TORT TIED TO HEALTH CARE!

by Steve Fair

Last week, the State Senate Judiciary Committee met and passed five bills that if signed into law would represent real tort reform in Oklahoma. The five bills would eliminate joint and several liability, establish a cap on non-economic damages at $250,000, and allow damages to be paid out in periodic payments and not just in a lump sum. They would also require that juries be informed of the tax implications of any awards an injured party might receive. Tort reform is a key agenda item for the Republican led legislature this session.

*****

“We have been working on lawsuit reform for years, taking mostly an incremental approach because we did not have the numbers or a Republican governor to support strong reforms,” said Senator Anthony Sykes, (R-Moore), Judiciary Committee Chairman. “These bills protect Oklahomans, our doctors and our businesses from frivolous lawsuits.”

*****

“Oklahoma is way behind the curve on these reform measures. Just a few short years ago a Democrat President Pro Tem wrote a letter to encourage attorneys in other states to bring their lawsuits to Oklahoma because we had not enacted these reforms that our neighbors had,” said Sykes. “We are sending the opposite message today, Oklahoma will no longer be known as a lawsuit destination state.”

*****

The lawmaker Sykes is referring to is former State Senator Stratton Taylor (D-Claremore). In 2003, Taylor sent a solicitation letter to national trial attorneys encouraging them to bring their lawsuits to Oklahoma after Texas passed similar lawsuit reform to what Sykes is proposing.

*****

"With recent events that have occurred in Texas, you may be looking to file cases in Oklahoma," Taylor wrote, adding that "I wanted to take an opportunity to introduce our law firm."

*****

Taylor’s letter made its way to the Wall Street Journal, the business community’s newspaper. They attacked his brazen abuse of ‘forum’ shopping and in a December 19, 2003 editorial, wrote, “Average Oklahomans are likely to continue to see higher insurance costs, fewer doctors, and all of the other troubles that come with an out-of-control tort system. In short, you're doing fine, Texas. Oklahoma? Not OK.”

*****

Sykes’ proposals have naturally encountered opposition from trial lawyers- both Democrats and Republicans. In blogs, faxes and emails, the barristers contend Sykes hates the U.S. Constitution and is no conservative. Never mind that Sykes is himself an attorney and has achieved a near perfect conservative rating by the Oklahoma Constitution.

*****

The medical community has been crying for tort reform for years in the Sooner state. Back in 2006, the Oklahoma Alliance of Physicians for Tort Reform surveyed 775 Oklahoma physicians and found that eighty seven(87) percent practiced ‘defensive medicine.’ That means the docs ordered more testing or conducted more patient visits than they normally would because of the threat of a lawsuit. Twenty five percent said they had either quit practicing medicine or were leaving the state to escape the high malpractice insurance premiums in Oklahoma.

*****

Sykes said that Oklahomans will not only benefit economically by reducing frivolous lawsuits but the state will also be more attractive to doctors seeking to establish practice.

*****

In a state with a shortage of physicians, that is a good thing. “Oklahoma is dead last in most rankings of number of practicing physicians per 100,000 people,” says Dr. James Hess, vice president for health care administration for the OSU College of Osteopathic Medicine. “We’re not producing enough doctors and our physicians are a higher average age than physicians in other states. A perfect storm is coming.” “The situation is very bad. The demand for physicians is already outstripping the supply and bigger shortages are coming,” concurs Dr. Dan Duffy, director of the community medicine track at OU School of Medicine in Tulsa. “We’ve been asleep at the wheel.”

*****

Lawsuit reform is a necessary step in improving Oklahoma’s long term health care. Sykes has taken a personal career risk by carrying this legislation. The personal injury trial lawyers will not go down without a fight because true tort reform would dramatically impact their livelihood. The ‘ambulance chasers’ are certainly within their rights to protect their turf, but painting themselves as ‘Protectors of the Constitution’ is a stretch.

