Weekly Opinion Editorial

MAN, BEAST, PROPERTY NOT SAFE!

    The Oklahoma legislature ended filing of bills for this session on Thursday.  The 48 member Senate filed a total of 1,116 bills and 18 Senate Joint Resolutions.  That is an average of 23.25 bills per senator. 

     The 101 member Oklahoma House of Representatives filed 1,901 bills( up 419 from last year) and 44 House Joint Resolutions.  That is an average of 19 bills per representative.  All told, state lawmakers will be considering over 3,000 bills this year.  In 2022, 416 bills became law. 

     Legislative rules allow for appropriation bills to be filed throughout the session and rest assured, there will be several.  The rules also allow for the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House to initiate legislation at any time.

    The Oklahoma Constitution sets the date for the legislature to meet.  This year, it will convene on Monday February 6^th and  adjourn by May 26^th.  If taxpayers want to research  legislation, they can go to www.okhouse.gov or www.oksenate.gov. 

     One bill certain to be controversial is a school choice proposal by Sen. Julie Daniels, (R--Bartlesville and Sen. Shane Jett, (R-Shawnee) that would allow parents the option of tapping a portion of their children’s education dollars to pay for a variety of education services, including tuition.  That bill number is SB#822. 

     After meeting with a group of public school educators on Wednesday, Sen. Adam Pugh, (R-Edmond), the Chair of the Senate Education committee, released a four point public education agenda, detailing his support of public school teachers.  President Pro Tempore Sen. Greg Treat, (R-Edmond) praised Pugh’s agenda in a press release.  Often when leadership opposes a bill, it never gets to the floor for a vote. SB#822 faces an uphill battle. 

     Rep. Josh West refilled HB#1030, which would require a consumer’s consent for their personal data to be collected.  West’s bill passed the House last year, but did not get a vote in the Senate.   "Major technology companies track our every conversation, our spending records, our movements and so much more and then sell that information so it can be used to socially engineer us through marketing manipulation," West said. Three observations::

     First, lawmakers need to major on the majors.  Appropriations, revenue, taxation bills should be at the forefront.  Money bills should be paramount, but inevitably they are pushed to the back of the line and considered last.  Often the fiscal year budget is the last bill to pass in a legislative session. 

     Oklahoma tax payers deserve meaningful tax cuts in 2023.  State government is flush in money and lawmakers have generously handed out raises to state employees, teachers, and others.  It’s time to give the taxpayer back some of their money and it should be a significant/consequential amount, not some negligible token tossed to taxpayers like they were a beggar on the street.    

     Second, taxpayers/voters/citizens should pay attention.  Legislators seldom hear from constituents until a citizen is angry.  Careful, deliberate, continual monitoring of what is going on at the legislature will result in more accountability.  People often do what is ‘inspected’ more than what is ‘expected.’  The web sites mentioned above are a place to start.  When you communicate with your legislator, be clear, concise, and respectful.  Expressing your opinion in a constructive effectual manner can often result in their being better informed.  A good legislator will welcome the input because it will keep them in tune with what their district and state want and need.

     Third, there are too many bills.  House bills filed were up +22% vs last year, Senate bills up +18.8%.  Many of these bills are repetitious/redundant and unnecessary.  Lawmakers wrongly believe they must get bills passed into law in order to be effective.  The truth is legislators are sent to the Capitol to ‘represent’ their constituents/district and to ‘vet’ legislation.

 .  Filing bills on controversial issues to call attention to themselves is not a part of their job description.  These 3,000 bills have to be organized and considered, with there being only a 13% chance of one making it on the books.  A great deal of taxpayer funded time and money is being wasted for legislators to grandstand.

     Back in the 1930s, when the Oklahoma legislature was in Democrat control, the late Will Rogers said when they were in session, ‘neither man, beast or property’ was safe.  Sadly, not much has changed in the past century. Oklahoma taxpayers/voters/citizens better pay close attention to what is happening at 23^rd and Lincoln(State Capitol) in 2023.

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

CONVERGE, NOT DIVERGE!

by Steve Fair

      A recent article in Forbes magazine addressed state to state migration.  According to Forbes, Americans are moving long-distances more than ever.  The increase has since the COVID-19 pandemic.  The ability to work remotely and the opportunity to pursue new avenues and opportunities have increased address changes from state to state by +5% in the past two years.  California, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts are the five states Americans are fleeing.  Texas, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Georgia are the top five U.S. states people are moving to.  Oklahoma ranks #13 among all states in state-to-state migration.

