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.

Alienating 1/2 of potential customers isn’t a sound strategic initiative!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

DANCE WITH THE ONE WHO BROUGHT YOU!

by Steve Fair

     In May of 2022, House Bill # 2034, authored by Rep. Mark McBride, (R-Moore) and Sen. Mark Allen, (R-Spiro), was signed into law.  Titled the Energy Discrimination Elimination Act of 2022, it requires the state to divest from any financial company that boycotts the energy industry.  McBride said, “This law protects all Oklahomans from the overreach of companies who think they can govern our population through the use of political environmentalism.”  Legislative Democrats said the law protects the oil industry in Oklahoma and they believe the oil industry can take care of itself.  McBride countered that the energy sector was a major employer in the state and contributed billions to the state’s economy and loyalty mattered. 

     On Wednesday, State Treasurer Todd Russ, (R-Cordell) notified thirteen (13) financial institutions they are not eligible to conduct business with the state of Oklahoma because they violate HB#2034.  The businesses now have the opportunity to clarify their activities and then there is a step-down period before the bank/financial institution are kicked to the curb.  Three observations:

     First, companies who have ESG policies must be willing to face the consequences.  Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) investing refers to a set of standards for a company’s behavior used by socially conscious investors to screen potential investments.  Bottom line: a bank with an ESG policy doesn’t invest in oil/gas companies.  Most financial experts agree ESG policies are significantly more risky than non-ESG policy.   Oklahoma taxpayers are better off not having their money being invested by ‘woke’ bankers.

     Second, the energy sector is king in Oklahoma.  According to the Oklahoma Energy Resources Board, the total economic impact of 4,000 oil and gas businesses in the state in 2022 was $64.9 billion, a whopping 27% of the state’s total economic activity.  Nearly 200,000 Oklahomans, making $24 billion dollars are directly or indirectly employed by the energy sector.  As the old saying goes: ‘dance with the one who brought you.”  In other words- be loyal! 

     Third, Todd Russ is enforcing the law.  That should be commended.  All too often, elected officials are relucent to do the hard part of the job.  Russ received questionnaires from nearly 160 financial institutions and after identifying thirteen (13) who have ESG policies that violate HB#2034, he notified state entities/agencies.  They are to contact the offending financial institution and give them a chance to ‘explain themselves,’ before they are given the boot.  It remains to be seen if the bureaucrats will be as vigilant as the treasurer.   The agencies have a year to get it done.

     In the 1960s, businesses, big and small, focused exclusively on profit.  Businesses were not expected to have a conscience. They provided jobs. The purpose of a business was to create customers and to offer value to those customers.  Changing the world and public policy wasn’t a business objective- maximizing profit was their cornerstone. 

     Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), the precursor of ESG came along in the late 1960s.  A few businesses began to market and position their company and brands to appeal to social conscious consumers.  Sixty years ago, that was a narrow/niche market, e.g.: Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream.  Fast forward to 2023 and CSR/ESG is now mainstream.  The list of banks Russ released includes Blackrock, Wells Fargo, J.P Morgan, and Bank of America, some of the largest financial institutions in the country.  Blackrock has already announced they are willing to lose the business- they are not willing to change their ESG policy.  Standing up for a liberal cause and willing to lose profit is admirable- unless you own stock in Blackrock.  Consumers can change a businesses’ policy by boycotting businesses who implement policies Business policy/convictions/conscience change rapidly when profits are impacted by dumb decisions.  Alienating half of potential customers isn’t a sound strategic initiative.

Gamesmanship was first practiced in Genesis. It's not new!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

GAMESMANSHIP

by Steve Fair

 

     Gamesmanship is defined as the ability to outsmart the competition.  Gamesmanship was first practiced in negotiation in Genesis.  The serpent used deceptive tactics to convince Eve to eat the forbidden fruit.  Synonyms for gamesmanship are artfulness, cunning, bettering, and cageyness.  Gamesmanship is often considered an asset in politics.  If you can outfox or outwit your political opponent in order to achieve your goal, you are considered an effective politician. 

