DEMOCRATS IN OKLAHOMA ARE OFFICIALLY LIBERAL!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

GRADING MY OWN TEST

by Steve Fair

     I always loved grading my own tests in school.  It always seemed both Johnny(my seatmate) and I got better grades when we graded our own than when the teacher made us exchange tests for grading.  The recent ruling by the Oklahoma Supreme Court on a lawsuit by the League of Women Voters that removed the requirement for notarization of voter absentee ballots and allows voters to simply ‘self-notarize  reminds me of those days grading my own test. 

     Election Board Secretary Paul Ziriax said, “This decision effectively leaves Oklahoma without a means to verify that the person who signs an absentee ballot affidavit is the same person to whom the ballot was issued.” 

     The Oklahoma legislature got busy this week and quickly passed SB #210.  Authored by Senate President Pro Tempe Greg Treat, (R-OKC) and Speaker of the House Charles McCall, (R-Atoka), SB#210 reinstated the notary requirement for the November general election.  It also requires absentee voters in the June 30, 2020 primary election to include a photocopy of their photo ID with their ballot.  No notary is required.  Waiving the notary requirement for the primary due to the pandemic seems unnecessary and could promote voter fraud.Three thoughts:

     First, Oklahoma has one of the best election processes in the country.  The optical- scan voting machines utilized in the Sooner state provide a voter-verifiable ‘paper trail,’ direct recording electronic machines do not.  Voter fraud in Oklahoma is rare, but it does happen.  Ten years ago, an Adair county man, known for being a Democrat activist, was charged with two felony counts of false affidavit in voting registration and two felony counts of false notarization of an absentee ballot.  He pled nolo contendere and received a three year deferred sentence.  He was essentially charged with signing the names of two voters on absentee ballots.  If the legislature had not acted as quickly as they did, verification of who is voting by absentee would have been next to impossible and the possibility of voter fraud would have been dramatically increased.

     Second, the League of Women Voters is a liberal organization.  Originally founded in 1920 to help women gain the right to vote, it has politically moved far from that mission.  The League now publicly opposes voter ID laws, supports abortion, universal health care and gun control.  Their motivation in opposing notarization of absentee ballots threatens ballot security.  Every person who is eligible should be afforded the right to vote, but insuring the identity of the person casting that vote is essential to election integrity. 

     Third, Democrats in Oklahoma are officially liberal.  The vote on SB #210 was along Party lines, with Republicans supporting and Democrats opposing Oklahoma voters to sign their absentee affidavit in front of a notary. The days of ‘conservative’ Democrats in Oklahoma is gone.  The elected Democrats in the Oklahoma legislature are philosophically in line with the national Democrats when they in lock step oppose a common sense bill like SB #210. 

      Ronald Reagan famously said, “Trust, but Verify.”  That is what SB#210 does.  It outlines a process in which voters can cast their ballots by absentee and verification the voter did the casting of the ballot.  Why would anyone oppose Voter ID?  Because they want to grade their own test.

 

CHANGE IS A-COMING! THREE PREDICTIONS FOR THE FUTURE!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

GOD HAS NO DEFICIT!

by Steve Fair

     The Oklahoma legislature faces an estimated $1.3 billion dollar revenue shortfall due to falling oil prices, reduced sales tax and fuel tax collections, and COVID-19.  The state will receive an estimated $800 million from the federal government through the COVID-19 stimulus bill, which could help plug some holes, but even with that money it appears budget cuts are looming.  House Majority Floor Leader Rep. Jon Echols, (R-OKC), said the state has lost more than 18% of its total revenue and cuts to state agencies could range from 3-10%.  The Oklahoma Constitution requires the legislature to pass a balanced budget, so it will be challenging times at 23^rd and Lincoln this month. 

