Republican presidential candidate John McCain would defeat both Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama in a presidential matchup, data from a survey conducted by Community Newspaper Holdings Inc. shows.
The parent company of The Norman Transcript, CNHI owns more than 200 news outlets in 22 states. CNHI conducted the survey on the company’s newspaper Web sites between March 6 and March 15. While it didn’t use scientific methods, the survey did include ways to prevent respondents from participating more than once.
The survey — which was based on the Zoomerang Web site — received 2,123 responses.
“It gives an interesting look,” said Courtney Chojnacki, who supervised the survey. “It’s interesting how the women say they will vote.”
According to the survey, of the 2,132 who responded, a majority — 53 percent — were female, with the largest percentage of those falling in the 25- to 66-year-old age bracket.
Additionally, 42 percent of the respondents claimed membership in the Democratic Party, 37 percent Republican and 20 percent either Independent or undecided.
However, those Democrats may not help their party’s presidential nominee.
Of those who responded, 43 percent said they would vote for Republican John McCain in a race between Clinton and McCain with 36 percent supporting Clinton.
Twenty-two percent remain undecided.
In a race between McCain and Barack Obama, McCain, again, comes out on top with 47 percent for McCain and 33 percent for Obama; 20 percent, CHNI’s survey said, remain undecided.
Still, not all Democrats are worried by those numbers.
Oklahoma City-based Democratic political consultant Don Hoover said the survey is “pretty much meaningless.”
“Those kinds of Web surveys don’t count for much,” he said. “People are doing them because they are motivated one way or another. There’s not a chance of a random possibility.”
And while Hoover acknowledged he “wouldn’t be surprised” by a McCain win, he said the campaign season is still in the early stages.
“A McCain win would be due to the Republican nature of this state,” he said. “Oklahoma hasn’t voted for a Democratic presidential candidate in 44 years. It’s more of a partisan gap than a gender gap.”
Yet even for Oklahoma Democrats there is some good news, Hoover said.
“There’s always some bleed during a presidential year. In terms of legislative candidates, which is what we have a majority of this year, they will have to work hard and fund strong campaigns, regardless of what’s going on at the top of the ticket.”
Monday, March 31, 2008
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Campus gun bill moves to state Senate
KLAHOMA CITY -- A legislative proposal designed to allow concealed guns on the campuses of state colleges and universities was assigned to the Senate's appropriation sub-committee on education late Thursday afternoon.
Senate leaders made the assignment after House Bill 2513 was sent to the Senate's full appropriations committee. The bill passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives by a 65-36 vote last week.
Under House Bill 2513 -- written by Guthrie Republican Jason Murphey -- honorably discharged veterans and others with firearms training would be allowed to carry a concealed weapon on the campus of an Oklahoma college or university.
The bill is not popular with the state's higher education community.
The measure has drawn harsh criticism from education officials across the state including a plea from University of Oklahoma President David Boren asking lawmakers to kill the bill.
Additionally, in a statement issued to The Norman Transcript last week, OU's Faculty Senate passed a resolution asking lawmakers to reconsider their support of the measure.
"We believe that allowing guns on our campus would endanger the safety of our students, faculty and staff," the resolution said. "Furthermore, we, the faculty, cannot imagine being able to conduct class in a classroom where one or more of our students might be armed. We cannot imagine students being able to concentrate on a class, knowing that some of their fellow students might be armed. We ask you to reconsider."
Other groups echoed the OU faculty.
This week, the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators issued a statement saying the IACELA's Board of Directors believes "concealed carry" initiatives do not make campuses safer.
"There is no credible evidence to suggest that the presence of students carrying concealed weapons would reduce violence on college campuses. In fact, we are concerned that concealed carry laws have the potential to dramatically increase violence on college and university campuses that our members are empowered to protect."
The organization said it had several "concerns" about the bill, including the "potential for accidental discharge or misuse of firearms at on-campus or off-campus parties where large numbers of students are gathered or at student gatherings where alcohol or drugs are being consumed, as well as the potential for guns to be used as a means to settle disputes between or among students."
"There is also a real concern that campus police officers responding to a situation involving an active shooter may not be able to distinguish between the shooter and others with firearms," the organization's statement said.
Boren, a former governor, appealed to lawmakers to reconsider the proposal.
"While I strongly support the rights of our citizens to keep and bear firearms under the Second Amendment to the constitution, allowing guns on college campuses would endanger the safety of our students, faculty and staff," Boren said. "Every single day, I think about my responsibilities as president of a university for the safety of those on our campus. We have spent large sums of money to develop rapid communication systems and highly trained law enforcement personnel to take action in emergency situations. To allow other people to have guns who have not trained with our police units would create chaos in a crisis situation."
While he acknowledged he wasn't surprised by swift movement of HB 2513, state Sen. John Sparks, D-Norman, said he "really didn't expect" the measure to survive the Senate.
"Honestly, I don't think the bill will make it to the floor," Sparks said late last week. "The best thing for everyone involved would be if it died here."
However, on Friday, during a breakfast meeting sponsored by the Norman Chamber of Commerce, Sparks said he was leaning against the bill but would take "a wait and see approach" to view the bill's final language.
"I don't think it will happen this year," he said. "As a practical matter, I don't see it happening this year. It's happened too fast."
Rep. Scott Martin, R-Norman, who voted in favor of the bill, told chamber members that the law would narrowly define who could carry a gun on campus.
He also said the shootings at Virginia Tech last year and Northern Illinois this year showed police can't always respond in time.
"The police were too late," Martin said. "People were already dead by the time the police got there."
Murphey, the bill's author, said the proposal was a "commonsense step" to expand Oklahoma's concealed weapons law to combat campus violence.
"I don't know what could be safer for the students than having our men and women in the military to defend them if something went down," Murphey said Friday. "I wish there would have been someone that could have been armed in Illinois."
It's not sound public policy, he said, "to have a bubble around campuses, where criminals can penetrate."
Senate leaders made the assignment after House Bill 2513 was sent to the Senate's full appropriations committee. The bill passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives by a 65-36 vote last week.
Under House Bill 2513 -- written by Guthrie Republican Jason Murphey -- honorably discharged veterans and others with firearms training would be allowed to carry a concealed weapon on the campus of an Oklahoma college or university.
The bill is not popular with the state's higher education community.
The measure has drawn harsh criticism from education officials across the state including a plea from University of Oklahoma President David Boren asking lawmakers to kill the bill.
Additionally, in a statement issued to The Norman Transcript last week, OU's Faculty Senate passed a resolution asking lawmakers to reconsider their support of the measure.
"We believe that allowing guns on our campus would endanger the safety of our students, faculty and staff," the resolution said. "Furthermore, we, the faculty, cannot imagine being able to conduct class in a classroom where one or more of our students might be armed. We cannot imagine students being able to concentrate on a class, knowing that some of their fellow students might be armed. We ask you to reconsider."
Other groups echoed the OU faculty.
This week, the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators issued a statement saying the IACELA's Board of Directors believes "concealed carry" initiatives do not make campuses safer.
"There is no credible evidence to suggest that the presence of students carrying concealed weapons would reduce violence on college campuses. In fact, we are concerned that concealed carry laws have the potential to dramatically increase violence on college and university campuses that our members are empowered to protect."
The organization said it had several "concerns" about the bill, including the "potential for accidental discharge or misuse of firearms at on-campus or off-campus parties where large numbers of students are gathered or at student gatherings where alcohol or drugs are being consumed, as well as the potential for guns to be used as a means to settle disputes between or among students."
"There is also a real concern that campus police officers responding to a situation involving an active shooter may not be able to distinguish between the shooter and others with firearms," the organization's statement said.
Boren, a former governor, appealed to lawmakers to reconsider the proposal.
"While I strongly support the rights of our citizens to keep and bear firearms under the Second Amendment to the constitution, allowing guns on college campuses would endanger the safety of our students, faculty and staff," Boren said. "Every single day, I think about my responsibilities as president of a university for the safety of those on our campus. We have spent large sums of money to develop rapid communication systems and highly trained law enforcement personnel to take action in emergency situations. To allow other people to have guns who have not trained with our police units would create chaos in a crisis situation."
While he acknowledged he wasn't surprised by swift movement of HB 2513, state Sen. John Sparks, D-Norman, said he "really didn't expect" the measure to survive the Senate.
"Honestly, I don't think the bill will make it to the floor," Sparks said late last week. "The best thing for everyone involved would be if it died here."
However, on Friday, during a breakfast meeting sponsored by the Norman Chamber of Commerce, Sparks said he was leaning against the bill but would take "a wait and see approach" to view the bill's final language.
"I don't think it will happen this year," he said. "As a practical matter, I don't see it happening this year. It's happened too fast."
Rep. Scott Martin, R-Norman, who voted in favor of the bill, told chamber members that the law would narrowly define who could carry a gun on campus.
He also said the shootings at Virginia Tech last year and Northern Illinois this year showed police can't always respond in time.
"The police were too late," Martin said. "People were already dead by the time the police got there."
Murphey, the bill's author, said the proposal was a "commonsense step" to expand Oklahoma's concealed weapons law to combat campus violence.
"I don't know what could be safer for the students than having our men and women in the military to defend them if something went down," Murphey said Friday. "I wish there would have been someone that could have been armed in Illinois."
It's not sound public policy, he said, "to have a bubble around campuses, where criminals can penetrate."
Friday, March 28, 2008
Granite man's federal lawsuit dismissed
OKLAHOMA CITY — A Granite man’s lawsuit against more than 40 defendants, including the Cleveland County Board of Commissioners, District Judge Tom Lucas, District Attorney Greg Mashburn, Sheriff DeWayne Beggs and a host of others has been dismissed by a federal district judge.
John Murray, 45, of Granite, claimed a loss of income, real estate losses, health problems resulting in surgery and “emotional, physical, mental and domestic distress,” in his lawsuit. Murray said the group’s actions “threatened his future and freedom, denied his civil rights and caused a general loss in quality of life.”