      Oklahoma population has increased each year the past twelve years.  The average growth has been about ½ percent per year.  It was recently announced Oklahoma’s population is now over four million for the first time in state history.  Oklahoma’s population growth has outpaced all bordering states with the exception of Texas.  There are two primary reasons people are moving to Oklahoma?

     First, the lower cost of living.   Oklahoma has the third-lowest cost of living in the United States, behind only Kansas and Mississippi.  Americans are fleeing states with a high cost of living, especially during inflationary times.  Migrants coming from California and New York to Oklahoma are paying 25% less for housing, 12% less for food and fuel.  While Oklahoma’s per capita income is lower than the regional average, the cost of living does make up for some of that deficiency.

     Second, politics.  Many of the new residents in the state trekked here because of politics.  Some came because they love the lax medical marijuana laws and the accessibility to casino gambling.  Others came because Oklahoma’s governor and legislature didn’t shut down the state during the COVID-19 pandemic.  Still others came to Oklahoma because the state is more politically conservative than the state they were living in. The Oklahoma legislature has passed some of the most pro-life legislation in the United States and gun rights are celebrated in the Sooner state. 

     New blood brings new opportunities.  Oklahoma currently has five U.S. House districts.  If population growth continues, it could add an additional seat after the 2030 census. Additional population means more manpower/labor force available in the state.  That in turn attracts employers and helps existing businesses grow.  

     Newcomers can also present challenges.  They bring with them their values, principles, morals, ethics, and politics to their new location.  They often work to convert those in their new locale to their world view instead of accepting/embracing what/who/where they are.  New settlers introduce new ideas, customs, and values to their new state.  Instead of converging or moving toward union or uniformity, they diverge and divide the state.

     Most of those moving to Oklahoma for political reasons are moving from Democratic controlled states.  In their previous state, they were considered conservative, but in truly conservative Oklahoma, their views are moderate at best.   

     Oklahomans should welcome migrants from other states with open arms.  Legendary college football coach, Frosty Westering said it best; “You are either green and growing or ripe and rotting.” But Oklahomans should not embrace their politics and values.  If newcomers came to Oklahoma because their previous state was too liberal, they should accept Oklahoma is the most conservative state in the U.S. and not attempt to change it to a ‘lite’ version of their previous zip code.   

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

KNOW WHEN TO WIN!

By Steve Fair

      The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives is the presiding officer of the body.  The office was established in Article 1 of the U.S. Constitution.  The Speaker is the political and parliamentary leader of the House, as well as the presiding officer.  The Speaker serves as the de facto leader of the House majority Party and the head of the administration for the House.  The Constitution does not require the Speaker to be a member of the body, however all thus far have been. 

     There are 435 members of the U.S. House.  A Speaker must normally receive 218 votes to be elected (a simple majority).  Most Speakers are elected on the first ballot.  There have been 14 instances in U.S. history where the Speaker’s race required multiple ballots- the last time in 1923, when Rep. Frederick Gillett, (R-MA) was elected on the ninth ballot.   

     The 2023 race for Speaker took a similar turn.  Rep. Kevin McCarthy, (R-CA), the House minority leader the past four years failed to reach the 218 votes on fourteen ballots.  This after former President Trump publicly urged Republican members to unite behind McCarthy.   Trump’s endorsement of McCarthy did not get him one vote on the next ballot. Ultimately, McCarthy was elected on the fifteen ballot, with  six Republicans voting present and McCarthy getting 216 votes, a majority of those voting.

     Twenty Republican members of the House, including newly elected Rep. Josh Brecheen, (R-OK), refused to coalesce/unify behind 200 other Republicans to elect McCarthy.  These hold-out members constitute the ‘Freedom’ caucus.  It appeared McCarthy wasn’t going to be elected without their support.  The 20 member Freedom caucus demanded the threshold needed to call a vote of confidence in the Speaker be lowered to just one member (McCarthy agreed to do that).  The Freedom caucus called for lower taxes, a reduction of the national debt, and a lowering of the federal budget deficit.  They also have demanded seats on powerful committees.  McCarthy agreed to virtually all of their demands, but in doing so  angered some of the more moderate members of the Republican caucus.    Three observations:

     First, a legislative body requires teamwork.  No individual member of a 435 member body can get much accomplished.  They have to work with others to accomplish anything.  Collaboration, negotiation, and cooperation are necessary skills to get legislation passed.  Failure to work with other members of the body will limit effectiveness of a member.  Too many uncooperative team members kill a team’s goals and objectives.   Effective governing requires willingness to give and take.  Being obstructive is not constructive. Helen Keller said, “Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much.”