     This week, Governor Kevin Stitt vetoed twenty state senate bills as retribution for the state senate not passing his tax cut and education ideas.  The vetoed bills were not related to either of those two subjects.  Stitt did it as a form of ‘gamesmanship’ to get the attention of the senate.  The veto messages the governor attached to each said: “Oklahomans elected me to advocate on their behalf and fight for the taxpayer.  I take this responsibility seriously and so I cannot, in good faith, allow another year to go by without cutting taxes and reforming education.”  Stitt went on to say until the senate passes tax cuts, gives teachers a raise and pass school choice, he will continue to veto bills that originated in the senate.  Most of the legislation Stitt vetoed is not legislation he opposes.  Speaker of the House Charles McCall, (R-Atoka) supports the governor’s decision to veto the senate bills.  Clearly Sen. Greg Treat, Senate President Pro Tempore, doesn’t agree.  Three observations:

     First, a veto should never be used as a negotiating chip.  The Bible says a person’s yea should be yea and their nay nay.  In other words, a man’s word should be his bond.  He shouldn’t use cunning cagey tactics to get an advantage on his fellow man.  By his own admission, Stitt doesn’t oppose the majority of the bills he vetoed.  The governor clearly misused the power of the veto.  Vetoing these twenty pieces of legislation was nothing more than a political stunt.  That should never be done by principled elected officials.  Elected officials are charged with working with the other branches of government for the betterment of citizens.  During his two terms as president, George Washington vetoed only two pieces of legislation.  Stitt vetoed ten times that in one day.   

     Second, this veto stunt will cost Oklahoma taxpayers money.  The legislature (House and Senate) will now burn manhours at taxpayer expense to override vetoes (2/3 majority) on non-controversial legislation.  That is not a good spend of time for lawmakers.  It is unnecessary double work that risks good legislation not becoming law.  Oklahomans didn’t give the GOP super majorities in both chambers and a Republican governor to create a logjam or to put on a circus act.  They expect them to work together and get something done.  Stunts and gamesmanship are not what Sooners deserve or expect.  If you didn’t know better, you would think the house, senate and governor were from three different political parties.   It is not a good look for Oklahoma.  

     Third, Oklahomans do deserve some tax relief.  With a $1.2 billion dollar surplus, taxpayers have overpaid and they need to get some of it back- permanently.  The legislature and governor have argued too long on the details of tax relief.  It needs to get done this session.  If taxes are not cut, voters must hold their elected officials accountable at the next election. 

     Stitt and the legislature should try using these three principles in negotiation: (1) Be a good steward of taxpayer dollars and resources, (2) Make ethical decisions on how to negotiate, (3) Recognize that all parties should walk away and not feel like they were cheated.  In good negotiations, everyone wins.    

A sequel appears to be where America is today.

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

IMITATING OURSELVES

by Steve Fair

     President Joe Biden will announce his re-election bid on Tuesday.  The Democratic National Committee (DNC) announced they support Biden’s nomination and that no primary debates will be held.  Biden, at age 80, is the oldest U.S. president in history.  If he is reelected in 2024, Biden would be 82 when sworn in for his second term.    

     2024 is shaping up to be a sequel rematch between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.  Barring any unforeseen circumstances, Biden will be the Democrat nominee.  He faces token opposition and the leaders in the Party appear united in clearing a path to the nomination.  While it is still a year before GOP presidential primaries will be held, Trump, 77, has a double-digit lead among Republican primary voters.   Trump will face several viable opponents for the nomination, but none have the voter base or the fundraising ability of the former president.   If a rematch happens between Biden and Trump in 2024, what must the two candidates do differently than they did in 2020?  Three things

     First, Trump must lead with his accomplishments.  Trump tends to spend more time attacking/mocking his opponents than detailing public policy plan.  During the 2016 election, Trump had great appeal to swing voters.  Swing voters are the people who didn’t attend Trump’s rallies, laugh at his insults, or wear a MAGA ball cap.  They voted for Trump because their manufacturing job had been exported by the Obama administration.    They put Trump in office in 2016, but didn’t show up in 2020. No president in recent history did more to help America manufacturing than Trump.  Buy America appeals to the working Democrat.   Trump should recreate that appeal in 2024.      

