process, and has interceded to undo legislation created by the will of the people,” Governor Kevin Stitt said.  Justice Dustin Rowe in his dissent stated: “The issues presented in this matter are political, better resolved by the citizens via our democratic process.”  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma needs judicial reform.  The current process of how justices are appointed to the high court is not working.  Defenders of the Judicial Nominating Committee (JNC) vetting process the state uses to select members of the high court should rethink their position.  In theory, the evaluation/scrutinization exercise seems effectual, but the proof is in the pudding.  The Oklahoma Supreme Court has consistently been inconsistent.  Their ‘logrolling’ (more than one issue in a bill) decisions have been conflicting and unpredictable.  But one area they have been consistent in- without fail- has been their rulings against the unborn.  Couple that with the cockeyed, implausible judicial retention ballot Oklahoma uses and the result is a high court that is unbalanced and unreliable.

     Second, the ruling was political.  A lot of the rulings the court will decide have a political element to them, but rulings should be based on the law and not an individual justice’s political leanings.  Of the six(6) justices who voted to overturn, five(5) were appointed by Democratic governors.  Their personal position on abortion, if consistent with their Party platform, is pro-choice.  Conversely, the justices who voted to not overturn were appointed by a Republican and are highly likely pro-life.  Oklahomans are overwhelming pro-life, yet the Oklahoma Supreme Court is pro-choice.    

     Third, accountability is key.  Griping, whining, and grumbling accomplishes little.  Consistent involvement in the dirty, nasty, nefarious political arena will make a difference.  If sufficient Oklahoma citizens committed to pay attention to what their government was doing, justices like the six who ruled to kill babies in the womb wouldn’t have made it on the Oklahoma high court.  Citizens need to start attending GOP meetings, learning about the issues, talking with their representatives and asking them ‘hard questions.’  It is time to heed a clarion call!

     In the Middle Ages, a trumpet called a clarion was sounded when action was required by a group.  The trumpet could play a melody in clear, shrill tones, so it could be heard far and wide.  Oklahoma needs a clarion call for citizens to pay attention and press accountability.  Until that happens, expect more of the same.

When the Politicos start bragging about what they accomplished, remember what they didn't!

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

REMEMBER THE FAIL!

by Steve Fair

 

     The Oklahoma legislature adjourned Sine Die (Latin for no appointed date for resumption) on Friday.  The Oklahoma Constitution requires lawmakers to complete their regular session by the last Friday in May each year.  The last week of session was a whirlwind of activity.  The legislature passed a record $12.8 billion dollar state budget.  $11.3 billion (88.3%) of the total is what is referred to as ‘recurring appropriation.’  That means it is money they plan to appropriate from now on, barring any unforeseen circumstances.   They appropriated $3.9 billion for the state Department of Education, a 21% increase over last year.  Most other state agencies got slight increases.  There were no board-based tax cuts- the state income tax wasn’t reduced and Sooners will still pay sales tax on groceries.  The legislature did agree to tax credits for those who send their kids to private schools or homeschool. 

    Lawmakers spent a great deal of time overriding Governor Stitt’s vetoes from April.  They overrode thirteen (13) on Thursday.  One of the most notable is HB#2263, which changes how the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority (OTA) will be organized.  It reduces the number of appointments by the governor to two (he had six) and gives the Speaker of the House and the Senate president pro tempore two appointments each. The vote, in both chambers, to override Stitt’s veto of HB#2263 was overwhelming.

     The governor has until Thursday, June 1^st to sign or veto the historic budget bill.  He has until June 10^th to act on the bills that were passed in the last week.  If he vetoes, lawmakers will be back in OKC on June 12^th, but they can only deal with the bills from the concurrent special session.  They can not deal with legislation vetoed from the regular session.  Confused?  Join the club.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma taxpayers didn’t get the tax cut they were promised.  Republican legislators and the governor have been telling constituents for years they were going to cut the state income tax…the very next session.  Yet another year/session goes by without a cut. It is reported the governor is not happy about that, but after four months of session and over a year of negotiating, the only loser is the taxpayers.  Oklahoma taxpayers should be asking their legislators why the tax cut was held up again.