Murray’s claims stem from a July 4, 2006, incident.
In his suit, Murray said three women — Demea Guidice, Donna Guidice and Cathey Miller — initiated a campaign of harassment against Murray, “claiming dominion over the private road known as Running Deer Road.”
That harassment continued, Murray said, “when Demea Guidice made a complaint to Cleveland County Sheriff’s Department which resulted in Murray’s arrest and incarceration.”
Murray sought $30 million in damages and an “end to the pattern of harassment and persecution” along with “all remedies allowed by law including real and punitive damages, interest, cost, medical bills and other related expenses.”
Murray filed the suit pro se — meaning he represented himself in the proceeding without an attorney.
Dave Batton, assistant district attorney for Cleveland County, said Murray’s suit was originally dismissed at the state court level.
“He had his original suit dismissed in state court,” Batton said. “Then he turned around and filed in federal court.”
On several occasions, Batton said, he tried to speak with Murray, but Murray was “hard to get focused on what his problems are.”
Batton said Murray faces a trial for assault and battery in Cleveland County.
In his ruling, Federal District Judge Robin Cauthorn dismissed Murray’s complaint, saying none of Murray’s allegations “would support a plausible federal or constitutional claim for relief against these defendants.”
“It’s patently obvious that Plaintiff could not prevail on the facts he has alleged,” Cauthorn wrote. “Amendment would be futile and these claims shall be dismissed.”
Murray, Cauthorn said, “fails to include any discernible allegations regarding any federal claim against as-yet-unknown defendants, and therefore dismissal of these defendants is proper.”
Last week, Murray said the suit was dismissed “on a technicality.”
“I’ve muddled through the best way that I could,” he said. “I’ve made a couple of technical mistakes, but even knowning that the federal lawsuit had been dismissed I filed an appeal.”
Murray said he was seeking a dismissal of the criminal charges against him and had filed open records requests with the Cleveland County sheriff’s office and the Cleveland County district attorney’s office.
“The Cleveland County district attorney’s office has refused to answer my subpoena,” he said. “And they refused to produce a copy of a 911 call made May 22.”
Murray said he’s made an Open Records Act request for the tape and plans to continue his lawsuit.
“I think this is the beginning and not the end,” he said.
John Murray, 45, of Granite, claimed a loss of income, real estate losses, health problems resulting in surgery and “emotional, physical, mental and domestic distress,” in his lawsuit. Murray said the group’s actions “threatened his future and freedom, denied his civil rights and caused a general loss in quality of life.”
Murray’s claims stem from a July 4, 2006, incident.
In his suit, Murray said three women — Demea Guidice, Donna Guidice and Cathey Miller — initiated a campaign of harassment against Murray, “claiming dominion over the private road known as Running Deer Road.”
That harassment continued, Murray said, “when Demea Guidice made a complaint to Cleveland County Sheriff’s Department which resulted in Murray’s arrest and incarceration.”
Murray sought $30 million in damages and an “end to the pattern of harassment and persecution” along with “all remedies allowed by law including real and punitive damages, interest, cost, medical bills and other related expenses.”
Murray filed the suit pro se — meaning he represented himself in the proceeding without an attorney.
Dave Batton, assistant district attorney for Cleveland County, said Murray’s suit was originally dismissed at the state court level.
“He had his original suit dismissed in state court,” Batton said. “Then he turned around and filed in federal court.”
On several occasions, Batton said, he tried to speak with Murray, but Murray was “hard to get focused on what his problems are.”
Batton said Murray faces a trial for assault and battery in Cleveland County.
In his ruling, Federal District Judge Robin Cauthorn dismissed Murray’s complaint, saying none of Murray’s allegations “would support a plausible federal or constitutional claim for relief against these defendants.”
“It’s patently obvious that Plaintiff could not prevail on the facts he has alleged,” Cauthorn wrote. “Amendment would be futile and these claims shall be dismissed.”
Murray, Cauthorn said, “fails to include any discernible allegations regarding any federal claim against as-yet-unknown defendants, and therefore dismissal of these defendants is proper.”
Last week, Murray said the suit was dismissed “on a technicality.”
“I’ve muddled through the best way that I could,” he said. “I’ve made a couple of technical mistakes, but even knowning that the federal lawsuit had been dismissed I filed an appeal.”
Murray said he was seeking a dismissal of the criminal charges against him and had filed open records requests with the Cleveland County sheriff’s office and the Cleveland County district attorney’s office.
“The Cleveland County district attorney’s office has refused to answer my subpoena,” he said. “And they refused to produce a copy of a 911 call made May 22.”
Murray said he’s made an Open Records Act request for the tape and plans to continue his lawsuit.
“I think this is the beginning and not the end,” he said.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Supreme Court backs off secrecy rules
OKLAHOMA CITY — An order which would have restricted public access to electronic court records has been withdrawn, officials with the Oklahoma Supreme Court an-nounced Tuesday.
The rule, which was originally designed to help curb identity theft, was set to take effect June 10.
Tuesday, the court’s chief justice, Justice James R. Winchester, said he was “pulling the request to allow time for further study.”
“The Supreme Court of Oklahoma is very aware of privacy and identity theft concerns of individuals related to the personal data that may appear on the court’s Web site,” the court said in a statement provided to The Associated Press.
“We are cognizant that many businesses and individuals rely on the information court clerks have placed on our Web site. Personal privacy balanced with reliable public information is critical for a free society.
“Due to the very important issues for all concerned, the Supreme Court is hereby withdrawing its privacy and public access order … handed down March 11, 2008, to give the issue further study and consideration,” the statement concluded.
The court’s about face drew praise from open records advocates.
“We’re happy that they withdrew the order,” said Mark Thomas, executive vice president of the Oklahoma Press Association.
“We believe further study of the issue is very important and gladly will serve on any task force formed to discuss this further.”
The original order, Thomas said, was “too broad, and closed so much information that it basically rendered court records unusable to thousands of people that relied on that information.”
“I do believe, however, the public wants us to seriously address the issue of identity theft, and more specifically Social Security numbers, and we will do so in the very near future.”
The rule, which was originally designed to help curb identity theft, was set to take effect June 10.
Tuesday, the court’s chief justice, Justice James R. Winchester, said he was “pulling the request to allow time for further study.”
“The Supreme Court of Oklahoma is very aware of privacy and identity theft concerns of individuals related to the personal data that may appear on the court’s Web site,” the court said in a statement provided to The Associated Press.
“We are cognizant that many businesses and individuals rely on the information court clerks have placed on our Web site. Personal privacy balanced with reliable public information is critical for a free society.
“Due to the very important issues for all concerned, the Supreme Court is hereby withdrawing its privacy and public access order … handed down March 11, 2008, to give the issue further study and consideration,” the statement concluded.
The court’s about face drew praise from open records advocates.
“We’re happy that they withdrew the order,” said Mark Thomas, executive vice president of the Oklahoma Press Association.
“We believe further study of the issue is very important and gladly will serve on any task force formed to discuss this further.”
The original order, Thomas said, was “too broad, and closed so much information that it basically rendered court records unusable to thousands of people that relied on that information.”
“I do believe, however, the public wants us to seriously address the issue of identity theft, and more specifically Social Security numbers, and we will do so in the very near future.”
Monday, March 24, 2008
Campus gun bill awaits action in Senate
OKLAHOMA CITY — A controversial legislative proposal designed to allow guns on the campuses of state colleges and universities has cleared the Oklahoma House of Representatives and is awaiting action by the Oklahoma State Senate.
Under the terms of House Bill 2513 — authored by Guthrie Republican Jason Murphey — active-duty military personnel, honorably discharged veterans and others with firearms training could carry a concealed weapon on the campus of an Oklahoma college or university.
In a vote which fell pretty much along party lines, the bill passed the Oklahoma House 65-36; only eight of the House’s 44 Democrats voted for the measure.
Murphey told The Associated Press his bill was a “commonsense step” to expand Oklahoma’s concealed weapons law to combat campus violence.
“I don’t know what could be safer for the students than having our men and women in the military to defend them if something went down,” Murphey said Friday. “I wish there would have been someone that could have been armed in Illinois.”
It’s not sound public policy, he said, “to have a bubble around campuses, where criminals can penetrate.”
And while many officials have expressed concern over having students with concealed weapons, Murphey said the state’s concealed carry permitting procedure “has done very well in the past 12 years.”
“I think the success of that program speaks for itself,” he said.
In Cleveland County, the county’s three Republican House members — Scott Martin of Norman, Randy Terrill of Moore and Paul Wesselhoft of Moore — voted in favor of the bill. Norman Democrats Bill Nations and Wallace Collins voted “no.”
Nations said he hopes the bill will die in the Senate.
“I have hope that it won’t make it through the Senate,” he said. “I don’t know that for sure, but at least I hope it won’t.”
The idea, he said, is being driven “by the excitement of those who are very strongly pro-gun.”
“University presidents are almost unanimously against it,” Nations said. “And at almost all levels, university administrators are against it. Professors on campus are almost 99 percent against it. Municipal law enforcement officials in towns which have a college are against it.”
The bill, he said, is “anti-business.”
“I’ve heard from business people that say it’s embarrassing to the state. We’ve got people trying to put guns on campus, we’ve got hate speech about minorities and have leadership resigning in disgrace. It is embarrassing.”
State Rep. Scott Martin disagreed.
Martin, a former assistant to Norman’s city manager, said the question isn’t what the state Senate is going to do with the bill, but what Gov. Brad Henry will do.
“The bill received fairly overwhelming bipartisan support in the House,” he said. “And the bigger question is what the governor is going to do?”
Martin said the bill “closely defines” what the new exceptions would be for those with a concealed carry permit.
“Just because you’re active duty, a veteran or CLEET certified, you wouldn’t automatically be able to carry a concealed weapon,” he said. “You would still have to have a concealed carry permit and meet those three previous exceptions I’ve mentioned, then you would qualify to have a gun on campus.”
Martin said “not every student who comes along” would qualify for the permit
“The average age is 51,” he said. “For the most part, the vast majority of people who have permits are older folks, not typical college students.”