     Second, some people will take nothing instead of something.  Some people are not wired to negotiate.  They consider any concession an unnecessary compromise.  They are intolerant of an alternate viewpoint.  Bargaining is for the feeble.  They would rather lose than compromise their convictions.  They are willing to accept a liberal over a moderate to prove their point. 

     Third, the tail wagged the dog in the Speaker race. The twenty members of the Freedom caucus constitute just 10% of the House GOP caucus, yet they were able to exercise proportionally more power than their numbers dictate.  All of their goals are worthy ones, but it remains to be seen if those goals will be accomplished, after their angering many in their own caucus.   

     Fortunately, Rep. McCarthy did not withdraw and a ‘moderate/centrist’ GOP candidate for Speaker get elected with ‘blue dog’ Democrat support.  That would have created a circus in the House.  Speaker McCarthy’s challenge is to ‘herd the cats’ and move the House forward.  With a single member having the ability to call for a confidence vote on the Speaker, his challenge of unifying the GOP will be formidable. 

     There is a fine line between negotiating and quibbling.  If negotiating gets personal (and it clearly did in the Speaker’s race), both parties lose.  Good negotiators are tough, but they know when to quit.  For a good negotiator, it’s not all or nothing.  They understand the art of the deal.  Six Republicans have shown they throw the long ball on every play and don’t subscribe to incrementally moving the ball down the field.

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

RE-ELECTION TOKENS ARE BACK!

by Steve Fair

     On December 22^nd, the U.S. Senate voted to pass a $1.7 trillion-dollar 4,155-page omnibus package. It funds the federal government through September 2023 and provides the Ukraine with $45 billion in military and economic aid.  The omnibus also included reforms to the Electoral Count Act (ECA).  The original ECA was passed in 1887 after three disputed presidential elections.  It set forth a formal procedure for Congress in how Electoral votes were counted.  The 2022 revision diminishes the role of the Vice President in the counting process and makes their function ceremonial.  Many believe it will not pass constitutional muster. 

     The Senate passed the bill 68-29, with 18 Republicans joining all Democrats to vote yay.  Sen. Jim Inhofe, (R-OK) was one of the 18, citing the increase in defense spending as his main motivator.  Sen. James Lankford, (R-OK) voted no.

     The U.S. House voted on Friday 225-201, along Party lines to pass the omnibus.   All five Oklahoma U.S. House members voted against the omnibus.   Three observations:

     First, Sen. Inhofe, who is retiring this month after 28 years in the Senate, has never been a fiscal conservative.  Inhofe fought the elimination of Senate earmarks when the late U.S. Senator Tom Coburn championed voiding them in 2010.  Coburn clashed with Inhofe on earmarks and other fiscal issues the entire time they served together in the Senate.   Inhofe argued for earmarks to be reinstated last year.  The Senate recognized the general public opposed earmarks, so they cleverly rebranded them, ‘congressionally directed spending.’  A more appropriate label would be ‘reelection tokens.’ 

       During the 2010 debate on earmarks, Inhofe stated Congress is given, ‘the power of the purse,’ therefore making earmarks for individual members not just acceptable, but necessary. Opposing views contend the 535 members have the ‘power of the purse,’ collectively, not individually. 

      The omnibus, which became law on Friday, contained 3,100 earmarks totaling almost $7.8 billion dollars.  44% of the total earmarks came from Republicans.  Senator Inhofe did his part to ‘bring home the bacon.’  On Inhofe’s official Senate website, there is an extensive listing of Oklahoma projects included in the omnibus.  Most, if not all of the projects, are worthy of funding.  Worthiness is not the issue.  No single Senator (no matter their Party affiliation, worldview, values) should wield the power to sovereignly decide what to fund or not to fund.  