     Every Republican serving in the legislature included ‘fiscal conservative’ in their campaign materials.  A fiscal conservative is one who advocates tax cuts, reduced government spending, free markets, deregulation, privatization, free trade and minimal government debt. Voters brought into their message. They elected them, believing they would go to the Capitol and be a good steward of tax dollars. If the current slate of elected officials can’t work together and get it done, perhaps they should go home and let someone else take a crack at it.

     Second, diluting political power makes for better government.  Reforming the appointment process for the OTA is long overdue.  There are several other boards and commissions in Oklahoma state government that should undergo the same scrutiny.  When one person is given sovereign control of a board, that board becomes nothing more than a rubber stamp to ratify everything the designator wants.   

     Third, Oklahomans should expect/demand more and better from the legislature.  Republicans gained control of the state House in 2004, after nearly a century of Democrat control.  They gained control of the state Senate in 2008.  The Rs were swept into power by promising to spend less money, cut taxes, repair the crumbling infrastructure and root out corruption.  They have consistently failed to deliver on the first two.  Republican elected leadership- executive and legislative- must do better.  Voters/taxpayers should require it. 

     In coming days, state legislators and the governor will be boasting and bragging about what they accomplished for Oklahoma in the 59th session of the legislature.  Taxpayers should remember what they failed to accomplish.

Expect the ‘Chicken Little/Debt Ceiling,’ performance to keep making curtain calls!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

THE SKY IS FALLING!

by Steve Fair

    

     The debt ceiling is the maximum amount the U.S. government can borrow by issuing bonds.  The U.S. Treasury Department must find other ways to pay expenses when the debt ceiling is reached, otherwise there is a risk the county will default on its debt.  Since 1960, Congress has raised, extended, or revised the debt limit 78 times.  49 of those were under Republican presidents and 29 times under a Democrat president.   In recent years, raising the cap has become a political football.  Since raising the debt ceiling is a so-called ‘must-pass’ bill, both political Parties use it to gain leverage for concessions.  Three observations:

     First, House Republicans have put a solid proposal on the table.  In late April, the U.S. House narrowly passed a bill that raises the debt ceiling while cutting spending by 14% over the next ten years.  It also rolled back some health mandates and climate change recently implemented by the Biden administration.  It also expanded gas and oil exploration.  The bill had no chance of being passed in the Democratic controlled Senate and immediately upon its passage Biden said he would veto it if it got to his desk. 

     Second, Democrats have put no proposal on the table.  Their position is to just raise the ceiling- no concessions, no spending cuts.  In the past, the Ds have used the debt ceiling crisis to raise taxes on the American people, but raising taxes isn’t in this year’s playbook.  With increasing inflation, they recognize raising taxes would be an unpopular move and would hurt them in the 2024 elections.  Democrats instead have focused their attack on House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), telling him to ‘put the pin back in the grenade.’  They anticipate the Rs will cave to public pressure.   

     Third, fiscal issues are going to be the ruin of America.  The federal national debt is $32 trillion dollars ($95,000 for every man, woman and child) and growing at an accelerating pace.  The federal government- both Parties- spend too much money.  Three years ago, a bi-partisan group of 60 House members introduced HR 6139 that proposed raising the debt ceiling if government spending were reduced by just 5% over ten years.  It failed.  Reasonable proposals to get spending under control are attacked as extreme.  Shifting debt to future generations is irresponsible and immoral, but the federal government has been doing it for decades. 

     In years past, conservatives were defined by their position on fiscal issues.  Conservatives today are more interested in liberty, personal freedom, and government overreach- all while the fiscal house is ablaze. Like an expanding credit card balance, the national debt continues to escalate, waiting for a responsible generation to pay it off. 