And those residents who have permits, he said, have “gone through vigorous background checks and training.”
“In the 12 years Oklahoma has allowed the concealed carry permit, we haven’t had one problem. And I wouldn’t anticipate that to happen in the future.”
Still, many university officials oppose the measure.
Last week, University of Oklahoma president David Boren — a former Oklahoma governor — issued a statement scolding lawmakers who supported the bill.
Legislators, Boren said, should “stick to the laws that have worked well in the past” and allow colleges to continue to improve campus safety.
“If it would help for me to get down on my knees to plead with the Legislature for the safety of our students, I would do so,” Boren said.
At Oklahoma State University, officials said allowing students to carry guns on campus was a dangerous idea.
“I think it creates a very unsafe environment,” Lee Bird, Oklahoma State University’s vice president of student affairs, told the OSU Daily O’Collegian. “Realistically that (shootings) is not our most major problem and I don’t think weapons are necessarily going to help us; I think it will endanger people.”
Martin said he, too, was concerned about public safety on state campuses.
“We’re not arming an army,” he said. “We’re trying to provide law-abiding citizens the opportunity to protect themselves. It (the bill) is really a sad commentary on today’s life.”
Nations countered, saying whole issue boils down to a single question.
“Ultimately, the question is this: Do you believe that students, faculty and staff are safer with more guns on campus or with fewer guns on campus?. That’s the question. And when you answer it you know how to vote.”
House Bill 2513 is on second reading in the Oklahoma State Senate.
Under the terms of House Bill 2513 — authored by Guthrie Republican Jason Murphey — active-duty military personnel, honorably discharged veterans and others with firearms training could carry a concealed weapon on the campus of an Oklahoma college or university.
In a vote which fell pretty much along party lines, the bill passed the Oklahoma House 65-36; only eight of the House’s 44 Democrats voted for the measure.
Murphey told The Associated Press his bill was a “commonsense step” to expand Oklahoma’s concealed weapons law to combat campus violence.
“I don’t know what could be safer for the students than having our men and women in the military to defend them if something went down,” Murphey said Friday. “I wish there would have been someone that could have been armed in Illinois.”
It’s not sound public policy, he said, “to have a bubble around campuses, where criminals can penetrate.”
And while many officials have expressed concern over having students with concealed weapons, Murphey said the state’s concealed carry permitting procedure “has done very well in the past 12 years.”
“I think the success of that program speaks for itself,” he said.
In Cleveland County, the county’s three Republican House members — Scott Martin of Norman, Randy Terrill of Moore and Paul Wesselhoft of Moore — voted in favor of the bill. Norman Democrats Bill Nations and Wallace Collins voted “no.”
Nations said he hopes the bill will die in the Senate.
“I have hope that it won’t make it through the Senate,” he said. “I don’t know that for sure, but at least I hope it won’t.”
The idea, he said, is being driven “by the excitement of those who are very strongly pro-gun.”
“University presidents are almost unanimously against it,” Nations said. “And at almost all levels, university administrators are against it. Professors on campus are almost 99 percent against it. Municipal law enforcement officials in towns which have a college are against it.”
The bill, he said, is “anti-business.”
“I’ve heard from business people that say it’s embarrassing to the state. We’ve got people trying to put guns on campus, we’ve got hate speech about minorities and have leadership resigning in disgrace. It is embarrassing.”
State Rep. Scott Martin disagreed.
Martin, a former assistant to Norman’s city manager, said the question isn’t what the state Senate is going to do with the bill, but what Gov. Brad Henry will do.
“The bill received fairly overwhelming bipartisan support in the House,” he said. “And the bigger question is what the governor is going to do?”
Martin said the bill “closely defines” what the new exceptions would be for those with a concealed carry permit.
“Just because you’re active duty, a veteran or CLEET certified, you wouldn’t automatically be able to carry a concealed weapon,” he said. “You would still have to have a concealed carry permit and meet those three previous exceptions I’ve mentioned, then you would qualify to have a gun on campus.”
Martin said “not every student who comes along” would qualify for the permit
“The average age is 51,” he said. “For the most part, the vast majority of people who have permits are older folks, not typical college students.”
And those residents who have permits, he said, have “gone through vigorous background checks and training.”
“In the 12 years Oklahoma has allowed the concealed carry permit, we haven’t had one problem. And I wouldn’t anticipate that to happen in the future.”
Still, many university officials oppose the measure.
Last week, University of Oklahoma president David Boren — a former Oklahoma governor — issued a statement scolding lawmakers who supported the bill.
Legislators, Boren said, should “stick to the laws that have worked well in the past” and allow colleges to continue to improve campus safety.
“If it would help for me to get down on my knees to plead with the Legislature for the safety of our students, I would do so,” Boren said.
At Oklahoma State University, officials said allowing students to carry guns on campus was a dangerous idea.
“I think it creates a very unsafe environment,” Lee Bird, Oklahoma State University’s vice president of student affairs, told the OSU Daily O’Collegian. “Realistically that (shootings) is not our most major problem and I don’t think weapons are necessarily going to help us; I think it will endanger people.”
Martin said he, too, was concerned about public safety on state campuses.
“We’re not arming an army,” he said. “We’re trying to provide law-abiding citizens the opportunity to protect themselves. It (the bill) is really a sad commentary on today’s life.”
Nations countered, saying whole issue boils down to a single question.
“Ultimately, the question is this: Do you believe that students, faculty and staff are safer with more guns on campus or with fewer guns on campus?. That’s the question. And when you answer it you know how to vote.”
House Bill 2513 is on second reading in the Oklahoma State Senate.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Court's proposed record policy could affect prescreening companies
OKLAHOMA CITY — New public access rules developed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court would make it more difficult for companies that do prehiring background checks, officials with those companies said this week.
The rules, set to take effect June 10, require removal of personal information such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses and other data from court filings. The rules also limit the number of documents available through the Oklahoma Supreme Court Network (OSCN) Web site.
Companies that perform background checks said the court’s rules will “severely limit” their ability to serve their clients.
“Although a person’s date of birth may be safe from the public, that same person may very likely be put at risk in the workplace because their employer will no longer be able to obtain adequate background checks on new hires,” said David Blanton, owner of PreHire Screening Service in Oklahoma City.
Blanton, who says his company performs about 10,000 background checks a year, told The Associated Press “the new rules could have an unintended negative effect, because companies may put workers in jeopardy by hiring applicants with violent criminal backgrounds.”
He said his company could face increased liability if it supplied incomplete information as a result of erroneous reports.
Norman private investigator Frank Gaynor agreed.
Gaynor, president of Norman-based Lighthouse Investigators, said the change would affect his business.
“It’s going to affect me because I do a lot of work on the Internet,” he said. “But it won’t affect me in Norman, because I can still go to the courthouse.”
And though Gaynor acknowledged the rule change would “cause a problem” for private investigators, he said he didn’t necessarily disagree with the court’s action.
“I do think that some public access is abused,” he said. “From a stalker standpoint.”
Tracy Seabrook, executive director of the National Association of Professional Background Screeners, said no other state has in place a records policy as restrictive as the new Oklahoma court rule.
She said others have tried such policies, but later backtracked after many who use court records pointed out problems. Seabrook said that includes North Carolina, where her association has its headquarters.
“We all understand, no one wants their identity stolen,” Seabrook said. “However, if I tell you my birthday right now, you can’t steal my identity with my birthday.”
Gaynor said he was aware of identity theft problems, but said he “hadn’t dealt with it here” in Oklahoma.
“I have dealt with identity issues in other states,” he said. “I’ve heard of it and it is a huge issue. But here, I think the problem is small, less than 5 percent.”
Several open government advocates have criticized the new rules.
Oklahoma Press Association executive director Mark Thomas said some disclosure is necessary when public institutions are used.
“If people want privacy they should settle their affairs in private,” Thomas said. “If they must use the public courts, paid for by taxpayers, they should expect much of their information to be public.”
There are a few sensitive issues such as Social Security numbers, he said, “but the list of items this new rule requires to be redacted, both in paper copies and any online documents is much too broad. Marking out all of that information will, in effect, give us secret courts.”
Oklahoma State University professor Joey Senat said the court should have listened to other parties interested in open government.
“I think there needs to be a more public process than letters sent to an administrator,” Senat, a former president of FOI Oklahoma Inc., said. “I’d like to see hearings, at the very least.”
Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice James Winchester said the new rules may be revisited before they take effect in June.
Winchester and Justices Tom Colbert, Rudolph Hargrave, Joseph Watt, John Reif voted for the rules. Justice Steven Taylor opposed the rules. Vice Chief Justice James Edmondson and Justice Yvonne Kauger agreed with some of the rules and disagreed with others. Justice Marian Opala did not vote.
The rules, set to take effect June 10, require removal of personal information such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses and other data from court filings. The rules also limit the number of documents available through the Oklahoma Supreme Court Network (OSCN) Web site.
Companies that perform background checks said the court’s rules will “severely limit” their ability to serve their clients.
“Although a person’s date of birth may be safe from the public, that same person may very likely be put at risk in the workplace because their employer will no longer be able to obtain adequate background checks on new hires,” said David Blanton, owner of PreHire Screening Service in Oklahoma City.
Blanton, who says his company performs about 10,000 background checks a year, told The Associated Press “the new rules could have an unintended negative effect, because companies may put workers in jeopardy by hiring applicants with violent criminal backgrounds.”
He said his company could face increased liability if it supplied incomplete information as a result of erroneous reports.
Norman private investigator Frank Gaynor agreed.
Gaynor, president of Norman-based Lighthouse Investigators, said the change would affect his business.
“It’s going to affect me because I do a lot of work on the Internet,” he said. “But it won’t affect me in Norman, because I can still go to the courthouse.”
And though Gaynor acknowledged the rule change would “cause a problem” for private investigators, he said he didn’t necessarily disagree with the court’s action.
“I do think that some public access is abused,” he said. “From a stalker standpoint.”