     Second, this was passed without anybody reading it.  The bill was given to the Senators on Tuesday, with a vote scheduled on Thursday.  To read it in that period of time would be like reading the entire Bible twice in two days.  Nobody read it all!  The chance of errors, unintended consequences, and just plain fraud is high.  That is no way to run a government.  Government requires publicly traded companies to provide accurate financial information to the public or face stiff penalties.  When errors or misstatements happen in legislation government proclaims, ‘my bad,’ and moves on.  Elected representative should be required to read the legislation they are voting on and leadership should be required to provide sufficient time for that to be done.

     Third, America’s fiscal house is falling apart with Republicans helping it happen.  The national debt is $31.3 trillion and rising.  Elected officials- in both Parties- spend tax dollars like drunken sailors.  Government waste is never addressed.  Government continues to grow at an alarming rate.  Republicans campaign on stopping the cycle of repetitiveness, but once elected, they spend money America doesn’t have on programs America doesn’t need.  We need more Tom Coburns.

     Senator James Lankford, (R-OK) replaced Coburn when he resigned from the Senate.  Lankford has continued Coburn’s fiscal conservatism fight.  He voted against the omnibus, citing the record high deficit spending it included.

     Dr. Coburn once said, “We need real leadership, Democrat, Republican and independent to stand up and say, we have to live within our means.” That is a concept 18 Republican Senators failed to grasp this week.

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

PREDETERMINED FINDINGS

by Steve Fair

     After 18 months, the U.S. House select committee investigating the January 6^th U.S. Capitol breech released an 845-page report based on over 1,000 interviews.  The nine-member committee had just two Republican members.  Rep. Liz Cheney, (R-WY) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger, (R- Il) were the two GOP members.  Both Cheney and Kinzinger have been strong public critics of former President Trump.

     The committee alleges President Trump oversaw the effort to put forward an alternative slate of electors in seven states he lost.  Citing the 14^thamendment (equal protection under the law), the committee recommends the former president be barred from holding any future government office- federal or otherwise.  They also recommend Congress pass laws with stronger criminal penalties for those who obstruct a peaceful transfer of power.  They also recommended Congress pass laws that give select committees be given subpoena power.    A number of individuals the committee subpoenaed did not appear including former President Trump.  Steve Bannon was convicted in federal court for refusing to provide testimony to the committee and was sentenced to four months in prison.  Three observations:

      First, the committee’s findings were predetermined.  The January 6^thcommittee was not as concerned with investigating the breach of the Capitol as they were getting President Trump.  None of the members of the committee went into the process with an open mind.  Cheney and Kinzinger were handpicked by Speaker Pelosi because they are Trump critics and they were elected Republicans.  The Democrats needed a couple of token Republicans on the committee so they could call it ‘bipartisan.’  Rest assured; the conclusions were preestablished.  The goal is and remains to prevent Donald J. Trump from ever holding office again.

      Second, the January 6^th breech of the Capitol should have been investigated by Congress.  The U.S. Capitol is the people’s house, but individual citizens don’t have a right to vandalize and destroy it.  Thus far, 964 people have been charged in the breech- over half have pled guilty.   Some were just ‘caught up in the moment,’ and acted on impulse.  Others wanted to overthrow the government.  Still others, just love conflict and like to tear up stuff.  Whatever the reason, those who bum rushed the Capitol on January 6^thdidn’t use good judgment and their actions didn’t further their cause for liberty.

     Third, the committee wants to reform the Electoral Count Act of 1887.  They want Congress to pass a law that prevents a Vice President from questioning a state’s electors.  They advocate for the VP’s role to be largely ceremonial.  The U.S. Constitution is clear; the VP presides over the process.  It is not ceremonial. 

     They recommend raising the number of votes needed in Congress to question a state’s election results.  This recommendation contradicts HR1, a proposal by Democrats to federalize elections.  But perhaps it doesn’t conflict with HR1?  The goal of the Democrats is to control the process by taking voters out of the equation.

     The committee’s recommendations ignore average Americans.  They want to manage/control the election system after the voters have spoken.  America is a Republic.  The power is held by the people and their elected representatives.  The January 6^thcommittee wants an oligarchy, a system of government where a small group of elitist rules.  The creditability of their report is questionable at best.  Eighteen months and a ton of tax dollars wasted!  The recommendations could have been written the day the committee was established.