     The federal government is not constrained by a balanced budget amendment, so deficit spending is the norm.  With the passage of the stimulus bill, the federal budget deficit this year will be $2 trillion dollars and the national debt will top $25 trillion.  With record unemployment and the economy in the tank, deficit spending makes sense in the short term, but spending money you don’t have will have long term impact on future generations. 

     In 1929, the U.S. stock market collapsed, banks and businesses failed and unemployment was 25%.  Demand for goods and services declined and supply was reduced.  The Federal Reserve, which has been created in 1912 for the purpose of providing the nation a more stable monetary system, raised interest rates to limit speculation in securities markets.  That backfired and caused panic and reduced demand further.  President Herbert Hoover tried to keep the federal budget balanced until 1932.  He believed in the economic system called Liquidationism, and that no government action should be taken during an economic downturn.  Liquidationism holds the ‘temporary pain’ of companies being liquidated is a solution in itself and government should stay out of the way. Eventually Hoover did acquiesce to pressure to provide relief to citizens and agreed to a deficit budget, but he remained firm in not baling out private companies. 

     In 2020, the Federal Reserve is firmly in control of our economy (good and bad). The interest rate is set by the Fed.    Monetary supply (money to be loaned) is controlled by the Fed.  Congress and President Trump have already shown they are willing to deficit spend to get through this crisis. There is not the political will or public support to allow the economy to suffer ‘temporary pain.’   This crisis will have an impact on how people live in the future.  Here are three predictions of change:

     First, the world’s eating habits will change.  More food will be consumed at home- less at restaurants.  That has been the recent trend.  In 2018, Americans ate out 185 times a year, down from a high of 216 in 2000.  That’s good news for grocers, not so much for restaurants. 

     Second, retirement plans will change.  With the stock market losing up to 30% of its value during this crisis, some will have to delay retirement or forego it all together.  Those who are retired and relying on investment income will have to make adjustments to their lifestyle or go back to work. 

     Third, the next generation will change.  The COVID-19 crisis is a part of their experience.  How they will work, play, invest, worship, interact, and vote will be filtered through the experience.  That can be good and bad.  The good is they will understand that life is fragile and they should cherish it.  The bad is they may believe life is so fragile; they live it like a dare-devil.

    Deficits and shortfalls are all around us, but God is still in control and has no deficit or shortfall.  He owns the cattle on a thousand hills and the wealth in every mine.  Stay safe!

 

Like the band, WHO SHOULD BREAK UP!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

THE WHO SHOULD BREAK UP!

by Steve Fair

     President Trump has directed a 60 day halt to payments by the United States to the World Health Organization (WHO), pending review of how it handled warnings about COVID-19 and China.  The president maintains COVID-19 could have been contained at its source and spared lives had the WHO done a better job investigating reports coming out of China.  During a conference call with the G-7 leaders, President Trump reiterated his complaints about the WHO, but after the call several of the G-7 leaders issued statements in support of WHO.  The president did say the U.S. will continue to engage with the WHO to pursue meaningful reforms.  Three thoughts:

    First, who/what is the World Health Organization?  It is an agency of the United Nations, charged with responsible for international public health.  It was established in April 1948 and take credit for the eradication of smallpox and  the near eradication of polio  The WHO has 6 regional offices, employs 7,000 people in 149 countries, and has a $4.2 billion dollar annual budget, voluntarily funded by member countries.  The U.S. contributes 15% of the total funding. China contributes about half that. Another of their funding sources is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which provides about 10% of the WHO’s annual funding.  Another major source of funding is Rotary International.    The WHO has not been without controversy.  According to the Associated Press, the organization spends about $200 million annually on travel expenses, which is more than it spends to tackle mental health, HIV, Tuberculosis, and Malaria combined.  A past Director/General of WHO once stayed in a $1,000 per night hotel room while visiting West Africa. 