Weekly Opinion Editorial

LEGISLATURE SHOULD PROCEED WITH CAUTION!
by Steve Fair

The 53rd Oklahoma legislature convenes today. One of the first bills they will consider is SB #718. The bill, if passed and signed into law, would effectively strip the State Board of Education of its authority over the Department of Education.
*****
The bill has been predicated because of the actions of the board toward newly elected State Superintendent of Public Instruction Janet Barresi. The board, composed of all Democrats, blocked three of her five hires in a very contentious, partisan first meeting.
*****
“As a statewide-elected official chosen by the citizens of Oklahoma, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Janet Barresi must be allowed to hire her own staff and implement promised reform at the Department of Education,” said Speaker of the House Kris Steele, (R-Shawnee). “Senate Bill 718 will give her that authority. It is important to advance this necessary reform so we can truly begin the important work of improving Oklahoma schools to benefit all children of this state.”
*****
After reading my op/ed in last week’s Duncan Banner, Dennis Howard called me to discuss the State Board of Education/Janet Barresi controversy. Howard, a Waurika native, was the Oklahoma Secretary of Agriculture under former Governor Keating. Dennis has been involved in Oklahoma politics for decades, starting his political career driving for Henry Bellmon when the former U.S. Senator was campaigning for Governor. Howard is now a professor at Langston University. Dennis has served in several capacities in several past Republican administrations. In the 1980s, he was appointed to the State School Board by Governor Bellmon.
*****
Howard said there came a time when the conservative Rs appointed by Bellmon became the majority on the board and began to question the actions of then School Superintendent Sandy Garrett. The Democrat controlled legislature passed legislation to effectively render the board irrelevant. The Democrats did exactly what the Republicans plan to do with SB #718.
*****
I know the temptation to do what the Democrats did years ago to a Republican controlled board seems timely and prudent. After all- turn about is fair play, but Republican lawmakers need to proceed with caution. ‘Neutering’ a board of citizens and a constitutionally established entity because of the actions of some partisan members of a board is not the right course of action.
*****
One thing the legislature should do is remove the State board’s oversight on personnel. A statewide elected official must be able to hire their own key staff members. All of the people that Barresi wants to hire are qualified. The board’s actions in not giving her the freedom to put together her own team was out of order and clearly partisan.
*****
The second thing that should happen is any board member who is unwilling to follow the prescribed duties of the position should resign. To remain on the board simply to obstruct Barresi’s agenda is flat out wrong. That clearly appears to be the motives of at least two of the more vocal members of the board, but some of the other members are voting with them and their motives should be questioned as well. They were appointed for oversight, not to engage in political debate.
*****
I like Janet Barresi. I consider her a friend, but just because she won the November election doesn’t mean she should be immune from a constitutionally established board. After all the hoopla that was generated from the recent board meeting, perhaps the current board members will rethink their stance or resign. One of the most vocal critics of Barresi, Tim Gilpin, will go off the board in April. The situation might very well resolve itself without a legislative fix.
*****
If lawmakers simply ‘redefine’ the State School board’s responsibilities, they send a message to every citizen who serves on citizen oversight boards that unless you do exactly as we want, we will pass legislation to make you irrelevant. Citizen boards were established because they do not have to face voters. They can make tough decisions and not face re-election. Doing away with oversight is not what Republicans are about. Barresi and the board should be allowed time to work out their differences.
*****
After listening to a recording of the meeting, it is clear the Democrat board members were not happy Barresi was elected. Their behavior was rude, insolent, disrespectful and unprofessional toward her and her staff. However, everyone makes mistakes and now that they know the public is watching, the next board meeting might be more civil and productive.
*****
Some have pointed out the only statewide elected official that has a ‘citizen’s oversight board’ is the Superintendent of Public Instruction. They think that’s unfair and perhaps it is, but like it or not, the State Board of Education was constitutionally established forty years ago(1971) and cannot be eliminated without a vote of the people.
*****
With an annual budget of over three billion dollars and over four hundred direct employees, the State Department of Education is a huge agency. Barresi should be given the freedom to build her team and implement her agenda- with proper oversight as prescribed by the State Constitution.
******
Because Republicans now have control of the process means we should proceed with caution and think of the consequences of our actions. SB#718 might seem like a good idea today, but it's unintended consequences might hurt Oklahoma.