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

A LITTLE BIT MORE!

by Steve Fair

     The birth of Jesus Christ will be celebrated this week.  Christmas was declared a federal holiday in the United States in 1870.  It was an attempt by President Grant to unite the nation after the civil war.  Most private companies in the United States close on Christmas and give their employees the day off.  Three observations about the Christmas holiday:

     First, early Christian believers didn’t celebrate Jesus’ birth.  Celebration of Christ’s birth started in the fourth century when the church fathers in Rome decided to set December 25^th (winter solstice) in order to ‘Christianize’ the popular pagan celebrations on that date. 

     Winter solstice is the day of the year with the shortest period of daylight and the longest night of the year.  This year winter solstice is December 21^st.  In the ancient world, winter solstice was celebrated with gift giving, feasts and festivals.  Sound familiar? 

      It is unlikely Christ was born on December 25^th.  Most Bible scholars say shepherds would not have been in the fields with their flocks in the winter, implying a warmer month as the actual date of Jesus’ birth.  But Jesus Christ was indeed born and His birth should be celebrated by believers.  How that is done should be a matter of personal liberty.  Scripture neither commends or condemns celebrating Christ’s birth. 

     Second, Americans celebrate Christmas in a big way!  A whopping 75% of annual retail sales in the U.S. are during the Christmas season.  In 2022, holiday retail sales are forecast to reach $942.6 billion dollars. 41% of Americans are willing to take on debt due to gift giving.  The average American family spends $1,000 on Christmas.  Americans spend $6 billion on Christmas trees. 93% exchange gifts and 74% attend holiday parties.  According to USA Today, 10% of people return their gifts to the store and 47% of those who got gift cards didn’t get the full value from the card. 

     Third, most celebrating Christmas miss the reason for the season.  The number of Americans who worship Christ is declining.  According to a poll by Pew Research, Christians will be a minority in America by 2070 if current trends continue. Sociologists call the people who are shelving their Christian roots, nonverts.  These young adults(30 years and under) are more secular than their parents and grandparents.  42% of young adults do not consider themselves religious.  They miss the true meaning of Christmas and Christianity because they don’t realize they are sinners.  They don’t show any interest in Christ because they don’t understand their need of salvation.  They don’t understand the wages of sin is death and plummets people into an eternal hell.  They ignore the remedy/treatment because they don’t even realize they have the disease. 

      The trend toward atheism and agnosticism has been a slow but steady decline in Europe.  In the U.S., it has been steep and quick, starting in the early 2000s.   To compound the problems, churches have resorted to secular tactics to fill their pews.  They have sought relevance and ditched reverence.  The Gospel has become secondary to schemes, activities, and programs. 

      Two thousand years ago, the Creator of the universe, the eternal God, took on humanity. With Christ’s birth, God and man were fused together in indivisible oneness.  The real significance of the birth of God in human form is overlooked, trivialized and minimalized in the very holiday created to celebrate His birth.   

     Theodor Seuss Geisel was a children’s book author and cartoonist.  He wrote 60 books under the pen name, Dr. Seuss.  In “The Grinch who stole Christmas,” the title character says in anapestic meter: “Maybe Christmas doesn’t come from a store.  Maybe Christmas perhaps means a little bit more.” You are right, Mr. Grinch!

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

THE RIGHT OF CONSCIENCE!

by Steve Fair

      The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

     The framers of the Constitution understood the importance of protecting the freedom of individual conscience.  James Madison, the father of the Constitution, called man’s conscience ‘the most sacred of all property.’  Thomas Jefferson said no ‘provision in the constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the government.’ 

     Is free speech being suppressed in modern America?  Can Americans express their opinion in the public square without fear of retaliation or censorship?  If social media is considered the public square, perhaps it is.  On Friday, Elon Musk released internal documents from Twitter files that revealed the social media giant restricted the sharing of a New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s shady dealings.  Hunter is President Biden’s son. Musk said he released it to expose what he claims is the political left’s grip over Big Technology.  Three observations:

     First, social media is not the public square.  Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and others are private businesses and have the right to set up guidelines and policies on how they do business.  While it is true that 3.5 billion or 45% of the world’s population use social media to keep in contact with others, social media is still free enterprise.  Users are social media consumers and have a choice as to whether they post or not.  The platforms have a choice on what they allow. 