     Ten years ago, U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, (R-OK), said the debt ceiling doesn’t exist and the U.S. would not default if the limit wasn’t raised.  “The debt ceiling has never not been raised, so there is no debt ceiling.  Having a debt ceiling and then automatically raising it every time allows politicians off the hook for making hard choices.  I am not saying we shouldn’t pay our bills.  What I am saying is we should put ourselves in the position to have to make hard choices regarding spending,”  Coburn said.

     In his book, “The Debt Limit,” Coburn exhorts Americans to stop blaming lobbyists and special interests for the gridlock and obstructionism in the U.S. government.  He blames citizens for not holding members of Congress-in both Parties- accountable for refusing to take bold steps of action to get the government spending under control. 

     Until more conservatives pay attention to fiscal issues, hold elected officials accountable , and demand spending cuts, expect the ‘Chicken Little/Debt Ceiling,’ performance to keep making curtain calls.         

The reddest state in America should have more influence in the process to select a presidential nominee!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

by Steve Fair

     The Republican Party selects a presidential nominee through a process of primaries and caucuses in each state that bind convention ‘delegates’ to candidates.  The whole presidential nomination process is governed by rule 40 of the national Republican Party rules.  A presidential nominee must have the support of a majority of the delegates at the national convention.  The GOP, in each state, determine how to select their national delegates.  Some states are winner-take-all, others proportional.  In a winner-take-all state, the top vote getter earns all the delegates.  In a proportional state, a candidate getting 20% or more of the vote earn delegates.  Oklahoma is a proportion allocated state, as are most states.  Seventeen states are winner-take-all.  Three observations:

     First, rule 40 has changed since 2016.  After President Trump was elected, his political team lobbied the GOP to get states to ditch the proportional allocation and go to winner-take-all.  In 2016, Trump complained that despite he was winning more delegates than the other candidates, why was he not getting every delegate in a state where he won the plurality? Many in the GOP agreed and ten states changed from proportional and are now winner-take- all.  Florida, whose primary will be held on March 19, is a winner-take-all state.  In a large primary field, this change favors the favorite, which in this case is Donald Trump. 

     Second, proportional allocation has a valid argument.  In 2016, Donald Trump had 63% of the pledged delegates at the GOP convention, but he garnered only 45% of the actual primary vote.  Advocates for proportional delegate allocation pointed out 55% of voting Republican primary voters preferred one of the other 15 candidates in the primary and those voters deserved a voice in the process.  They also pointed out elected officials must get a clear majority to win.  Critics of proportional allocation call the awarding to delegates who candidates who lost akin to giving out ‘participation trophies.’ 

     Third, the GOP’s primary calendar should be evaluated.  Iowa passed a law stating they will be the first primary in the U.S.  The state will hold the first GOP caucus in early January 2024, but no convention delegates are bound.  The Iowa caucus is nothing more than a beauty contest!  While the caucus is an economic boom to the Hawkeye state, it’s importance to the GOP presidential process is forgettable.  New Hampshire, who goes a week later than Iowa, has shifted to the left in recent years and while Politics and Eggs is entertaining to watch on C-Span, the Granite state has little impact on who wins the nomination.  Why not start the primary process in Florida instead of waiting until March? 

     Iowa’s caucus is early January 2024.  New Hampshire will vote in mid-January and South Carolina in late January.  Oklahoma Republicans will vote on Super Tuesday- March 2th- along with fourteen other states.  By that time, the nomination may be sewed up and the Sooner state’s input inconsequential and pointless.  The reddest state in America should have more influence in the process to select a nominee.  The primary calendar should be lined up by performance, not based on some classical, commemorative reminiscence.

     GOP candidates challenging Donald Trump in 2024 face an uphill battle.  The rules favor him.  If they expect to beat him, they must focus on policy and not personality and pray the voting public does the same.