OKLAHOMANS NEED A GOVERNOR WHO WILL REPRESENT ALL CITIZENS!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

THE STATE OF SEQUOYAH!

by Steve Fair

 

     Most Oklahomans know the Five Civilized Tribes were relocated from the southeast U.S. by the federal government to Indian Territory in the 1830-40s.  Those five tribes are the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Creek, Choctaw and Seminole.  In 1851, Congress passed the Indian Appropriations Act, which created the reservation system and provided funds to move Indians onto farming reservations.  The Dawes Act of 1887 granted private land ownership to tribal members, but the net result was tribal member’s land being reduced by one half.   

     In 1906, Congress passed the Oklahoma Enabling Act, whose stated intent was to disestablish the afore mentioned reservations of the five tribes.  The action was required by Congress so Indian Territory and Oklahoma Territory could merge and be admitted to the union in 1907.  The 2020 McGirt decision ruled the reservations were never disestablished and are still intact.  That decision has created a legal quagmire and could ultimately spilt the Sooner state in two. 

     This week, the five tribes endorsed Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister for governor.  Hofmeister is the Democrat Party nominee.  She was elected twice to her current post as a registered Republican, but changed political affiliation to run for governor.  Some recent polls show the race close between her and GOP nominee, Governor Kevin Stitt, an enrolled member of the Cherokee tribe.  The only reason the race is competitive is the monies the tribes are pumping into Hofmeister’s campaign.  Three observations:

     First, the tribe’s issue with Kevin Stitt is about money.  In 2004, Oklahoma voters approved State Question #712 by a 60-40% margin.  712 enacted a Tribal Gaming Compact allowing tribes to operate slot machines and card games.  The 15-year compact, negotiated by former Governor Brad Henry and then State Treasurer Scott Meacham, required 6-13% of the money casinos take in go to the state.  88% of the amount is earmarked for education.     

     The compact was set to expire in 2020.  After he took office, Stitt proposed the tribes give the state a higher take than the original agreement, but the tribes balked.  The tribes claimed the original compact rolled over and they are under no obligation to renegotiate.  In 17 years, the state’s tribal gaming industry  has grown to over 150 casinos.  Hofmeister agrees with the tribes and has no problem with their sweetheart deal.  The tribes want a puppet in the governor’s mansion, not a partner.  They are happy with the current spilt because after all- the house always wins.

     Second, the tribe’s formal endorsement will not likely impact the election.  Tribal membership in Oklahoma is less than 14% of the population and Native Americans have a history of not voting.  In a study by Steven Doherty, he found they were 51% less likely to vote than other races.  The tribes spend a lot of money on politics.  They fund campaigns for candidates that will promote their agenda (like Hofmeister).  They employ an impressive lobbying apparatus at the State Capitol.  The public endorsement, while impressive optically, is doubtful to influence their rank-and-file tribal membership.

     Third, Hofmeister wants to be governor of the State of Sequoyah.  Hofmeister said if she was elected, she would just an equal participant at the negotiating table with the tribes, not the head.  Oklahomans don’t need a governor who doesn’t lead and believes representing 14% of Oklahomans is justifiable. 

     In 1905, the State of Sequoyah was proposed to Congress.  It would have composed the eastern part of the state- about 44% of the land mass of Oklahoma.  A Constitutional Convention met in Muskogee.  A vote was taken in Indian Territory.  The constitution was approved by a 6 to 1 majority.  President Teddy Roosevelt opposed admitting two states.  The Rough Rider proposed combining the two territories into one state, gaining widespread support in Congress.  The State of Sequoyah evaporated and the State of Oklahoma was born.  With the McGirt decision and the recent attitude/endorsement of the five tribes, it appears the State of Sequoyah has been resurrected.

CLEAN UP OKLAHOMA HAS A LIBERAL AGENDA!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

CLEAN UP OKLAHOMA PLAYS DIRTY!

by Steve Fair

     Clean Up Oklahoma(CUO) is an organization that claims to want to stop politicians from abusing their power.  They urge Oklahomans to ‘get their mop’ and clean up Oklahoma politics.  They have an anti-corruption pledge they want every candidate to sign.  The three major points in the pledge are to: (1) Prevent politicians, their staff, and donors from profiting at the taxpayers’ expense, (2) Strengthen open records laws to stop secret deals and gifts from special interests, (3) Stop the rigging of our elections and return power to the voters.   Sounds good, doesn’t it, but who exactly is Clean Up Oklahoma and who is funding them? 