     Second, Biden must campaign.  During the 2020 election, Joe Biden used the COVID pandemic as an excuse to hide in the basement.  He did less public campaigning than any presidential candidate in modern history.  That bizarre strategy worked in 2016 because the pandemic had everybody hunkered down.  But that approach will not work in 2024.  Biden must detail his plan on how to deal with record inflation, high interest rates, and diminishing retirement accounts, while explaining how his failed policies created the problem. 

     Third, the VP pick must be carefully watched.  If Biden or Trump are elected in 2024, they would be the oldest president in American history.  That makes the vice president pick very important.  Mike Pence was a capable and competent VP-  Kamala Harris not so much.  Harris is a far left ideolog that would will be a disaster as president.  It’s a safe bet Pence will not be Donald Trump’s running mate again, but whomever he selects needs to be capable.  American voters need to pay very close attention to who the VP picks are because they could very well be president due to the advanced age of the candidates.

    A Washington Post/ABC poll conducted in February showed Republicans spilt between nominating Donald Trump or someone else.  The poll found most Democrats preferred an alternative to Biden.  It found few Americans were excited about a Trump-Biden rematch.  Sequels are seldom as good as the original.  Dr. Don Marquis was an American philosopher that taught at the University of Kansas.  Marquis famously said, “A sequel is an admission that you’ve been reduced to imitating yourself.”  That appears to be where America is today.

Parents shouldn't have to engage in espionage and reconnaissance to find out what school is teaching!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

WINK & NOD!

by Steve Fair

     Oklahoma House Bill#2077, authored by Rep. Chad Caldwell, (R-Enid) and Sen. Dave Rader, (R-Tulsa) would have directed the State Department of Education to create an online transparency portal for review of certain school materials.  Caldwell said the bill would have given both parents and the public access to look through and comment on school curriculum, textbooks and library materials. 

     “We tried to find a simple middle of the road common sense solution that would address both sides of this issue.  Parents, not only in Oklahoma, but across the country are concerned about what is going on in our schools,” Caldwell said.  The immediate financial cost to Oklahoma taxpayers to create the portal was estimated to be $1 million dollars.   

     HB#2077 passed in the House Appropriations and Budget Education subcommittee 10-4.  All Democrats on the subcommittee opposed it with one Republican, Rep. Ronny Johns, (R-Ada), a former school superintendent, joining them.  On March 2^nd, when voted on by the full A&B committee, HB#2077 failed 24-8.   

     Opposition to HB#2077 was initially from Democrats.  Democrat floor leader, Rep. Andy Fugate, (D-Del City) said, “I’m concerned about the impact to classroom teachers having another place to have to upload information.  If they don’t use the precise, exact language, they open themselves up to be a target.”  But some Republicans also thought HB#2077 had some fishhooks.  Rep. Rhonda Baker, (R-Yukon) said school superintendents in her district opposed it because they didn’t have the manpower to upload the material.  Caldwell responded that his goal was to reduce the burden on the districts, not add to it.  Baker voted to advance the bill in subcommittee, but opposed passage in full committee (very common occurrence).  Three observations:

     First, parents and taxpayers have a right to know what is going on in the schools.  They are the ones paying the bill.  HB#2077 may not have been the right vehicle or had the perfect language, but Caldwell’s idea of accountability and transparency is a good one.  Making it easier for taxpayers and parents to review what their children are being taught or have access to it would have been progress.  It might have been vexatious and burdensome for educators to upload, but that could have been addressed.  Parents and school patrons should not have to engage in espionage and reconnaissance to find out what their local school is teaching. 