Tracy Seabrook, executive director of the National Association of Professional Background Screeners, said no other state has in place a records policy as restrictive as the new Oklahoma court rule.
She said others have tried such policies, but later backtracked after many who use court records pointed out problems. Seabrook said that includes North Carolina, where her association has its headquarters.
“We all understand, no one wants their identity stolen,” Seabrook said. “However, if I tell you my birthday right now, you can’t steal my identity with my birthday.”
Gaynor said he was aware of identity theft problems, but said he “hadn’t dealt with it here” in Oklahoma.
“I have dealt with identity issues in other states,” he said. “I’ve heard of it and it is a huge issue. But here, I think the problem is small, less than 5 percent.”
Several open government advocates have criticized the new rules.
Oklahoma Press Association executive director Mark Thomas said some disclosure is necessary when public institutions are used.
“If people want privacy they should settle their affairs in private,” Thomas said. “If they must use the public courts, paid for by taxpayers, they should expect much of their information to be public.”
There are a few sensitive issues such as Social Security numbers, he said, “but the list of items this new rule requires to be redacted, both in paper copies and any online documents is much too broad. Marking out all of that information will, in effect, give us secret courts.”
Oklahoma State University professor Joey Senat said the court should have listened to other parties interested in open government.
“I think there needs to be a more public process than letters sent to an administrator,” Senat, a former president of FOI Oklahoma Inc., said. “I’d like to see hearings, at the very least.”
Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice James Winchester said the new rules may be revisited before they take effect in June.
Winchester and Justices Tom Colbert, Rudolph Hargrave, Joseph Watt, John Reif voted for the rules. Justice Steven Taylor opposed the rules. Vice Chief Justice James Edmondson and Justice Yvonne Kauger agreed with some of the rules and disagreed with others. Justice Marian Opala did not vote.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Piatt, Collins lock horns over defibrillator bill
OKLAHOMA CITY — A proposal which encourages public schools to purchase automated defibrillators is being derailed because House Republican leaders are feeling political pressure, the bill’s author claimed this week.
Norman Democrat Rep. Wallace Collins said he’s frustrated because he couldn’t get a hearing for House Bill 1847 — a measure, he says, which would encourage public school districts to make automated external defibrillators available “contingent upon certain funding.”
Collins developed the proposal in 2007. Since then, he said he’s struggled to get the bill heard by the House’s Republican leadership. “What’s crazy to me is here, they won’t hear a defibrillator bill which can help save lives, but they’ve got time to hear gun bills to make sure everyone can carry a gun.”
Collins claimed House Floor Leader Greg Piatt has refused to place the proposal on the House calendar because Collins has spoken publicly about his difficulty getting the bill heard and has encouraged residents in Piatt’s southern Oklahoma district to contact GOP leaders about the bill.
“He’s mad at me,” Collins said. “It’s not about the bill. It’s political, because he’s mad at me.”
But Piatt, an Ardmore Republican, said the issue isn’t with Collins, but his bill.
“I just found out about this bill a week ago last Thursday,” Piatt told The Transcript this week. “I started getting e-mails from Ardmore. I asked our legislative staff to look at it and they said the bill wouldn’t do anyting.”
Piatt said he contacted the House’s Education Committee chairman, Rep. Tad Jones — a Claremore Republican — and Jones, too, said the bill wasn’t heard because it “didn’t do anything.”
“The bill doesn’t change anything,” Piatt said. “That’s exactly the way it is right now. That’s the reason the bill wasn’t heard in the education committee. Why run a bill that doesn’t do anything?”
Collins, Piatt said, has “misrepresented” HB 1874 as “an avenue to fix a problem.”
Collins countered, saying Piatt is particularly sensitive to the issue because a boy from Dickson — a small town near Piatt’s home of Ardmore — died recently after collapsing at a basketball game.
In stories published in Ardmore’s Daily Ardmoreite newspaper, Dickson Superintendent Sherry Howe said 12-year-old Luke Davis — a Dickson Middle School student — died due to “an undiagnosed heart rhythm disorder.”
Davis died in early February.
Ardmore officials said Davis collapsed less than two minutes into a seventh-grade basketball game in February.
“If they had a defibrillator at the time, the little boy might have made it,” Collins said. “It probably would have saved his life and those people down there have taken this (bill) personally.”
Since then, Collins said several media outlets have contacted him about the measure, and the ensuing publicity has put a great deal of political pressure on Piatt. “I’ve been asked about my bill and I’ve answered their questions,” Collins said. “I’ve also referred people to Rep. Piatt and the speaker.”
Piatt acknowledged he was “frustrated” by the e-mails from his district.
“I asked him (Collins) to stop,” Piatt said. “I told him I wanted the e-mails from back in my district stopped. I didn’t have time to respond.”
Piatt said he did contact Luke Davis’ mother and “shared with her that Collins’ bill didn’t do anything.”
“I visited with her and that’s a tough phone call to make, let me tell you,” Piatt said. “That young boy died in February and it’s been a week and a month since he’d passed away. The day I called it was his birthday, it was one of the hardest calls I ever had to make.”
Collins said his focus was getting the bill passed and when asked, he “just responded to questions.”
On several occasions, Collins said he fielded questions from residents across the state about the bill. Collins said he encouraged those residents to contact either Piatt or House Speaker Chris Benge and that has angered Piatt.
“He (Piatt) doesn’t like that,” Collins said. “But I don’t think any of them would admit it.”
Copies of an e-mail obtained by The Transcript show that Collins did tell residents to contact Piatt and House Speaker Chris Benge.
In an e-mail dated March 10, Collins urged Ardmore residents Jamie and Charlotte Rutledge to “call or e-mail Speaker Benge and Floor Leader Piatt.”
“I feel this bill is important and can save lives,” Collins wrote in a reply to the couple.
Like Collins, Piatt said he, too, was frustrated.
“When I talked with him about the bill, he didn’t even know what was in his own bill,” Piatt said. “That’s frustrating. He just doesn’t get it. When Wallace left the House the first time he was in majority. When he came back, he was in a minority. That’s just the way it is. Not everyone gets what they want. You don’t go back and cry and complain. You don’t get everything you want when you are in the minority.”
Collins said he talked with Piatt about the issue again last week, and Piatt said he would not hear the bill because Collins was down in his (Piatt’s) district “stirring things up.”
“He said, ‘one more time and that’s it,’” Collins said. “So he’s mad. I guess I’m naive, I thought we were up here to do the right thing. I thought a bill would stand or fall on its own merits and personality wasn’t part of it. I’m being punished. For two years I’m not getting bills heard for purely political reasons.”
Paitt, however, said he supports the idea and has offered Collins a compromise.
“I told him we should run a House Concurrent Resolution,” Piatt said. “That’s what we need to do to bring awareness to this issue. If he wants to do that, that’s fine with me.”
Norman Democrat Rep. Wallace Collins said he’s frustrated because he couldn’t get a hearing for House Bill 1847 — a measure, he says, which would encourage public school districts to make automated external defibrillators available “contingent upon certain funding.”
Collins developed the proposal in 2007. Since then, he said he’s struggled to get the bill heard by the House’s Republican leadership. “What’s crazy to me is here, they won’t hear a defibrillator bill which can help save lives, but they’ve got time to hear gun bills to make sure everyone can carry a gun.”
Collins claimed House Floor Leader Greg Piatt has refused to place the proposal on the House calendar because Collins has spoken publicly about his difficulty getting the bill heard and has encouraged residents in Piatt’s southern Oklahoma district to contact GOP leaders about the bill.
“He’s mad at me,” Collins said. “It’s not about the bill. It’s political, because he’s mad at me.”
But Piatt, an Ardmore Republican, said the issue isn’t with Collins, but his bill.
“I just found out about this bill a week ago last Thursday,” Piatt told The Transcript this week. “I started getting e-mails from Ardmore. I asked our legislative staff to look at it and they said the bill wouldn’t do anyting.”
Piatt said he contacted the House’s Education Committee chairman, Rep. Tad Jones — a Claremore Republican — and Jones, too, said the bill wasn’t heard because it “didn’t do anything.”
“The bill doesn’t change anything,” Piatt said. “That’s exactly the way it is right now. That’s the reason the bill wasn’t heard in the education committee. Why run a bill that doesn’t do anything?”
Collins, Piatt said, has “misrepresented” HB 1874 as “an avenue to fix a problem.”
Collins countered, saying Piatt is particularly sensitive to the issue because a boy from Dickson — a small town near Piatt’s home of Ardmore — died recently after collapsing at a basketball game.
In stories published in Ardmore’s Daily Ardmoreite newspaper, Dickson Superintendent Sherry Howe said 12-year-old Luke Davis — a Dickson Middle School student — died due to “an undiagnosed heart rhythm disorder.”
Davis died in early February.
Ardmore officials said Davis collapsed less than two minutes into a seventh-grade basketball game in February.
“If they had a defibrillator at the time, the little boy might have made it,” Collins said. “It probably would have saved his life and those people down there have taken this (bill) personally.”
Since then, Collins said several media outlets have contacted him about the measure, and the ensuing publicity has put a great deal of political pressure on Piatt. “I’ve been asked about my bill and I’ve answered their questions,” Collins said. “I’ve also referred people to Rep. Piatt and the speaker.”
Piatt acknowledged he was “frustrated” by the e-mails from his district.
“I asked him (Collins) to stop,” Piatt said. “I told him I wanted the e-mails from back in my district stopped. I didn’t have time to respond.”
Piatt said he did contact Luke Davis’ mother and “shared with her that Collins’ bill didn’t do anything.”
“I visited with her and that’s a tough phone call to make, let me tell you,” Piatt said. “That young boy died in February and it’s been a week and a month since he’d passed away. The day I called it was his birthday, it was one of the hardest calls I ever had to make.”
Collins said his focus was getting the bill passed and when asked, he “just responded to questions.”
On several occasions, Collins said he fielded questions from residents across the state about the bill. Collins said he encouraged those residents to contact either Piatt or House Speaker Chris Benge and that has angered Piatt.