     Clean Up Oklahoma attests to be a non-partisan grassroots movement, but that isn’t true.  The Director of Clean Up Oklahoma is Jay Williams, a former staffer for Kendra Horn, the one term defeated 5^th district Democratic Congresswoman now running for U.S. Senate against Mark Wayne Mullin.  Williams also was an active member of the Bernie Sanders campaign.  That is partisan. 

In the pledge CUO wants candidates to sign, they advocate for open primaries, taxpayer funded political campaigns, and a non-partisan (appointed) redistricting commission.  All of these ideas are directly from the Democrat Party playbook.  That’s partisan.  Three observations:

     First, Oklahoma could use some cleaning up.  The recent Epic school debacle is a good example that corruption is alive and well in the Sooner state, but signing a pledge (especially this one) will not eliminate corruption.  Mankind is born with a sin nature and unchecked, that nature will produce corruption. As long as man is on this earth, there will be corruption, deceit, and duplicity.

     Oklahoma is not nearly as corrupt as it was the first 100 years of statehood- all under Democrat control.  The Oklahoma county commissioner scandal was the largest in American history.   In the late 1990s, Democrat legislators put their family on state payrolls as ghost employees and state tax dollars were appropriated for non-existent dog food plants.  Both those scandals were uncovered by the federal government because Oklahoma state officials were unwilling to expose their good ole boy buddies.  That has changed.  The most recent corruption in Oklahoma has been investigated by state officials. That is progress.  At least our state leaders are willing to expose corruption, unlike in the past.   

     Second, Clean Up Oklahoma isn’t really against corruption- just corruption that doesn’t include them.  CUO wants open primaries because they are losing elections in Oklahoma.   Winning an election in Oklahoma means you have to run as a Republican.  Democrats know the only way to change that is to change the rules.  Clean Up Oklahoma doesn’t want fair elections- they want to tilt the table to help them win elections.  Open primaries are a petri dish for corruption.

     Open primaries would allow Democrats to vote in a GOP primary, which makes about as much sense as the Baptists letting Presbyterians vote in their business meetings.   Their other ideas are just as foolhardy.

     Third, there is no truth-in-labeling in politics.  All consumer goods are subject to laws that require the manufacturer to disclose net contents and the name of the producer.  Food items are required to provide nutritional information.  When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it’s on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says the ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence.  Violations can result in action from the Federal Trade Commission.  Sadly, no such law exists for politics.  In politics, you can call a baloney sandwich crème brulée without liability. 

     Because there is no accountability, Clean Up Oklahoma is playing dirty politics without consequence. Only their non-existent conscience guides them.  They run false and misleading television ads and flood social media with delusive messages- all while claiming to take the high road.  Low information, unenlightened voters are their target audience.  The only cleaning up in Oklahoma Clean Up Oklahoma wants is to elect liberals in November.  Don’t be fooled by clever branding- they are not mopping up corruption- they are polluting.  Candidates that sign their pledge should be avoided, not lauded.

 

Oklahoma's judicial system needs reformation!

 OKLAHOMA'S JUDICIAL SYSTEM

by Steve Fair

How are Oklahoma’s appellate court judges and justices appointed?

All judges and justices on the three courts of last resort in Oklahoma are appointed by the Governor of Oklahoma.  But they must first go through a ‘nominating’ process conducted by the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission.  The commission submits three candidates to the governor, who must select from the three.  After nomination by the governor, they must be confirmed by the State Senate.

Who is on the Judicial Nominating Commission?

There are 15 members- six appointed by the governor (must not be lawyers or have lawyers in their family).  No more than three of the governor’s appointments can be people with the same political party affiliation.  The Oklahoma Bar Association appoints six members (a lawyer from each Congressional district).  There is one appointment by the Speaker of the Oklahoma House and one by the Oklahoma Senate President Pro Tempore (cannot be a lawyer)and the last member selected by the other 14 members.   Commission members serve 6 year terms.  The Chairman of the Commission is elected by the membership and serves a one year term.  Commission members cannot be an official within a political party or an elected official during their term and for five years after their term ends.  They are not paid, but are reimbursed for travel expenses. 

Where do you find information on the judges/justices?

It is very difficult to find information on the judges and their ideology.  Two of the courts of last resort have websites where they publish their decisions.  The Oklahoma Supreme Court website is: https://www.oscn.net/schome/  The Oklahoma Court of Criminal appeals website is: http://www.okcca.net/ The Oklahoma Court of Civil decisions can be viewed at Justia.  That website is: https://law.justia.com/cases/oklahoma/court-of-appeals-civil/  Their political affiliation is not public information.  The judicial conduct code prevents the judges/justices from campaigning, which limits voter information on their individual ideology/values/philosophy.  