      Second, social media engages in censorship and suppression. As Musk’s release revealed, Twitter restricted the widespread distribution of information that would have been damaging to the 2020 Biden campaign. 

     Some conservative lawmakers have attempted to pass legislation prohibiting platforms from censoring posts based on a person’s viewpoint and users who have been censored would be able to sue a site for it.  Restricting the right of free enterprise to operate without government interference is what Republicans have traditionally stood for. 

     Third, actions have consequences.  As the big social media giants have ramped up their ‘thou shalt not’ philosophy with users, they have lost users and thus important advertising revenue.  Advertisers of goods/services don’t traditionally seek controversy.  Twitter advertising is down -30% vs. last year.

      Last month, Elon Musk told Twitter staff the companies’ financial problems are so serious that ‘bankruptcy is not out of the question.’  Facebook revenue is down and profits are less than half than one year ago.  Protecting fellow Americans from themselves has cost Big Tech’s bottom line.

     The loss of free speech in the public square has evolved because of three clear deficiencies in modern America: (1) The void of in-person interaction among people.  Courageous keyboard warriors now communicate with their friends without looking at them eyeball to eyeball.  That has resulted in comments and insults that in years past they would never say in person, but now do.  The perceived importance of interpersonal skills is at an all-time low.  (2)  Respecting a differing opinion and being humble is considered weak.  Exaggerating another’s position and attacking them personally is fashionable and celebrated.  Civility is dead. Ideological purity is demanded.  (3) The intolerance of the tolerant.  Those who demand respect for their opinion don’t respect those who disagree with them.   The problem with the first amendment is it protects the speech we hate and tolerates the speech that offends us.  Until Americans recognize others have a right to be wrong, the first amendment will be subdued.

Weekly Opinion Editorial 

WALK IN THE RAIN!

by Steve Fair

     In an op/ed in Politico last week, Jeff Greenfield addressed the Republican and Democratic Party presidential nomination process.  Greenfield writes the Trump campaign has an under-appreciated advantage in understanding the GOP nominating process vs. other potential candidates, because they have been through it before. 

     Most registered voters have little idea how a Party selects the nominee.   The two major Parties do not do it the same way.  Democrats require delegates to their national nominating convention be proportionally allocated in each state.  Republicans leave the decision on how delegates are selected up to each state.   

     Some states, including Oklahoma, hold a presidential preference primary.  In Oklahoma, if a candidate receives 50% of the vote in the primary, all the state’s delegates are pledged to that candidate.  If no candidate reaches the 50% threshold, all candidates who receive 15% or more of the vote get delegates.    Other states use a caucus or a state convention to select national delegates. 

     In 2020, Oklahoma had 43 delegates to the 2020 convention.  15 of those delegates were selected at Congressional District level (5 districts x 3 delegates each).  25 were selected at the state GOP convention.  3 were automatic delegates as elected members of the Republican National Committee (State Chair/National Committeeman & Committeewoman). 

     Oklahoma Republican Party rules and Oklahoma State law bind convention delegates to vote for who they are pledged to for as long as that candidate remains in the race.  Every delegate must sign an affidavit before they attend the national convention.  Three points about the process:

     First, Trump does have an advantage in the nomination process.  Knowledge of how the primary system works is crucial.  Early in 2016, the Trump team was clueless about the delegate selection rules.  They even dared to claim the system was rigged- all while they were winning.  Knowing the quirky rules, by state, is fundamental to being effective in a primary campaign.  Ignorance of how the game is played is no excuse- especially for well-organized candidates.

     Second, expect the RNC and some states to alter/change/amend the rules.  It happens every cycle.  A state changes their delegate selection process to a caucus system or a presidential preference primary or move up or back the date of their primary. 

     The RNC attempts to ‘manage’ the process to avoid a brokered convention by dictating which states can go first in the primary order.  They try to impose penalties (not sitting their delegates) on states that don’t comply.  Each state wants more influence in the nomination process.    

     In 2015, former RNC members presented a rotating system that would have rewarded Red states like Oklahoma, Alabama, and Utah, by allowing those states to hold their primaries first.  It would have given more conservative states a greater influence in the nominating process.  That proposal was soundly defeated.  The RNC continues to allow Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada and Florida to hold early races, in spite of the fact they are not as conservative as the previously mentioned trio of states.  Don’t expect the RNC to change the primary order in 2024.