“He (Piatt) doesn’t like that,” Collins said. “But I don’t think any of them would admit it.”
Copies of an e-mail obtained by The Transcript show that Collins did tell residents to contact Piatt and House Speaker Chris Benge.
In an e-mail dated March 10, Collins urged Ardmore residents Jamie and Charlotte Rutledge to “call or e-mail Speaker Benge and Floor Leader Piatt.”
“I feel this bill is important and can save lives,” Collins wrote in a reply to the couple.
Like Collins, Piatt said he, too, was frustrated.
“When I talked with him about the bill, he didn’t even know what was in his own bill,” Piatt said. “That’s frustrating. He just doesn’t get it. When Wallace left the House the first time he was in majority. When he came back, he was in a minority. That’s just the way it is. Not everyone gets what they want. You don’t go back and cry and complain. You don’t get everything you want when you are in the minority.”
Collins said he talked with Piatt about the issue again last week, and Piatt said he would not hear the bill because Collins was down in his (Piatt’s) district “stirring things up.”
“He said, ‘one more time and that’s it,’” Collins said. “So he’s mad. I guess I’m naive, I thought we were up here to do the right thing. I thought a bill would stand or fall on its own merits and personality wasn’t part of it. I’m being punished. For two years I’m not getting bills heard for purely political reasons.”
Paitt, however, said he supports the idea and has offered Collins a compromise.
“I told him we should run a House Concurrent Resolution,” Piatt said. “That’s what we need to do to bring awareness to this issue. If he wants to do that, that’s fine with me.”
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
COMMENTARY: When did Yield stop meaning Yield?
The small, blue Toyota ahead of me is in a hurry.
The driver — oblivious to everyone except himself — zooms in and out of traffic like a Formula One race car driver on Memorial Day.
I’ve watched him for several minutes and honestly, I’m amazed he’s still alive.
Especially after he exits off I-35 at about 70 miles per hour and blows past a large red and white Yield sign.
He missed the yellow truck by just a few feet.
Granted, Mr. Blue Toyota isn’t alone.
In fact, he’s just one example of an all-too-common problem I call “Nonexistent Yield Signs.”
And it’s getting worse.
Across Oklahoma, in small towns and right here in the Metro, there are hundreds — maybe even thousands — of Yield signs.
They are shaped like a triangle and painted red and white.
And they say, “Yield.”
And I have yet to see a driver obey them.
Seriously, those signs might as well not be there.
Because no one yields.
When I was taking drivers ed, the Yield sign was the metal equivalent of your mother standing there, waving her finger at you.
She was reminding you to be good.
She was telling you to slow down, pause, and look around you as you prepare to enter the highway.
She was not telling you to stomp on the gas, and try to beat the other driver to the end of the road.
But somewhere, somehow along the way the humble Yield sign’s clout began to fade. It no long stands as a warming, a caution. It’s simply being ignored.
And the results are tragic.
If you look at almost any major intersection in the Metro area, you’ll probably find an impromptu monument to the victim of a car wreck. Now you and I both know, the accident victim’s friends or family would not have put those monuments there had the accident victim lived.
Nope. Those little crosses represent someone who died.
And I’ll bet you my copy of Newt Gingrich’s Fun Things to Do When You’re No Longer in Office, that more than half of those victims of accidents ignored Yield signs.
Just two weeks ago, I watched as the driver a of new, pretty silver Mustang blew past a Yield sign and right into the back of slow moving minivan.
The minivan was filled with a family which included several small children. Thankfully, no one was hurt.
But as I drove away — I’d stopped to see if everyone was OK — I overheard the Mustang driver cuss the other driver because the minivan “was moving to slow and causing disruptions in the flow of traffic.”
Bull.
The truth behind the story is simple: The idiot (and that’s the only word that truly describes him) in the Mustang was traveling way too fast and did not bother to Yield.
Mr. Mustang came very close to killing himself and several other people.
Honestly, if public safety officials are not going to enforce the laws surrounding the Yield sign, then all Yield signs should be removed and the motoring public can take its chances.
If, however, Yield signs are to remain, then patrolmen should nail those drivers who cruise through the signs with the same type of penalty for failure to stop or speeding or all those other traffic violations we’ve all come to know and love.
Still, most of the fault remains with the drivers and not the police.
It is up to each and every person who travels the ribbons of highway in this great state to turn off their damned cell phone, unplug their iPod and pay attention to what they are doing.
And that means slowing down at Yield signs.
I know, of all the problems our state faces today, you’re wondering why the issue of “Nonexistent Yield Signs” needs to be addressed.
It’s simple.
Somewhere, sometime soon, you may be driving.
And somewhere some dolt with too much car and too little sense will be out there, too.
And the next monument could be for you.
The driver — oblivious to everyone except himself — zooms in and out of traffic like a Formula One race car driver on Memorial Day.
I’ve watched him for several minutes and honestly, I’m amazed he’s still alive.
Especially after he exits off I-35 at about 70 miles per hour and blows past a large red and white Yield sign.
He missed the yellow truck by just a few feet.
Granted, Mr. Blue Toyota isn’t alone.
In fact, he’s just one example of an all-too-common problem I call “Nonexistent Yield Signs.”
And it’s getting worse.
Across Oklahoma, in small towns and right here in the Metro, there are hundreds — maybe even thousands — of Yield signs.
They are shaped like a triangle and painted red and white.
And they say, “Yield.”
And I have yet to see a driver obey them.
Seriously, those signs might as well not be there.
Because no one yields.
When I was taking drivers ed, the Yield sign was the metal equivalent of your mother standing there, waving her finger at you.
She was reminding you to be good.
She was telling you to slow down, pause, and look around you as you prepare to enter the highway.
She was not telling you to stomp on the gas, and try to beat the other driver to the end of the road.
But somewhere, somehow along the way the humble Yield sign’s clout began to fade. It no long stands as a warming, a caution. It’s simply being ignored.
And the results are tragic.
If you look at almost any major intersection in the Metro area, you’ll probably find an impromptu monument to the victim of a car wreck. Now you and I both know, the accident victim’s friends or family would not have put those monuments there had the accident victim lived.
Nope. Those little crosses represent someone who died.
And I’ll bet you my copy of Newt Gingrich’s Fun Things to Do When You’re No Longer in Office, that more than half of those victims of accidents ignored Yield signs.
Just two weeks ago, I watched as the driver a of new, pretty silver Mustang blew past a Yield sign and right into the back of slow moving minivan.
The minivan was filled with a family which included several small children. Thankfully, no one was hurt.
But as I drove away — I’d stopped to see if everyone was OK — I overheard the Mustang driver cuss the other driver because the minivan “was moving to slow and causing disruptions in the flow of traffic.”
Bull.
The truth behind the story is simple: The idiot (and that’s the only word that truly describes him) in the Mustang was traveling way too fast and did not bother to Yield.
Mr. Mustang came very close to killing himself and several other people.
Honestly, if public safety officials are not going to enforce the laws surrounding the Yield sign, then all Yield signs should be removed and the motoring public can take its chances.
If, however, Yield signs are to remain, then patrolmen should nail those drivers who cruise through the signs with the same type of penalty for failure to stop or speeding or all those other traffic violations we’ve all come to know and love.
Still, most of the fault remains with the drivers and not the police.
It is up to each and every person who travels the ribbons of highway in this great state to turn off their damned cell phone, unplug their iPod and pay attention to what they are doing.
And that means slowing down at Yield signs.
I know, of all the problems our state faces today, you’re wondering why the issue of “Nonexistent Yield Signs” needs to be addressed.
It’s simple.
Somewhere, sometime soon, you may be driving.
And somewhere some dolt with too much car and too little sense will be out there, too.
And the next monument could be for you.
11 men seeking Cleveland County sheriff's post
At least 11 men — almost all of them from Norman — have applied to replace Cleveland County sheriff DeWayne Beggs, who recently resigned and will leave office at the end of April.
As of last Thursday, all 11 men had submitted resumes to the Cleveland County Board of Commissioners. The application deadline has closed.
Assistant District Attorney Dave Batton — who serves as the county commissioners' attorney — confirmed the applicants and said each meets the statutory requirements to be appointed to the sheriff's post.
Batton said the eleven include:
Roy D. Magerkurth, Norman, a former sheriff's department employee.
Lloyd D. Blaine, Norman, a current employee with the sheriff's department.
David Williams, Norman, a former undersheriff.
Jim D. Filipski, Norman, the current undersheriff of McClain County.
Christopher Manning, Norman.
Rhett B. Burnett, Norman, who previously ran for the sheriff's post.
Joe Lester, Norman, the former public safety director for the University of Oklahoma.
Neil Vickers, Norman, the former deputy chief of police for the city of Norman.
Eddie Thomason, Harrah, current undersheriff of Cleveland County.
Mark S. Hamm, Moore.
Don Holyfield, Norman.
While all of the men meet the statutory requirements to be appointed to the position, at least one of the applicants, undersheriff Eddie Thomason, would not meet the requirements to be elected to the office.
"There's a gray area in the law on appointments," Batton said. "And Mr. Thomason meets those requirements. But it looks like he might not be able to run for the office because he lives in Harrah and not in Cleveland County."
State law requires a person seeking the office of sheriff to be a "registered voter in the county at least six months prior to the first day of the filing period for the election."
Because Thomason lives in Harrah he wouldn't qualify to run for election to the post, Batton said.
And though state law doesn't require any applicant — or person running for the office of sheriff — to have law enforcement experience, Batton said all the applicants were certified by the Council for Law Enforcement Education (CLEET).
Batton said he is compiling a notebook with all the applicants' resumes. That information would be given to Cleveland County commissioners to review. Once the commissioners decide who they want to interview, county officials will interview those chosen and pick a successor to Beggs.
An announcement is expected by the end of the month.
As of last Thursday, all 11 men had submitted resumes to the Cleveland County Board of Commissioners. The application deadline has closed.