How many judges/justices are up for retention in November?

There are eleven up for retention.  Four on the Supreme Court, five on the Court of Civil Appeals, and two on the Court of Criminal Appeals.

Has a judge/justice ever not been retained?

No, since Oklahoma began judicial retention, no judge/justice has not been retained.

 

BIDEN SHOULD SUBMIT TO A COGNITIVE TEST & RESULTS SHOULD BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

POLICY, NOT GAFFES!

by Steve Fair

 

      A gaffe is an unintentional act or remark-a blunder- causing embarrassment to its originator.  Everyone makes gaffes because no one is perfect. Politicians in both Parties make gaffes all the time.  Michael Kinsley, former host of CNN’s Crossfire, coined the term ‘Kinsley gaffe’ to when a politico tells the truth- some obvious truth- they weren’t supposed to say.  Politicos don’t make many of those.

     One of the most famous political gaffes was in 1984 when President Reagan, while prepping for his weekly radio address, decided to make a joke, unaware his microphone was on.  “My fellow Americans, I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever.  We begin bombing in five minutes,” the Gipper said.  Given this was during the peak of the Cold War, the comment sparked fear among U.S. citizens and panic among Russian authorities. All-out war was averted when those in control of both militaries took the remark for what it was…an ill-conceived attempt at humor.

     The mainstream media loves gaffes, especially when the politician committing it is a Republican.  In 2016, then candidate Donald Trump confused 9/11 with 7/11 and it made headlines.  In 2019, Trump confused Toledo and Dayton, Ohio as the site of a shooting and the mainstream media made it the lead story.  Trump’s often outrageous flamboyant statements, provides mainstream media with plenty of ammunition.  Three observations:

     First, everyone makes mistakes.  No one is perfect.  A scribers error by a speechwriter or a misspoken word by a candidate/elected official in a speech will happen.  It is not always reflective of their cognitive ability or mental health.  Citizens shouldn’t get so energized and worked up over miscues and bloopers.  They should be more concerned with policy and issues.

     Second, the media has a double standard in regard to gaffes.  President Trump’s mistakes and gaffes were spotlighted and headlined, while those by Biden and the Democrats are largely ignored.  For example, this week, speaking from the White House, President Biden tried to acknowledge the late Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-IN), despite the fact she died in a car crash in August.  The gaffe was largely ignored by the media.  If Trump had made that mistake, it would have been the lead story for a month.     

     On Thursday, Vice President Kamala Harris mistakenly touted the United States ‘alliance with the Republic of North Korea’ in a speech from the DMZ.  Clearly, Harris meant South Korea, but little was made of her lapse by the media.  When then VP candidate Sarah Palin said America should stand with our North Korean allies, networks broke into regular scheduled program to point out the error.  The media ignores Democrat gaffes and sensationalizes Republican ones- a clear double standard.

     Third, Biden’s recent gaffes appear to reveal cognitive decline.  Republicans and Democrats alike have questions about the POTUS’ cognitive ability.  In July, Rep. Ronny Jackson, (R-TX), sent a letter to Biden’s physician asking Biden to undergo a cognitive test and to share the results with the American people.  Jackson is a former White House physician, serving in the administrations of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump.  A cognitive test for a POTUS is not unprecedented.  In 2018, following calls from Democrats and the mainstream media, Jackson, as WH physician, gave President Trump a cognitive test and the results released to the public. 

     “I have long said there would come a time when I was not the only one discussing Joe Biden’s cognitive decline. That time is now. As Democrats in the West Wing and the broader Democrat Party express discontent about his age-related decline, it should be clear now more than ever to President Biden, Dr. O’Connor, and Dr. Fauci that it is time to submit to a cognitive test. This is not a political issue, it’s common sense,” Jackson said.  The American people have a right to know if the POTUS is in cognitive decline.  Biden should submit to the test. 

     Anne Shirley of Anne of Green Gables said, “Isn’t it nice to think that tomorrow is a new day with no mistakes in it yet.” Nice to think that way Anne, but unrealistic- everyone makes mistakes/gaffes/errors.  Americans shouldn’t focus on lapses or misspeaks.  They should be fixated on policy- specifically on how much of their money the government is spending in these challenging economic times.

POLLS ARE NOT USED TO REFLECT PUBLIC OPINION- THEY ARE USED TO SHAPE IT!