     Third, Oklahoma voters cast their presidential primary vote for an unknown representative. That representative is a political activist who will represent them at the GOP national convention.  They will be legally bound to vote the way the district or state voted.  They will spend their own money and time to travel to the convention.  They will be criticized by some for sticking to their word and doing what they said they would do.  Why would anyone do that?  Because they love their Party, their state and their country?  Those fellow citizens should be applauded, not abhorred.  They should be cheered, not discouraged.  Without their dedication, devotion, and commitment, the process would be havoc and anarchy.     

     America was founded on the principle of the government deriving power from the consent of the governed.  Until the majority of the governed deposit sustained ownership in government, the unengaged and uninformed will show no appreciation for political activists and will detest elected officials.  Roger Miller said, “Some people walk in the rain- others just get wet.”

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

GROUNDHOG DAY!

by Steve Fair

     On Tuesday, former President Donald Trump announced he was running for the Republican nomination in 2024.  “In order to make America great and glorious again, I am tonight announcing my candidacy for president of the United States,” he told the crowd gathered at Mar-a-Lago. “America’s comeback starts now,!” Trump proclaimed. 

     Some of Trump’s family isn’t on board like they were in his previous two campaigns.  Ivanka Trump Kushner, the ex-president’s daughter and former advisor, did not attend the announcement and issued a statement after the declaration of her father.  “While I will always love and support my father, going forward I will do so outside the political arena,” Trump Kushner said.  Her husband, Jared Kushner, a former senior advisor to the president, did attend the announcement, as did sons Eric and Barron, but Donald Trump Jr. was not in attendance.

     Reaction to Trump’s announcement was mixed from Congressional Republicans.  Four term Congresswoman Rep. Elise Stefanik, (R-NY), endorsed Trump, calling him the most popular Republican in America, who has a proven record of conservative governance.  Three term Congressman Rep. Andy Biggs, (R-AZ), who unsuccessfully challenged Rep. Kevin McCarthy, (R-CA) for Speaker earlier this week said Trump was the leader of the Republican Party.  Former White House physician, Texas Congressman Ronny Jackson, (R,TX), said he was 100% behind Trump. 

     Former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney(who served 15 months in the job) said Trump was the only Republican who could lose in 2024 and it would be a mistake to nominate him.  Outgoing Maryland Governor Larry Hogan agreed.  Sen. Richard Burr, (R-NC), who is retiring after 28 years in Congress, said he could care less about Trump’s announcement.  It is not unheard of for an ex-president to covet moving back to the White House. 

     Three ex-presidents in American history have come back and ran for the job.  President Ulysses S. Grant served two terms as POTUS from 1869-1877, but declined to run for a third term.  He changed his mind in 1880 and ran for the Republican nomination, but lost to James Garfield on the 36^th ballot. 

     After losing to FDR, President Herbert Hoover ran for the GOP nomination in 1936 and 1940, but failed to win the Party’s nod. 

     Three other former presidents tried to get their old job back by running as third-Party candidates. Martin Van Buren ran eight years after he was defeated and came in third and got no electoral votes.   Millard Fillmore created the Know Nothing Party’s nomination in 1852,  and finished third with 21% of the popular vote and got eight electoral votes.  Could it have been the Party’s name?

      Perhaps the best-known ex-president to try and win the Oval Office job back is President Teddy Roosevelt.  After serving seven years, Roosevelt chose to not run for reelection.  He handpicked Secretary of War William Howard Taft as his successor, but quickly regretted the decision.  Roosevelt ran against Taft for the Republican nomination in 1912, but narrowly lost.  Teddy then created the Bull Moose Party.  He got 27.4% of the popular vote and 88 electoral votes.  Taft got 23.2% of the popular vote, but only 8 electoral votes.  Taking advantage of the Republicans splitting the vote, Woodrow Wilson won 435 electoral votes with just 41% of the popular vote. 

     President Grover Cleveland is the only former president who has come back after being defeated for reelection to win a second nonconsecutive term.  Cleveland was the 22^nd and the 24^th president with Benjamin Harrison the 23^rd.  Cleveland, the former governor of New York, beat Harrison in the rematch in 1892.    