Assistant District Attorney Dave Batton — who serves as the county commissioners' attorney — confirmed the applicants and said each meets the statutory requirements to be appointed to the sheriff's post.
Batton said the eleven include:
Roy D. Magerkurth, Norman, a former sheriff's department employee.
Lloyd D. Blaine, Norman, a current employee with the sheriff's department.
David Williams, Norman, a former undersheriff.
Jim D. Filipski, Norman, the current undersheriff of McClain County.
Christopher Manning, Norman.
Rhett B. Burnett, Norman, who previously ran for the sheriff's post.
Joe Lester, Norman, the former public safety director for the University of Oklahoma.
Neil Vickers, Norman, the former deputy chief of police for the city of Norman.
Eddie Thomason, Harrah, current undersheriff of Cleveland County.
Mark S. Hamm, Moore.
Don Holyfield, Norman.
While all of the men meet the statutory requirements to be appointed to the position, at least one of the applicants, undersheriff Eddie Thomason, would not meet the requirements to be elected to the office.
"There's a gray area in the law on appointments," Batton said. "And Mr. Thomason meets those requirements. But it looks like he might not be able to run for the office because he lives in Harrah and not in Cleveland County."
State law requires a person seeking the office of sheriff to be a "registered voter in the county at least six months prior to the first day of the filing period for the election."
Because Thomason lives in Harrah he wouldn't qualify to run for election to the post, Batton said.
And though state law doesn't require any applicant — or person running for the office of sheriff — to have law enforcement experience, Batton said all the applicants were certified by the Council for Law Enforcement Education (CLEET).
Batton said he is compiling a notebook with all the applicants' resumes. That information would be given to Cleveland County commissioners to review. Once the commissioners decide who they want to interview, county officials will interview those chosen and pick a successor to Beggs.
An announcement is expected by the end of the month.
Moore council approves firefighter's contract
City councilmembers endorsed a new contract for city firefighters, changed a municipal ordinance governing oil and gas storage wells, and approved more than $1 million in spending during a meeting Monday evening.
Voting unanimously, councilmembers approved a new contract with the international Association of Firefighters, Local 2047.
That contract, Mayor Glenn Lewis said, would give Moore firemen a 3 percent pay increase.
“Basically it’s a 3 percent raise,” he said. “This is the second year of a two-year contract and it was very easy to work with the firemen.”
Lewis said city officials use the 2007 Oklahoma City firefighters’ contract as the baseline for Moore’s pay schedule.
“We stay one year behind Oklahoma City’s contract,” he said.
In addition to the firefighters’ contract, Lewis said councilmembers endorsed changes to a city ordinance requiring sightproof fencing on oil and gas wells.
“People from three different oil companies attended the meeting,” he said. “And this a nice compromise with them.”
Under the ordinance, Lewis said oil companies would be required to screen pumps and storage tanks with fencing and landscaping.
“We want them (the storage tanks) to be secure,” Lewis said. “We don’t want solid fencing, because you can’t see if kids sneak in there to play. Those things can be dangers and we want to secure them.”
Companies who use “chain-link” fencing will be required to landscape the area around the tank, he said.
“We’re working with the oil companies to clean up the sites. They are painting tanks, cleaning up and keeping them beautified.”
The effort, Lewis said, makes a good partnership. “We’re working with them instead of fighting,” Lewis said. “We all want to make sure the areas are secure so no kids can get in there. We want to clean them up and make them safe.”
Monday evening councilmembers also heard a report about the city’s proposed new wastewater treatment plant.
A new plant originally was planned on land near the intersection of Indian Hills Road and south Pennsylvania Avenue.
However, the facility drew the complaints from landowners in the area and city officials eventually shelved the idea.
Monday evening, councilmembers heard a report from Eagle Consulting about alternative sites for the plant.
“We’re going to build a new facility on the same land that our old facility is on,” Lewis said. “We will build the new plant first, then tear down the old one.”
Lewis said the new plant would be “state of the art” and would be funded by a construction loan from the Oklahoma Water Resources Board.
“We’ll be holding a public hearing soon,” he said. He said construction costs are expected to be between $28 million and $35 million.
“We’re going to do it as quick as we can. We’re trying to get more capacity and take out the odors.”
In other action, councilmembers:
• Approved a $500,000 budget supplement to the General Fund Street Department.
• Accepted a drainage easement from Richard Montgomery in lots 10, 11 and 12 in block 8 of the Lockhoma Estates Addition.
• Approved a lot split in the Westmoore Business Park.
• Endorsed a $3,000 contract with Cleveland County Rebuilding Together for low-income repairs.
• Approved the preliminary plant of Old Town Square.
• Approved spending $101,277 for the purchase of three one-ton Wildland Grass-Bursh apparatuses.
Acting at the Moore Public Works authority, the council approved:
• A contract with the Great Plains Coca-Cola Bottling company.
• Claims and expenditures totaling $119,126.
Acting as the Moore Economic Development Authority, the council approved:
• A report from the city’s economic development director.
The council’s next meeting will be 6:30 p.m. April 7 at Moore City Hall, 301 N. Broadway Ave.
Voting unanimously, councilmembers approved a new contract with the international Association of Firefighters, Local 2047.
That contract, Mayor Glenn Lewis said, would give Moore firemen a 3 percent pay increase.
“Basically it’s a 3 percent raise,” he said. “This is the second year of a two-year contract and it was very easy to work with the firemen.”
Lewis said city officials use the 2007 Oklahoma City firefighters’ contract as the baseline for Moore’s pay schedule.
“We stay one year behind Oklahoma City’s contract,” he said.
In addition to the firefighters’ contract, Lewis said councilmembers endorsed changes to a city ordinance requiring sightproof fencing on oil and gas wells.
“People from three different oil companies attended the meeting,” he said. “And this a nice compromise with them.”
Under the ordinance, Lewis said oil companies would be required to screen pumps and storage tanks with fencing and landscaping.
“We want them (the storage tanks) to be secure,” Lewis said. “We don’t want solid fencing, because you can’t see if kids sneak in there to play. Those things can be dangers and we want to secure them.”
Companies who use “chain-link” fencing will be required to landscape the area around the tank, he said.
“We’re working with the oil companies to clean up the sites. They are painting tanks, cleaning up and keeping them beautified.”
The effort, Lewis said, makes a good partnership. “We’re working with them instead of fighting,” Lewis said. “We all want to make sure the areas are secure so no kids can get in there. We want to clean them up and make them safe.”
Monday evening councilmembers also heard a report about the city’s proposed new wastewater treatment plant.
A new plant originally was planned on land near the intersection of Indian Hills Road and south Pennsylvania Avenue.
However, the facility drew the complaints from landowners in the area and city officials eventually shelved the idea.
Monday evening, councilmembers heard a report from Eagle Consulting about alternative sites for the plant.
“We’re going to build a new facility on the same land that our old facility is on,” Lewis said. “We will build the new plant first, then tear down the old one.”
Lewis said the new plant would be “state of the art” and would be funded by a construction loan from the Oklahoma Water Resources Board.
“We’ll be holding a public hearing soon,” he said. He said construction costs are expected to be between $28 million and $35 million.
“We’re going to do it as quick as we can. We’re trying to get more capacity and take out the odors.”
In other action, councilmembers:
• Approved a $500,000 budget supplement to the General Fund Street Department.
• Accepted a drainage easement from Richard Montgomery in lots 10, 11 and 12 in block 8 of the Lockhoma Estates Addition.
• Approved a lot split in the Westmoore Business Park.
• Endorsed a $3,000 contract with Cleveland County Rebuilding Together for low-income repairs.
• Approved the preliminary plant of Old Town Square.
• Approved spending $101,277 for the purchase of three one-ton Wildland Grass-Bursh apparatuses.
Acting at the Moore Public Works authority, the council approved:
• A contract with the Great Plains Coca-Cola Bottling company.
• Claims and expenditures totaling $119,126.
Acting as the Moore Economic Development Authority, the council approved:
• A report from the city’s economic development director.
The council’s next meeting will be 6:30 p.m. April 7 at Moore City Hall, 301 N. Broadway Ave.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Meacham: No tax reductions this session
MOORE— A $114 million hole in the state's budget will put the kibosh on any tax reduction plans for this year, the governor's chief budget negotiator said Wednesday.
Speaking to members of the Moore Rotary Club, state treasurer Scott Meacham said the $114 million hole presents a challenge for state lawmakers, but said the budget picture "wasn't as bad as it was in 2003."
"In 2003 things were a lot worse," he said. "We were looking at a $700 million hole."
But while Meacham said the state's financial picture wasn't rocky as the past, he said Oklahomans shouldn't expect new tax reductions this year. "I don't see any tax reductions right now," he said. "I believe we're looking at a maintenance type budget."
Meacham said that "maintenance budget" would include little, if any, new spending and would probably fund most state agencies at their current level. This year's budget probably wouldn't incude tax reductions, increases in pay for teachers or state employees or other spending initiatives.
"It's not a standstill budget, because I think we'll be able to adjust some things for inflation," he said. "I expect it will just be a maintenance budget."
Last week, Meacham said preliminary financial reports show the state's general revenue fund collections for February totaled about $303 million. That figure, he said, was 0.6 percent below last year and $26.9 million - about 8.2 percent - below this year's estimate.
"When the revenue loss from income tax cuts is factored in, Oklahoma's economy is showing growth. The trend of the past few months continues - the Oklahoma economy is expanding, just not as fast as during the past few years," he said.
Collections from three of the four major tax categories - sales, gross production and motor vehicle taxes - exceeded the prior year by $19.1 million and were above the estimate by a total of $20.7 million.
However, collections from income taxes were below the prior year by $4.1 million and below the estimate by $20.8 million.
Meacham said "timing issues" were primarily to blame for the "less than estimated" income tax collections.
"Electronic filing of tax returns has sped up the rate at which refunds are being paid," he said. "We anticipate this month's income tax shortfall will balance out to a certain extent in the coming months."