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

POLL CATS!

by Steve Fair

     Forty-five days until the November general election and according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll, America is divided.  The pollster included a ‘skewed’ question about the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, that showed 62% of Americans disagreed with the ruling.  The poll showed Republicans have a slight advantage in voter enthusiasm, but both Parties are motivated to get out to vote.  President Biden has an approval rating of 39%, with 53% strongly disapproving of the job the POTUS is doing.  57% of those polled believe Biden hasn’t accomplished much of anything.  31% of those polled said the Democrat Party is too permissive on abortion.  50% believe the Republican Party is too restrictive. Three observations about polls, no matter who is conducting them:

     First, polls are often manipulated and contrived.   Statistical sampling is the method pollsters use to measure voter interest.  They poll a cross section of voters and then extrapolate and project the results to a confidence factor.  Polls have been around since the early 1800s.  In the 20^th century, The Literary Digest, a magazine published by Funk & Wagnalls, conducted opinion polls on the presidential races.  The Digest correctly predicted four straight races, but missed big in 1936 when they predicted Alf Landon would upset FDR.  George Gallup found their method of soliciting people to send in postcards had given them a bad sample. It seems, Landon’s supporters had conspired to bias the poll by flooding the Digest with postcards. 

     How a question is asked, who is commissioning (paying for) a poll, and those polled not providing accurate and honest answers can result in poll cats providing erroneous and faulty information.       Many push polls masquerade as opinion polls.  A push poll is an interactive marketing technique where a campaign attempts to influence the polled’s views and manipulate their response.

     Second, the only poll that matters is the one on Election Day.  The phrase originated in Australian politics, but it’s repeated often in America- often by candidates who are behind in the polls.  While true, polling, when conducted in a fair, unbiased, and scientific manner can be amazingly accurate.  Exceptions have been the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.  Most preelection polls had Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden easily beating Donald Trump. According to a report from the American Association for Public Opinion Research, polls for the 2020 election were the worst in forty years and polling in state races was the worst in twenty years.  Loss of objectivity by pollsters have resulted in a loss of public confidence in their accuracy.

     Third, the economic poll is the one to watch.  Pay attention to the inflation rate, the Consumer Price Index(CPI), the Gross domestic product(GDP), unemployment, interest rates and the price of crude oil.  All of those aren’t trending well for the average American.  The average Individual Retirement Account(IRA) decreased in value -18% since January 2022, wiping out $3 trillion in collective wealth of Americans.  The stock market is down -20% during the same period.  Crude oil is at a fifteen year high, resulting in high fuel prices at the pump.  Inflation is over 9% this year. Food at home prices have increased by 11% this year.   Most voters vote with their pocketbook, so it’s a safe conclusion the economic poll indicates they will vote out the Party in power.

       The late Rush Limbaugh said: “Polls are just being used as another tool of voter suppression.  The polls are an attempt to not reflect public opinion, but to shape it.  Yours.  They want to depress the heck out of you.” Nothing could depress Americans more than the economic indicators this year.    

     But that won’t stop poll cats from releasing fake polls indicating Americans are going to vote liberal in November, in the hope it will deflate conservatives.  A pole cat is a weasel-like mammal, noted for ejecting a fetid fluid when threatened.  Is there an odor in the air?

 

They condemn politicization, while politicizing!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

SNAKE OIL CONCOCTION

by Steve Fair

 

     The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) begins a new term on October 3^rd.  This will be the first term new Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was appointed by President Biden, will be on the court.  Brown Jackson replaced fellow liberal Justice Stephen Breyer, who retired in June.  A 6-3 conservative majority remains on the court.  The SCOTUS is set to tackle a series of hot-button issues, including two major election disputes that could impact the 2024 presidential election.

     After the SCOTUS’s ruling overturning Roe vs. Wade, two of the liberals on the court have went on the road like snake oil salesmen questioning the legitimacy of the court.  Liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor claims the court’s most result rulings have been political and not constitutional.  “When courts become extensions of the political process, when people see them as extensions of the political process trying to impose personal preferences on society, irrespective of the law, that’s when there’s a problem,” Kagan said this week in Chicago.  Sotomajor said the same thing the next night in California.  Chief Justice John Roberts responded that justices shouldn’t question the court’s legitimacy just because they disagree with a ruling.  Three observations:

     First, every SCOTUS ruling is political.  The definition of political is: relating to the government or the public affairs of a country.  The original Roe vs. Wade ruling was political.  In 1973, spurred by social liberals, who wanted the government to sanction birth control- after the fact- the SCOTUS made a political ruling. Every ruling is political and rooted in ideology.  For Kagan and Sotomayor to question the court’s legitimacy is dishonest.  They know the six justices who voted to overturn the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision hold to an ‘originalist’ legal philosophy as opposed to their ‘textualism’ view.  To cast a shadow over the court’s legitimacy is the height of political and the ultimate sore loser.