     Second, the killing of HB#2077 illustrates the effective power of the education lobby.  Once word got out HB#2077 had gotten out of the subcommittee and had a chance to become law, opposition got busy.  They immobilized and made sure the bill was dead on arrival.  The education lobby is consistently opposed to efforts to provide the public more transparency into what is going on in schools.  Any attempt to force more accountability is resisted. 

     Third, local school board members are important.  These elected officials serve with little or no compensation.  Per Oklahoma statutes, school board members are ‘eligible’ to receive $25 per meeting, not to exceed $100 monthly.  They represent school patrons and parents and are charged with general oversight of the district.  Sadly, most just ‘rubber stamp’ the administration’s recommendation on curriculum and textbooks.  They take more interest in the fiscal issues.  Both are important.  School board members should make it their mission to know what their school is teaching and solicit input from those in their district.    

    School board races were held across the state of Oklahoma in February and April.  Turnout was dismal.  Less than 10% of those eligible to cast a vote bothered to show up and vote.  Until parents and taxpayers start to care more, little will change.

     Several Republican House members opposed passage of HB#2077 in the A&B committee.  If your State Representative was one of them- ask them why they opposed it.  They may have a good reason, but opposing it because the school superintendents in the district opposed it is not one of them.  Opposition to a bill that provides transparency to taxpayers has to be more substantive than just a wink and a nod.

 

Sadly, for most politicians ‘standing on principle’ is just a campaign slogan!

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

DEARTH OF TRUTH!

by Steve Fair

     Politico, a political newspaper based in Virginia, was founded in 2007 by Robert Allbritton.  Allbritton, a Texan, sold Politico to a German publishing company for $1 billion in cash in 2021. Politico leans left of center (meaning liberal), but their coverage of politics is followed by people on both sides of the aisle. 

     On Saturday, Politico columnist Steven Shephard wrote Republicans were losing races because more than 50% of America supports abortion.    Shephard claims 60% of voters support legal abortions in most cases.  He says only one third of American voters want abortion to be entirely or mostly illegal. Citing last week’s Wisconsin Supreme Court race, Shephard concludes the GOP lost because the youth vote is not pro-life.  He says Rs will continue to lose if the Party doesn’t, “find a message that puts the Party more in line with the median voter.” Three observations:

     First, standing up for what is right is more important than winning political races.  Shephard may be correct about Republicans losing the youth vote.  Because there is a moral decline in America, interest in spiritual things is down across the board, especially among the young.  Abortion is a Biblical and political issue that polarizes. Polarization makes GOP political operatives nervous and puts their livelihood in jeopardy.  Their response is to ‘rebrand/relabel’ the message by toning down a strong pro-life stance by candidates.

     Sadly, for most politicians ‘standing on principle’ is just a campaign slogan.  All too often, candidates are recruited based on their marketability, not their ability.  Political consultants want a candidate as pliable as wax to be molded into effigies that can get elected.  Once elected, those ignorant and uninformed droids get schooled by special interests on how to vote and behave.  If they play the game- they get funded for reelection.  If they don’t play the game, they are abandoned and another golem is enlisted.  Until voters start paying attention all the time and not just a month before an election, the cycle will continue.

      Second, life begins at conception.  Even most liberals concede that fact, but even if they don’t believe it, it is still true.  God said He gives life.  He is the Creator.  In America, a person has a right to believe otherwise, but it doesn’t the change facts.  God is the Creator and man is His creation.  Legalizing abortion puts man in direct conflict with what God has said.  Former President Reagan wisely said, “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born.” 