     Second, President Trump is right to withhold funding.  Holding the WHO accountable for their basic mission is not unreasonable.  The president said the world depends on the WHO to work with member countries to make sure accurate information about health threats are shared in a timely manner.  Clearly, China did not provide accurate or timely information and the WHO should have sounded the alarm earlier, but they seemed unwilling to dispute China’s account of COVID-19.  That caused the virus to remain unchecked for weeks, which resulted in more deaths.

     Third, health care has become very political.  No place is it seen more than at the WHO’s response to COVID-19, but it’s also seen every time you visit your doctor.  Instead of your physician making decisions on what your health needs are, lawmakers and insurance companies have mandated what can and can’t be done.  Instead of the WHO sounding the alarm to save lives, they folded to political pressure from China. 

     The WHO is nothing more than a ‘middleman’ that works with health organizations in member countries and then dissimilates information.  Perhaps there should be a health organization that works with those members, but the WHO has become an bloated bureaucracy that is overstaffed and fails to perform their most basic function and should break up like the band the WHO(who broke up in 1983).  President Trump is right to suspend funding, but unless reforms are made, that suspension should be permanent.   

 

Legislature was complicit in expanding Guv's Power!

Weekly Opinion Editorial

QUIT PLAYING POLITICS

by Steve Fair

     In the midst of the COVID-19 virus outbreak, politics continues.  The Oklahoma legislature and Governor Stitt are fighting over the 2020 state budget.  Last week, the legislature sent three budget bills to the governor’s desk.  Stitt refused to sign one of the bills because it did not include funding for the Digital Transformation Revolving Fund(DTRF), one of his priorities.  The governor said the funding is $930,000, legislators, $250,000.  Stitt accused legislative leadership of playing ‘political games.’  On Wednesday, that legislative leadership sued the governor and the Board of Equalization after the governor canceled a meeting of the board.  The petition asks the state Supreme Court to rule on Stitt’s authority to unilaterally cancel a Board of Equalization meeting.  Until the board votes to declare a ‘revenue shortfall,’ the legislature cannot legally tap the state’s rainy day fund, whose funding is sorely needed to plug budget holes.  Three thoughts:

     First, what is the actual funding for the DTRF?  Is it 250k or 930k or another number?  Who is telling the truth?  Either number is small in the grand scheme of the total 8 billion dollar budget, but it would be nice to know the correct number.  The DTRF was created by the legislature in 2019  to implement digital transformation initiatives.  Thus far they have implemented Oklahoma Mobile ID and Driver’s License, which allows citizens to apply for a digital ID or license.  The fund is overseen by the governor’s cabinet appointees. 

     Second, both parties are playing politics, not just the legislature.  When the governor made the decision to cancel the Board of Equalization meeting, he was ‘playing politics.’  The Board of Equalization is a seven member board chaired by the governor.  It is composed of six Oklahoma state elected officials: the governor, lieutenant governor, state auditor, state treasurer, attorney general, state school superintendent, and the appointed by the governor, the secretary of agriculture.  The board is responsible for providing an estimate of all revenue available to the state legislature for appropriation.  They certify that number before the legislature convenes in February.  When revenue shortfalls occur, they normally meet and  declare a revenue shortfall, which allows the legislature to tap the Rainy Day fund.  There is no doubt that eventually will happen, but Stitt is ‘playing politics’ when he doesn’t call the meeting in a timely way.

     Third, the power of the office of governor since Stitt was elected has expanded.  That did not happen in a vacuum.  It occurred with the cooperation of the legislature.  They passed legislation allowing the governor to hire/fire state agency heads.  Legislative leadership proclaimed how important it was to give the governor more power. Constitutionally, Oklahoma’s governorship is one of the weakest in the U.S, but with the legislature’s help that has changed.  The legislature’s contention Stitt is pulling a power grab is ironic since they were complicit in the grab. 

     The governor should call the BOE meeting, so a vote can be taken regarding a revenue shortfall.  The legislature should restore reasonable funding for the governor’s pet project.  Both parties should get on with the people’s business and quit wasting time and tax dollars playing politics.