Weekly Opinion Editorial

OVERSIGHT SHOULD NOT BE PARTISAN!
by Steve Fair

Last week, Oklahoma State Superintendent of Public Instruction Janet Baressi had her first meeting with the State Board of Education. The meeting, which received a lot of media attention, was contentious to say the least. The meeting had loud exchanges, name-calling and some inappropriate statements made by members of the board.
*****
It was reported that during the meeting one member, former State Senator Herb Rozell, stated the agency’s new legislative liaison Jessica Russell would be ‘worthless’ to the board if she took maternity leave during the legislative session. Rozell’s remark had Russell so upset she left the room in tears. A couple of Republican legislators called for his resignation. One said he regretted his vote to confirm Rozell as a board member. Rozell has said he was just joking and has offered to apologize to Russell.
*****
The Oklahoma state board of education is composed of seven members- one from each of the five congressional districts, one at-large member, and the Superintendent who presides over the meetings. All members of the board, with the exception of the Superintendent are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate. They serve for six (6) year terms and their terms are staggered so that one member’s term expires every year.
*****
The current board members are Tim Gilpin, a Tulsa attorney; ex-state Sen. Herb Rozell, of Tahlequah; Betsy Mabry, 1993 Oklahoma Teacher of the Year; Sue Arnn, of Ardmore, an educator who has served on several boards; Gail Foresee, of Shawnee, an educator who served two years on the Governor’s Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Committee; and Gayle Miles-Scott, of Oklahoma City, an assistant accounting professor at the University of Central Oklahoma. Her sister is the embatted District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange. All current board members are registered Democrats. Baressi is the first Republican to be the State Superintendent of Public Instruction and the first new Superintendent in twenty(20) years.
*****
The state board of education is charged with determining the policies and directing the administration and supervision of the public school system in the state. The board was created back in 1971 after Oklahomans approved State Question #481. From statehood until 1971, the Governor, the AG, the Secretary of State, and the State School Superintendent served as the State Board of Education. All of the current members of the state board of education were appointed by former Governor Brad Henry, a Democrat.
*****
During the meeting, the board did not approve three of the five staff members Baressi presented, saying they were not qualified for the positions they were being hired. The three positions are the three most critical to the agency- Chief of Staff, Communications Director, and Finance Director. One member of the board stated they believed approval of the staff was a function of the board and that Baressi’s appointment of her campaign manager to the Chief of Staff position was political patronage.
*****
Some conservatives immediately said they wanted the state board of education dissolved. They want to give Baressi the freedom to implement the the education reforms she campaigned on. After all, Baressi was elected by the people and the board is composed of appointees who don’t have to face the voters. Some others want the legislature to ‘neuter’ the board with legislation. In my opinion, that is not what needs to be done.
*****
First, oversight is good, so long as it is not partisan. The state board of education should not be dissolved- it should perform oversight. Granted, the board’s actions this week were clearly partisan. In a statement sent to CaptialBeatOK, State House Minority Scott Inman, (D-OKC) said “State law makes it clear that the Superintendent answers to the Board of Education, not the other way around. I commend the members of the Board of Education, who performed their duties according to state law.”
*****
Former Governor Brad Henry does not share Inman’s viewpoint. On Flashpoint Sunday, Henry said he believes Baressi has the right to hire her own staff. The board’s actions were clearly partisan and not oversight. If the current board members are so partisan that they are unwilling and unable to work with Baressi, then they should resign. When people don’t agree, it’s completely understandable when they part company. To remain on the board just to slow or obstruct Baressi’s agenda is dishonest and clearly not what the voters mandated when she was elected.
*****
Second, Baressi faces a huge challenge- a contentious board, a down budget, underfunded teacher pensions, and an Oklahoma education establishment that just doesn’t get it. Her education reforms are needed to move the state forward, but Baressi should remember what Abraham Lincoln said, “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.”

Weekly Opinion Editorial

ZERO BASED BUDGETING!
by Steve Fair

In two simultaneous events, Oklahoma State Senate leaders announced the Senate agenda last week. In Oklahoma City, Senate Pro Tempore Brian Bingman, (R- Sapulpa), and in Ardmore, Assistant Majority Leader Senator Anthony Sykes, (R-Moore) presented the upper chamber’s agenda for 2011.
*****
The Senate plans to support tax reforms that lower the tax burden on individuals and businesses and balance the state budget by prioritizing spending. They pledge to finally ‘really’ reform the state’s workers compensation system. They plan to rank public schools and allow school districts the ability to remove low performing personnel. And finally they will commit to the already established eight year transportation plan that addresses Oklahoma’s critical bridge and road needs.

*****
“Our commitment as Republicans is to make Oklahoma a better place to create jobs and grow your business,” stated Senator Brian Bingman, (R-Sapulpa) who is the Senate Pro-Tempore. “We are optimistic about Oklahoma’s future because our state is well positioned for growth and economic development” continued Bingman. “We are not letting off, we will continue to pursue job creating policies and allow people to thrive here in Oklahoma.”

*****
“We are honored to represent the people of Oklahoma,” said Senator Anthony Sykes, said in Ardmore. “We are presenting this as a commitment because we take these issues very seriously.”