Additionally, net income tax collections produced $40.7 million - about $4.1 million or 9.2 percent below the prior year - and $20.8 million or 33.8 percent below the estimate. Net income tax collections, he said, include personal income taxes and corporate income taxes less refunds paid for the month.
Personal income tax collections totaled $38.9 million for the month, short of the prior year by 3.3 percent. Meacham said those figures failed to meet the estimate by $19.6 million or 33.5 percent.
"This year's budget is a good lesson for all of us," he said. "It's a lesson on who we can all work together."
Along with any new tax proposals, Meacham said he "didn't expect" a bond issue to pay for roads and bridges. "I do foresee some type of bond issue," he said, "but not for transportation."
And while Meacham was critical of some lawmakers for "the partisan nature" of the state capitol, he said he expected bugets issues would be resolved.
"Again, things aren't as bleak as they were before. There are many areas where we can find revenue. And people always seem to work better together when there is little money to spend."
Speaking to members of the Moore Rotary Club, state treasurer Scott Meacham said the $114 million hole presents a challenge for state lawmakers, but said the budget picture "wasn't as bad as it was in 2003."
"In 2003 things were a lot worse," he said. "We were looking at a $700 million hole."
But while Meacham said the state's financial picture wasn't rocky as the past, he said Oklahomans shouldn't expect new tax reductions this year. "I don't see any tax reductions right now," he said. "I believe we're looking at a maintenance type budget."
Meacham said that "maintenance budget" would include little, if any, new spending and would probably fund most state agencies at their current level. This year's budget probably wouldn't incude tax reductions, increases in pay for teachers or state employees or other spending initiatives.
"It's not a standstill budget, because I think we'll be able to adjust some things for inflation," he said. "I expect it will just be a maintenance budget."
Last week, Meacham said preliminary financial reports show the state's general revenue fund collections for February totaled about $303 million. That figure, he said, was 0.6 percent below last year and $26.9 million - about 8.2 percent - below this year's estimate.
"When the revenue loss from income tax cuts is factored in, Oklahoma's economy is showing growth. The trend of the past few months continues - the Oklahoma economy is expanding, just not as fast as during the past few years," he said.
Collections from three of the four major tax categories - sales, gross production and motor vehicle taxes - exceeded the prior year by $19.1 million and were above the estimate by a total of $20.7 million.
However, collections from income taxes were below the prior year by $4.1 million and below the estimate by $20.8 million.
Meacham said "timing issues" were primarily to blame for the "less than estimated" income tax collections.
"Electronic filing of tax returns has sped up the rate at which refunds are being paid," he said. "We anticipate this month's income tax shortfall will balance out to a certain extent in the coming months."
Additionally, net income tax collections produced $40.7 million - about $4.1 million or 9.2 percent below the prior year - and $20.8 million or 33.8 percent below the estimate. Net income tax collections, he said, include personal income taxes and corporate income taxes less refunds paid for the month.
Personal income tax collections totaled $38.9 million for the month, short of the prior year by 3.3 percent. Meacham said those figures failed to meet the estimate by $19.6 million or 33.5 percent.
"This year's budget is a good lesson for all of us," he said. "It's a lesson on who we can all work together."
Along with any new tax proposals, Meacham said he "didn't expect" a bond issue to pay for roads and bridges. "I do foresee some type of bond issue," he said, "but not for transportation."
And while Meacham was critical of some lawmakers for "the partisan nature" of the state capitol, he said he expected bugets issues would be resolved.
"Again, things aren't as bleak as they were before. There are many areas where we can find revenue. And people always seem to work better together when there is little money to spend."
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Medal of Honor winner remembered as "humble hero"
Funeral services are pending in Washington state for former Norman resident Richard M. McCool Jr., a former Navy lieutenant who earned the Congressional Medal of Honor in 1945.
McCool, 86, died last Wednesday at Harrison Medical Center in Bremeton, Wash.
McCool was one of only two Celveland County residents to earn the award — the second, Major John Lucian Smith of Lexington.
A native of Tishomingo, McCool graduated from the University of Oklahoma, then at 19, earned an appointment to the Naval Academy in 1944.
After graduating from the academy, he was placed in charge of the Navy transport ship USS Landing Craft Support 122.
The ship — similar in looks to a landing craft which brought soldiers ashore, but heavily armed with machine guns and rockets — was used to protect Naval destroyers.
On June 10, 1944, McCool’s ship was attacked while in Okinawa.
According to the book “Medal of Honor, Portraits of Valor Beyond the Call of Duty,” McCool rescued 99 crew members of the USS William D. Porter after the Porter was attacked by a Japanese Kamikaze.
The next day, Kamikaze planes attacked McCool's ship.
McCool’s crew blew one Kamikaze out of the sky and gunners hit a second, but that plane crashed into the 122, about 8 feet below the conning tower.
Of the 71 crew members on board, 12 were killed and 23 injured, including McCool, who suffered shrapnel wounds, burns and was knocked unconscious.
“When he came to, the conning tower was on fire,” author Peter Collier wrote. “He managed to get down to the main deck, and acting instinctively — he would remember almost nothing of the ensuing events — he rallied his crew to fight the fire that threatened to engulf the ship.”
As they attempted to save his ship, McCool learned that “several men were trapped in the burning deckhouse” and “went in to rescue them, carrying one of them to safety on his back, despite his burns.”
McCool continued to command his ship until he collapsed.
Because of his actions, he was awarded the Medal of Honor “for saving the lives of many” and for “saving his ship for further combat service” by then-President Harry Truman.
Created in 1861 by act of Congress, the Medal of Honor is the highest military award for bravery in the United States. It is traditionally awarded only to members of the armed forces for valor and/or self-sacrifice above and beyond the call of duty while in combat.
Since 1863, only 3,456 Americans have received the medal, incuding 28 from Oklahoma.
In a story published in the Kitsap Sun, McCool’s friends remember him an a “humble hero.”
“He was the most humble of men,” Fran Moyer, a friend of McCool’s, told the paper. “He did not ever want to be invited to a parade or anything like that because he could never think about himself as being a hero. The heroes were the men who gave their lives.”
After recovering, McCool returned to Norman, then returned to active duty service in mid-1946. He served in the Korean and Vietman wars and retired as a Navy captain in 1974.
That same year, McCool and his wife, Carole Elaine, moved to Bainbridge Island in Washington.
Active in politics, McCool served as chairman of the Kitsap County Democrats.
He is survived by his wife of 63 years, Carol Elaine; one daughter, Carolyn McCool of Vancouver, British Columbia; and two sons, Rick of Gig Harbor, Wash., and John, of Indianola, Wash.
McCool, 86, died last Wednesday at Harrison Medical Center in Bremeton, Wash.
McCool was one of only two Celveland County residents to earn the award — the second, Major John Lucian Smith of Lexington.
A native of Tishomingo, McCool graduated from the University of Oklahoma, then at 19, earned an appointment to the Naval Academy in 1944.
After graduating from the academy, he was placed in charge of the Navy transport ship USS Landing Craft Support 122.
The ship — similar in looks to a landing craft which brought soldiers ashore, but heavily armed with machine guns and rockets — was used to protect Naval destroyers.
On June 10, 1944, McCool’s ship was attacked while in Okinawa.
According to the book “Medal of Honor, Portraits of Valor Beyond the Call of Duty,” McCool rescued 99 crew members of the USS William D. Porter after the Porter was attacked by a Japanese Kamikaze.
The next day, Kamikaze planes attacked McCool's ship.
McCool’s crew blew one Kamikaze out of the sky and gunners hit a second, but that plane crashed into the 122, about 8 feet below the conning tower.
Of the 71 crew members on board, 12 were killed and 23 injured, including McCool, who suffered shrapnel wounds, burns and was knocked unconscious.
“When he came to, the conning tower was on fire,” author Peter Collier wrote. “He managed to get down to the main deck, and acting instinctively — he would remember almost nothing of the ensuing events — he rallied his crew to fight the fire that threatened to engulf the ship.”
As they attempted to save his ship, McCool learned that “several men were trapped in the burning deckhouse” and “went in to rescue them, carrying one of them to safety on his back, despite his burns.”
McCool continued to command his ship until he collapsed.
Because of his actions, he was awarded the Medal of Honor “for saving the lives of many” and for “saving his ship for further combat service” by then-President Harry Truman.
Created in 1861 by act of Congress, the Medal of Honor is the highest military award for bravery in the United States. It is traditionally awarded only to members of the armed forces for valor and/or self-sacrifice above and beyond the call of duty while in combat.
Since 1863, only 3,456 Americans have received the medal, incuding 28 from Oklahoma.
In a story published in the Kitsap Sun, McCool’s friends remember him an a “humble hero.”
“He was the most humble of men,” Fran Moyer, a friend of McCool’s, told the paper. “He did not ever want to be invited to a parade or anything like that because he could never think about himself as being a hero. The heroes were the men who gave their lives.”
After recovering, McCool returned to Norman, then returned to active duty service in mid-1946. He served in the Korean and Vietman wars and retired as a Navy captain in 1974.
That same year, McCool and his wife, Carole Elaine, moved to Bainbridge Island in Washington.
Active in politics, McCool served as chairman of the Kitsap County Democrats.
He is survived by his wife of 63 years, Carol Elaine; one daughter, Carolyn McCool of Vancouver, British Columbia; and two sons, Rick of Gig Harbor, Wash., and John, of Indianola, Wash.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Intelligent design politics,not science, OU prof says
A movement which claims to be an alternative to the scientific theory of evolution is nothing than an attempt to inject politics and religion into the classroom, a University of Oklahoma professor said Friday.
Victor H. Hutchinson, a former George Lynn Cross professor of zoology at OU, told members of the Cleveland County Democratic Party the intelligent design movement is part of an "ongoing culture war" being waged in America.
Hutchinson, now retired, spoke at the Democrats' weekly Tyner Cornbread and Beans luncheon.
"Evolution is not a faith and intelligent design is not a scientific theory," Hutchinson said. "Science can only ask 'how,' science cannot ask 'why?'"