    Third, America has too much emphasis on relevance or not enough on reverence.  The familiarity of basic Bible truths is at an all-time low.  Modern day churches, Christians, and parents have abandoned the message of the Gospel for a pertinent gist, which has resulted in a dearth of truth.  Emphasis on self-fulfillment has created a society of narcissistic people who are self-centered, arrogant and have no empathy or consideration for others.  Because they believe there is no absolute truth, they are on a continual journey for admiration.  They look at those who believe the Bible as unlearned, unscientific boobs, sitting on a tree stump picking their teeth.  They fail to see they are the unenlightened.  May God open their eyes.

     Shephard concludes his column by saying Democrats need to be careful expanding abortion.  He says the Party who ‘moderates’ their position on abortion will likely win elections in the future, by attracting the youth vote.  If the GOP weakens their position on life in the womb, they will lose a huge percentage of the base and cease to be the Republican Party.  That will guarantee its defeat.

Blind loyalty/allegiance often leads to disappointment for the devoted.

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

TRUMP NOT TARGET!

by Steve Fair

 

     On Thursday, former President Donald Trump was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury.  The indictment, the first directed at a U.S. president, concerned Trump’s alleged role in a hush money payment made to Stormy Daniels, a porn actress.  The former president is expected to appear in person at an arraignment on Manhattan Island Tuesday.  Three observations:

     First, the indictment is a misuse of the legal system.  Most legal experts believe the Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg doesn’t have a strong case.  They predict Trump will be found not guilty, if the case goes to trial.  Bragg is attempting to tie the payment to Daniels as an in-kind campaign contribution.  They believe that would be a stretch, since no campaign monies were used for the payment.  A former Federal Election Commission Chair says the payment would not be considered a political contribution.

     Bragg openly campaigned in 2021 he would indict Trump if elected.  That is highly inappropriate for a prosecutor.  District Attorneys are not to engage in ‘selective enforcement,’ or targeted prosecution.  Bragg is soft on real crime.  Bragg, 49, announced four days after he took office that he would not enforce what he called low level offenses.  Offenses like resisting arrest, prostitution, and cannabis related laws are not enforced in Manhattan.  Bragg also announced burglaries and store robberies, ‘”where the offender displays a dangerous weapon, but does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.” would be reduced to a misdemeanor.  Bizarre! But Bragg is aggressive in going after high profile political figures. He indicted former Trump advisor Steve Bannon in September on charges of fraud, the same charges Trump pardoned him for.  Bragg, a Harvard grad, is politically ambitious and a self-promoter. 

     Second, President Trump is basking in the attention.  Most people would have angst or perturbation if they faced indictment by a prosecutor, even if they were innocent.  But not Trump.  The former POTUS has stated he wants to be handcuffed and a mug shot taken.  Both are not likely to happen.  Trump subscribes to the theory any press is good press and there is no such thing as bad publicity.  Painting himself as the persecuted victim who is being picked on helps Trump with his base.  Reportedly Trump has raised $4 million dollars in campaign funds since the indictment was announced- 25% came from new donors.  By indicting him, Bragg likely handed the former POTUS the 2024 GOP nomination. 

     Third, this indictment is not about Trump.  Bragg denies it, but he and most every Democrat hate what Trump was able to accomplish in his single term.  They hate Trump’s policies more than they hate him.  But they recognize their socialist stratagem won’t sell to the public.  They resort to attacking the messenger.  They condemn him for his boisterous, egotistical, muckraking personality.  The real bulls-eye is conservative policies.

     Breaking the law or misbehavior by elected officials should never be excused by all Americans.  Every person of character, no matter their Party affiliation or political leanings, should demand integrity and forthrightness from elected leaders.  No one should ever be considered above the law, including former presidents.  No one should excuse misbehavior or turn a blind eye to shenanigans, even from zealot DAs. 

     Bragg’s actions are obviously partisan, but Democrats have ‘circled the wagons’ around him.  Many Republicans have done the same for Trump.  Blind loyalty/allegiance often leads to disappointment for the devoted.