*****
The first item on the agenda will be the most challenging- lowering the tax burden on Oklahomans and balancing the budget. Oklahoma state government faces a potential budget shortfall of more than 600 million dollars this fiscal year, which is about ten percent less than what the state had to spend last year.

*****
Oklahoma has a ‘rainy day fund.’ In essence, this constitutional mandated fund is a saving account for government. Some critics of the rainy day fund say it is unnecessary and gives government a ‘crutch’ for the lean years. They have a valid argument. Government shouldn’t be squirreling away taxpayer money in good times to spend when times are bad- they should be collecting only what is absolutely necessary to operate and returning the difference to the people who earned it.

*****
Two years ago, Oklahoma’s rainy day fund had over $600 million in it. Today the balance in the rainy day fund is only $2.03. The $600 million is gone. The legislature spent it to make up for economic downturns the last two fiscal years.

*****
If the Oklahoma State Senate wants to make a real difference, they need to implement zero based budgeting in state government. In zero-based budgeting, every function is reviewed All expenditures must be approved, rather than only increased. Zero-based budgeting requires the budget request be justified in complete detail starting from the zero-base. The zero-base is indifferent to whether the total budget is increasing or decreasing. In other words, every dime must be justified in the budget- no ‘history’ of what an agency has gotten in the past is relevant. Zero based budgeting is time consuming and exhaustive, but if implemented, it would make Oklahoma government more efficient and accountable.

*****
Back in 2003, the Oklahoma legislation mandated that ‘zero based budgeting’ would be used for a four-year cycle, but because of the complexity of the reviews and the great amount of material the reviewers had to assimilate, the process was abandoned. The reviews of agency purposes, procedures and productivity was more depth than the annual appropriation process allowed for a part time legislature, so Oklahoma went back to the same old appropriations process, which is in essence- tell us what you got last year and we will either up it or cut it.
*****

Zero based budgeting is a lot of work for everyone involved in government. It would work if first, we have strong committed leadership dedicated to the task. If those appointed to the appropriations process are unwilling to truly assess every item in an agency’s budget, word will get out that ZBB is more talk than action. Second, ZBB wouldn’t have to be done for every agency every year. A comprehensive review every three to five years should be sufficient. That would allow the legislators to perform an in-depth analysis on an agency’s budget, which will reveal both areas of waste and areas of deficiency. Third, the ZBB process should reference all aspects of an agency and what their goals are. This shouldn’t just be about numbers- it should be about performance.
*****

Probably the main reason the legislature doesn’t want to implement zero based budgeting is the sheer magnitude of the reviews and the demands on members and staffs time. But Oklahoma taxpayers need to know if they are getting what they are paying for. If Oklahoma public servants really want to make state government more modern efficient and effective, then inventive ideas like ZBB must be seriously considered.

Weekly Opinion Editorial

NO EXCUSE!
by Steve Fair

Last Monday, at the Oklahoma State Capital, I visited with State Senator Todd Lamb in the Lt. Governor’s office. In less than an hour, Lamb was going to be sworn in as Oklahoma’s sixteenth Lt. Governor. I congratulated him on the occasion and after some pleasantries, Lamb stated in a very serious voice, “Steve, please pray for me and hold me accountable.” I promised him I would do both. Later, as I sat in my seat awaiting the start of the inaugural with snow falling, I thought of how appropriate Lamb’s request was.
*****
First, praying for our elected officials is a command of scripture. All Christians should pray for those who rule over us. Paul said in 1 Timothy 2, "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour"

******
America has always been a nation of prayer. Since the first call to prayer in 1775, when the Continental Congress asked the colonies to pray for wisdom in forming a nation to Abraham Lincoln, often called the Savior of the Union, proclaiming three fasts, Americans has been asked to pray for their country.

*****
During the Civil War, Lincoln called the nation to prayer and fasting for national peace and unity. Lincoln's second call on March 30th, 1863, was to repent as a nation through prayer and fasting. Honest Abe's third proclamation was the first Thursday of August 1864. He made a special plea for those in positions of authority to seek God with fasting and prayer.
*****

Evangelist Billy Graham says we should not only pray for our leaders on a personal level, but also collectively. “We also should come together to pray, for God is pleased when His people are united in prayer,” Graham says.
*****

Pastor John Piper offers an example of a prayer for Christians for an elected official: "We pray, Lord, that our leader would have a humble demeanor and be open to truth, that he would be granted wisdom beyond his native capacities, and that he would make no snap judgments or knee-jerk reactions but take all factors into account. We pray that policies, procedures and laws would be put in place that would not hinder the gospel but give free reign to its spread." You can word anyway you want, but pray for our elected officials whether they request it or not.