     Will Donald Trump be successful and serve a second nonconsecutive term like Grover Cleveland?  Will history repeat itself and Trump win a rematch against Joe Biden like Cleveland did against Harrison?  Will Trump be like Grant and Hoover and fail to get the GOP Party nomination?  If he lost the nomination, would he follow Teddy Roosevelt’s example and create a third-Party?  It remains to be seen how it plays out, but one thing is certain: 2024 is taking shape to be an eventful election.

     American philosopher George Santayana famously said, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” 

     Phil Connors in Groundhog Day put it in more contemporary terms: “I wake up everyday, right here in Punxsutawney, and it’s always February 2^nd, and there’s nothing I can do about it.”  That’s how most Americans feel about politics and their government.

 Weekly Opinion Editorial

CELEBRITY REPUBLICANS!

by Steve Fair

     Last Tuesday’s elections didn’t turn out like most political pundits/sages expected.  Instead of a red wave, it was more like a calm pink tide.  Republicans appear to have gained enough seats to take over the U.S. House, but the U.S. Senate will remain under Democrat control.  It appears the Democrat has won in the Arizona governor’s race, so all in all it wasn’t a strong night for Republicans.  Three observations:

     First, Parties don’t win or lose elections, candidates do.  Republican elected officials and so-called political experts recruited, equipped and funded bad candidates.  The Senate GOP candidate in Pennsylvania was Dr. Mehmet Oz, a Turkish Muslim, who lives in New Jersey.  A regular on Oprah Winfrey’s show, Oz was recruited because he had name recognition and Republicans thought Oz would appeal to ‘swing’ voters.  His opponent was the sitting Lt. Governor in Pennsylvania who had a stroke and struggled through a debate.  They were running to replace Sen. Pat Toomey, a Republican. Oz had little appeal to Pennamites in the larger metropolitan areas and Democrats picked up the seat.  Oz may know medicine and television, but in politics, he was a political novice.   

     Republicans ran Kari Lake for governor in Arizona.  Lake was a Phoenix TV news anchor who had high name recognition.  Her Democrat opponent was Katie Hobbs, the sitting Secretary of State in Arizona. It appears Lake lost in a very close race.  In Georgia, the GOP nominee for U.S. Senate was Herschel Walker, who was a Heisman Trophy winner while at the University of Georgia and a well-known professional athletic.  Walker was recruited because everybody in Georgia knows who he is.  Walker hasn’t lost yet, but he trails his Democratic opponent as they move to a December 6^th runoff.     

     None of the three GOP candidates mentioned have held elective office before.  All three were unconventional, out of the ordinary, outsider candidates.  The three were aggrandized as being conservative outsiders in the mold of former President Donald Trump. Yet voters didn’t seem to care about their notoriety or celebrity status.  They chose the more conventional candidates.  Perhaps the days of PT Barnum ‘now in the center ring’ politics has run its course.

     Second, the grand old Party missed a great old probability.  Inflation is at a 40 year high.  The economy is in the tank. Exit polling showed the economy/inflation was the number one issue with over 50% of voters.   Odds were in Republican’s favor.  Democrat’s failed economy policy is hurting the average family.  Even Democrat pollsters projected the GOP would win big on Tuesday, yet Republicans failed to capitalize on the number one issue.  They instead ran candidates based on personality and not policy. 

     Third, Oklahoma and Florida were the two bright red spots.  Oklahoma voters cast their ballots overwhelmingly for Republicans, which is not surprising.  Republicans easily won their races in the Sooner state, in spite of the fact millions were spent in dark money ads attacking Governor Stitt and Ryan Walters. 

     Florida is another story. The sunshine state reelected Governor Ron DeSantis to a second term 60% to 40%.  DeSantis won Miami Dade county, a traditionally Democrat county, by 10 points- the first time a Republican has won it in over twenty years.    Republicans in Florida won all statewide races and now have super majorities in both the state House and Senate (Oklahoma did it in 2014).  That gives DeSantis a launching pad for a 2024 presidential run.  Florida is a key swing state. 

     The lesson from Tuesday is candidates win or lose elections- not Parties.  Ill prepared, amateur, greenhorn candidates have little appeal to the knowledgeable voter- and they rarely fool the uniformed one.  Running a candidate with little substance so an extra chair is needed at the caucus meeting is a foolhardy strategy.  A notable luminary on the ballot is no different than the unknown career politician.  Both must convince the voter they are competent to do the job.  Celebrity Republicans clearly didn’t do that on Tuesday.