     Second, the SCOTUS should not rule based on public opinion.  Every ruling should be based on the U.S. Constitution.  In the most recent past, that hasn’t been the case because the majority of justices on the SCOTUS were textualists and believed the Constitution is a ‘living’ document.  Textualists contend the original intent view is out of date/unfashionable.  Most SCOTUS textual rulings were made based on public opinion.  Now that’s political.  While it is true, citizens/the governed should have confidence that SCOTUS rulings are proper and follow the rule of law, the court should never rule based on public opinion.  It should rule based on the founding document.  

     Third, liberals are trying to change the structure of the SCOTUS.  Since President Trump appointed three justices in four years, liberals have come to the conclusion the SCOTUS needs to change.  Pressured by liberal activists, President Biden appointed a commission to study ways to change the SCOTUS.  The commission recommended term limits for justices (70 years old max) and expanding the court.  President Franklin Roosevelt tried the exact same thing in 1937, when conservative SCOTUS justices struck down some of his New Deal legislation.  The plan failed because Democrats in Congress opposed FDR’s plan- calling it a politicalizing of the SCOTUS.

     Democrats are trying to use the SCOTUS ruling on Roe Vs. Wade as ammunition against Republicans in the mid-term elections.  They are trying to convince voters the SCOTUS justices who voted to overturn Roe vs. Wade are partisan political hacks.    They condemn politicization while politicizing.  They are double-minded, unstable, vacillating, and insincere.  November will reveal if Americans brought their snake oil concoction.

 

CITIZENS GET THE GOVERNMENT THEY WANT!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

WHISTLE PIGS!

by Steve Fair

      According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Americans in 2021 paid more in taxes than they spent on food, clothing and health care combined.  American households spent an average of $15,495 on food, clothing and health care, while paying an average of $16,729.73 in total taxes to federal, state and local governments.  Both of these numbers are up vs. 2020.  Three observations:

     First, government, at all levels, never has enough revenue.  Whether its for the national defense or the repair of a local pothole in the city street, government’s appetite for taking money from citizens is never satisfied.   Government spending is never cut or reduced- it continues to grow each year- no matter which Party is in office.

     The U.S. Treasury divides federal spending into three groups: mandatory spending, discretionary spending, and interest on the national debt.  Discretionary spending refers to the portion of the budget Congress decides each year through the appropriations process.  Last year, that was a whopping $2 trillion dollars.  In a normal year, about half of that amount goes to the military. 

     Mandatory spending includes Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which combined are three times more than what the U.S. spends on national defense.  In 2022, mandatory spending was $6 trillion dollars.

     The interest on the national debt is $400 billion each year.  The Congressional Budget Office(CBO) projects the annual interest cost will increase to over $1.2 trillion in the next ten years,  As a percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), these costs would double from 1.6% to 3.3%.  Government grows at all levels, with little accountability.   

     Second, true fiscal conservatives are endangered.  GOP candidates, at all levels, ballyhoo fiscal conservatism in their campaign literature and stump speeches, but few follow up once elected.  Candidate Donald Trump promised to balance the federal budget, but by 2019- before the pandemic- then President Trump was sending a budget to Congress that was $1 trillion dollars in the red.  During his four-year term, Trump spent more tax money than Obama.  Political activists rarely question elected officials about deficit spending and the national debt, which has resulted in true fiscal conservatives vanishing like the blush of innocence. 

     Third, citizens get the government they want.  While most Americans lament and complain about the size of government, the amount of taxes they pay, and the lack of response from their elected officials, only a very few do anything about it.  Most citizens are too busy making a living, paying their taxes, and raising their families to invest any time paying attention to how their tax dollars are being spent or to pay attention to politics.  They rely on others to do their heavy lifting.  Like Punxsutawney Phil, the groundhog who only leaves his burrow once a year, these hard workers emerge from their den periodically to hold those who are engaged accountable for the sad state of affairs.  They are unwilling- and sometimes unable- to be involved, but that doesn’t stop them from deriding those who are.  What those whistle pigs fail to discern is they have the government they deserve.  The only way to change that is for them to take proprietorship/ownership of their government more than intermittently.

     American consumers are price conscious at the grocery store.  They make sure they get a value for their food dollar.  They watch for bargains on clothing.  They shop and compare health care.  But when it comes to how taxes are being spent, taxpayers are impassive.  Until taxpayers start watching where taxes are being spent- at all levels of government- citizens will get the government they deserve.  Start paying attention!  Don’t be a whistle pig.