*****
Second, in a representative form of government, it’s critical we hold our elected officials ‘accountable.’ Because most citizens have jobs and busy lives, they don’t have time to ‘monitor’ every vote an elected official makes. However, with the advent of the Internet, bills moving through the Oklahoma legislative process can be accessed and viewed by concerned citizens through both legislative chamber websites. The State House website is http://www.okhouse.gov/. The State Senate website is http://www.oksenate.gov/. Other organizations like the Oklahoma Family Policy Council http://www.okfamilypc.org/and Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs http://www.ocpathink.org/homepage/have web sites that are excellent sources of information on what is happening at 23rd and Lincoln.
*****

The Oklahoma legislature opens in early February and will adjourn at the end of May. During the four months, they are in session, legislators will consider a thousand or more bills. Only a few will receive a lot of media attention, but most will impact your life. Regularly monitor the websites listed and call your elected officials to inquire as to what is on the radar screen. Stay informed.

*****
Oklahoma Republicans campaigned last year on radically reforming Oklahoma government. A record number of GOP candidates were swept into office. Republicans now control every statewide elected office for the first time in state history. It’s clear that Oklahoma voters brought their message. If the newly elected Republican Governor and Republican led legislature execute what they campaigned on- moving Oklahoma to a smaller, more efficient government, they will move the Sooner state to new heights. While we must pray for them, we must also hold them accountable.

*****
Governor Fallin said in her inaugural address, “It is crystal clear in my mind from my experience as a public official, we do not need more government, what we need is better government – and more efficient and effective government services.”

*****
If Oklahomans do not get better government-more efficient and effective government- Republicans have no one to blame but ourselves. We can’t blame it on the Democrats. We have no excuse to not produce.

Weekly Opinion Editorial
PRIMARY SHOULD REMAIN AS IS!

Caucus system is move backward!

By Steve Fair

Last week, State Representative Charles Key, (R-OKC) filed two bills that would reform how Oklahoma conducts elections. HB 1057 would require political parties to pay for presidential primary elections. HB 1058 would change the required number of signatures to get a political party on the ballot. Currently it takes five percent of the total votes cast in the last general election to have a party on the ballot. Key’s proposal would change that number to a flat 5,000 signatures.
*****
“When you look at all 50 states and their signature requirements, Oklahoma has either the worst or the second worst ballot access law in the country. Most of the other states we have looked at for a comparison set their requirement at between 5,000 and 10,000 signatures, “ Key says.
*****
Thom Holmes, Chairman of the Constitution Party of Oklahoma, requested that Rep. Key file HB 1057. Said Holmes, “Participating in the Election process, both by voting and by having the opportunity to run for office as a candidate, are worldwide symbols of freedom and they should be encouraged, not discouraged in Oklahoma. One of the things that makes America great is the concept that competition yields a superior product.”
*****
Key said that presidential primary elections are expensive and with the state in its current budget crisis, it needs to save the estimated $1 million plus cost to hold primary elections. “Parties in other states choose their various nominees in convention or by different means. Oklahoma for many years used the caucus method and it worked fine. The caucus method would bring more presidential candidates to the state and voters would have a better chance to meet them and interact with them.”
*****
Key is correct that presidential primaries cost money, but one of the primary functions of government is to conduct legal and fair elections. This is not a new issue for Key. At the state GOP convention in 2009, Key and several others proposed that Oklahoma Republicans return to the caucus system and ditch the presidential primary.
*****
At the convention, I wrote a paper entitled, “We’re doing fine Oklahoma!” http://stevefair.blogspot.com/search?q=WE+ARE+DOING+FINE%2C+OKLAHOMA%21 In it, I wrote, “The truth is a caucus system would empower a few influential activists who believe they know better than the general population what Oklahoma needs. A caucus system would establish an oligarchy, which is a form of government where power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society- aka Political Pharisees. That is never good and goes completely against the principles of the U.S. Constitution which is inclusive and protects us from the establishment of an oligarchy.”
*****
In a debate the evening before the convention, I asked my fellow delegates to ‘educate, not exclude’ those less involved members of our Party. The proposal to move to a caucus system was soundly defeated, but the proponents have never given up.
*****
“Both of my bills are about fairness,” Key said. “There is nothing fair about taxpayers funding primary elections in which they don’t take part and there is nothing fair about restrictive ballot access.”
*****
Key is half right- his proposal- HB 1058- to lower the number of signatures to allow for ballot access is fair. Oklahoma’s signature requirement is excessive and restrictive. It needs to be changed. However his proposal to get the two major political parties to pay for the primary is flawed.
*****
First, the actual cost of a presidential primary is small in the grand scheme of things. The savings realized by the elimination of the presidential primary would represent only $250, 000 a year. Oklahoma’s state budget in 2011 is 6.7 billion.
*****
Second, Key knows that if HB 1057 became law, it would be difficult for the two major parties to come up with the money to pay for a primary. Party fundraising is a challenge. People contribute to candidates, but not to a Party. For that reason, the Ds and Rs might consider the other option he mentions- the caucus.
*****
Third, most voters in the presidential primary don’t realize they are voting for someone to represent them at a national nominating convention. If we move to a caucus system, a few influential activists will select those delegates, leaving out the general public. That is regressive and not fair.

Weekly Opinion Editorial

DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION!
READ IT!

by Steve Fair

The Constitution of the United States defines a framework for the country’s law and order. It is the supreme law enforcer of the United States. At 4,400 words it is the shortest and the oldest Constitution of any major government in the world. With it’s twenty-seven amendments the length is about 7,500 words. As evidence of its continued flexibility, the Constitution has only been changed seventeen times since 1791. The last amendment- the 27th- was originally proposed in September 1789 as an article in the original Bill of Rights. It was finally ratified after 74,003 days in May 1992. The 27th amendment deals with legislative salaries.

*****
The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution clearly defines the purpose of the founding document. The Constitution provides the framework for the organization of our federal government. It outlines the civil rights of the citizens in the U.S. It provides a sense of direction to the three branches of government by defining their responsibilities. It outlines the powers granted to the federal government.

*****
Patrick Henry said, "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."

*****
Sadly, elected officials and citizens have ignored the Constitution for decades. According to an NPR survey last year, only twenty eight (28%) percent of Americans have ever read the U.S. Constitution, even though it takes less than a half an hour to complete the task. When the Republicans take control of the U.S. House on Thursday, they plan to read the entire document on the floor. Incoming Speaker of the House John Boehner says, “ We always hear members of Congress talking about swearing an oath to represent their constituents, when in reality the only oath we take is to the Constitution. We pledge 'to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.' No more, no less." This is an obvious nod to the Tea Party’s help in getting Republicans elected in November. According to the House Historian's Office, there is no record of the Constitution being read aloud on the House floor.

*****
“I think it's entirely cosmetic," said Kevin Gutzman, a history professor at Western Connecticut State University and a conservative libertarian who sympathizes with the Tea Party. "This is the way the establishment handles grassroots movements. They humor people who are not expert or not fully cognizant. And then once they've humored them and those people go away, it's right back to business as usual.” Whether the Republicans in Congress follow-up by actually following the Constitution remains to be seen.

*****
Every January for the past six years, the Stephens County GOP has sponsored a Wallbuilders educational event. WallBuilders is an organization dedicated to presenting America's forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on the moral, religious, and constitutional foundation on which America was built.

*****
Our Wallbuilders event is not a GOP fundraiser or a partisan event. Concerned citizens, regardless of Party affiliation, have benefited by learning about our country’s true history. Last years event featured Wallbuilders founder David Barton, a frequent guest on the Glenn Beck TV program. David Barton and Rick Green host a daily radio program -Wallbuilders Live- that is broadcast weekdays on FM 88.7 in Duncan.

*****
On Friday the 7th, Rick Green, a former Texas State Representative and a Constitutional attorney will present a free 90-minute presentation starting at 6pm at the Stephens County Fairgrounds in Duncan. On Saturday the 8th Rick will present “A Citizens Guide to the U.S. Constitution.” The six hour seminar runs from 9am until 3pm, costs $40 and includes a $20 text. It will also be held at the Stephens County Fairgrounds. It would be worth a three hour drive to attend this informative seminar.

*****
David Barton frequently says that America should elect people we can turn our back on. His point is that elected officials make most of their decisions out of the limelight; therefore it is critical we have someone with a fundamental understanding of the nation’s founding document to guide their decisions.

*****
American inventor and scientist Thomas Edison said, "The strength of the Constitution, lies in the will of the people to defend it." We start our defense by knowing what it says.