Using a computerized slide presentation, Hutchinson told the group many creationists claim anyone who supports the theory of evolution is automatically an atheist.
"These fundamentalist groups say, 'the removal of the theory of evolution will be salvation of western civilization,'" Hutchinson said. "They have said, 'this is not a debate about science but religion and philosophy.'"
Their group's goal, Hutchinson said, is to make the United States a theocracy.
"Religion and science don't need to conflict," he said. "And most of our country's mainstream church understand this. It's only in the far right that we have this problem."
In fact, Hutchinson said, the only other country with a greater fundamentalist movement seeking to inject religion in the classroom is Islamic Turkey.
"This is something that has happened before," he said "We saw this movement in the '20s, when the country moved toward fundamentalism, and we had a similar response in the '50s and in the '80s."
And now, Hutchinson said, "we're seeing the same movement again."
"Part of the problem is our fault," he said. "Education and science educators have failed to explain scientific education to the general public. The general public has no idea what science is and how research is done."
And because of that, Hutchinson said most people don't understand the difference between a theory -- that is, a guess -- and a scientific theory, which has been vetted, tested and reviewed.
"A scientific theory is as close as you can get. The scientific theory of evolution is just as valuable a theory as the theory of gravity or the theory of plate tectonics," he said. "But metaphysical concepts like faith and religion are different. The supernatural is not testable."
Hutchinson criticized some fundamentalist groups' reliance on polls to push for the teaching of intelligent design. "Polls don't determine science," he said.
The professor also had harsh words for some members of the Oklahoma Legislature.
"We've had to battle textbook disclaimers, bills for intelligent design and academic sunshine laws," he said. "This has become a partisan issue and it shouldn't have."
The only way to ensure that science is taught in the classroom is by continuing to fight the efforts of those who support intelligent design, he said.
"There is room for a discussion of intelligent design in the classroom," he said. "But not as a scientific theory. There are many places were it could be discussed, it's just not science."
And the problem, Hutchinson said, will "only get worse."
"Many science teachers are afraid to teach evolution because of the issues involved," he said. "And I had some tell me that when they do talk about it, students have asked to be excused. We are in the middle of a culture war and I don't think it will ever stop.
Victor H. Hutchinson, a former George Lynn Cross professor of zoology at OU, told members of the Cleveland County Democratic Party the intelligent design movement is part of an "ongoing culture war" being waged in America.
Hutchinson, now retired, spoke at the Democrats' weekly Tyner Cornbread and Beans luncheon.
"Evolution is not a faith and intelligent design is not a scientific theory," Hutchinson said. "Science can only ask 'how,' science cannot ask 'why?'"
Using a computerized slide presentation, Hutchinson told the group many creationists claim anyone who supports the theory of evolution is automatically an atheist.
"These fundamentalist groups say, 'the removal of the theory of evolution will be salvation of western civilization,'" Hutchinson said. "They have said, 'this is not a debate about science but religion and philosophy.'"
Their group's goal, Hutchinson said, is to make the United States a theocracy.
"Religion and science don't need to conflict," he said. "And most of our country's mainstream church understand this. It's only in the far right that we have this problem."
In fact, Hutchinson said, the only other country with a greater fundamentalist movement seeking to inject religion in the classroom is Islamic Turkey.
"This is something that has happened before," he said "We saw this movement in the '20s, when the country moved toward fundamentalism, and we had a similar response in the '50s and in the '80s."
And now, Hutchinson said, "we're seeing the same movement again."
"Part of the problem is our fault," he said. "Education and science educators have failed to explain scientific education to the general public. The general public has no idea what science is and how research is done."
And because of that, Hutchinson said most people don't understand the difference between a theory -- that is, a guess -- and a scientific theory, which has been vetted, tested and reviewed.
"A scientific theory is as close as you can get. The scientific theory of evolution is just as valuable a theory as the theory of gravity or the theory of plate tectonics," he said. "But metaphysical concepts like faith and religion are different. The supernatural is not testable."
Hutchinson criticized some fundamentalist groups' reliance on polls to push for the teaching of intelligent design. "Polls don't determine science," he said.
The professor also had harsh words for some members of the Oklahoma Legislature.
"We've had to battle textbook disclaimers, bills for intelligent design and academic sunshine laws," he said. "This has become a partisan issue and it shouldn't have."
The only way to ensure that science is taught in the classroom is by continuing to fight the efforts of those who support intelligent design, he said.
"There is room for a discussion of intelligent design in the classroom," he said. "But not as a scientific theory. There are many places were it could be discussed, it's just not science."
And the problem, Hutchinson said, will "only get worse."
"Many science teachers are afraid to teach evolution because of the issues involved," he said. "And I had some tell me that when they do talk about it, students have asked to be excused. We are in the middle of a culture war and I don't think it will ever stop.
Extended school year a tough sell to teachers, administrators
OKLAHOMA CITY -- A proposal which would make major changes in the length of the state's school year sailed through the Oklahoma House of Representatives this week.
But there's a big storm on the horizon.
Under House Bill 3122, lawmakers would add "about three days" to the state school year and use hours instead of days to measure time in spent in the classroom.
Written by state Rep. Tad Jones, R-Claremore, the bill would require a minimum of 1,080 hours per academic year.
Jones, chair of the House Education Committee, said the measure would make schools stronger.
"This will give our schools more flexibility to teach how and when they see fit," he said. "If school districts want to leave their school year exactly as it is right now, this bill gives them that option. But, if they want to extend each school day so the needed academic time is placed within a 4-day week to save money on utility and bus costs, this bill gives them that flexibility."
However, in addition to adding time to the school calendar, the bill would reduce the number of professional development days available to teachers. Currently most teachers have about five professional development days.
Under HB 3122, those days would be reduced to two.
"The bill ... protects 15 hours of professional development for teachers each year," Jones said in a media release.
And while Jones claims the bill will "help our students compete not only nationally, but globally," area school administrators and teachers' union officials are questioning that reduction and the lack of funding for the longer school year.
The measure, union officials said, doesn't include any funding for those three extra days.
"The bill is an unfunded mandate," said Moore Association of Classroom Teachers President Jill Dudley. "They took three of our professional development days and turned those days into instruction days. So where will the money to pay for the extra time, the support staff, the extra cafeteria food and things like that come from?"
In addition, Dudley said teachers don't want to lose their professional development days.
"What those legislators don't understand is those five days are not all about professional development," she said. "We also have to accomplish many things before the beginning of the school year. We have organizational meetings, we meet with subject area coordinators, we review test scores and remediation efforts. We need time to do those things, too."
Democratic state Rep. Bill Nations agreed.
Nations, from Norman, voted against the bill. He said he, too, didn't like the idea of trading teachers' professional development days for days in the classroom.
"I voted against it because they (the House GOP) won't tell the truth," he said. "You're trading three days of professional development for three more days in the classroom. Oklahoma has some of the best teachers in America and I'm not one who wants to take those professional development days away from them."
Representative Jones, Nations said, "doesn't want to come out and say that's what they are doing and that somehow, we're going to get three extra days in the classroom. This was the cheapest way to get them."
The real cost, some administrators say, is much higher.
Norman school superintendent, Dr. Joe Siano, said each extra day of instruction would probably cost an additional $18 million, statewide.
Siano, part of a task force appointed by state school superintendent Sandy Garrett to study the issue, said the additional school days would be expensive.
"Our task force studied three areas," he said. "The quality of instruction time, the cost of instruction time and the quantity of instruction time."
And while the task force recommended adding a total of 15 days to the school year, Siano said the group also recommended those additional days be added in five day increments and that the state provide the extra funding -- between $80 million and $100 million -- to cover the costs of those additional five days.
"I think extending the school year is something we ought to consider," Siano said. "The more time with kids is going to be impactful and I like the part of the bill addressing the school year in hours instead of days."
However, like both Dudley and Nations, Siano said he, too, "was concerned" about exchange of professional development days for instructional days.
"I think that, in the end, if you begin dismissing the importance of professional development, you're going to minimize the impact of additional instruction," he said.
The Legislature, Siano said, should "fund everything they are already underfunding and meet schools' operational obligations."
"Then you're going to have to pay for the extra days," he said.
And this year, money is tight.
"One of the challenges that we've encountered is clearly the funding portion of the bill," state Rep. Scott Martin said. "There isn't just loads of extra money sitting around. If we're to expand the school year, as it has been proposed, then we're talking about millions of new dollars."
Martin, a Norman Republican, said he voted for the measure because he was "in favor of some of the changes that have been proposed."
"I don't think the change of the school days to hours impacts us too much," he said. "But I am concerned about changing professional days to instructional days."
Still, even with the measure's 67-33 vote, Martin said House members will get another chance to review the measure before it's sent to the governor's desk.
On Feb. 21, Jones moved to remove the measure's title and enacting clause. That action forces the bill back to the House of Representatives before it can be sent to Gov. Brad Henry.
"We're gong to get another look at it," Martin said. "Changing of the school days to hours was an easier sell at this time. We're going to see if we can fund it appropriately. If it comes down to it and all we can do is change from days to hours, then that's all right. We can wait until we can find the money."
However, even those changes might not prove enough to satisfy the area's school teachers.
"None of us are opposed to adding more instructional days," Dudley said. "But you gotta pay for it. You just can't push the burden off on the district."
And, Dudley said, should the measure not include funding, teachers' union officials will work to defeat HB 3122 in the state Senate.
"If we can't beat it in the Senate, then we'll ask the governor to veto it," she said. "The districts can't bear any more unfunded mandates.
But there's a big storm on the horizon.
Under House Bill 3122, lawmakers would add "about three days" to the state school year and use hours instead of days to measure time in spent in the classroom.
Written by state Rep. Tad Jones, R-Claremore, the bill would require a minimum of 1,080 hours per academic year.
Jones, chair of the House Education Committee, said the measure would make schools stronger.
"This will give our schools more flexibility to teach how and when they see fit," he said. "If school districts want to leave their school year exactly as it is right now, this bill gives them that option. But, if they want to extend each school day so the needed academic time is placed within a 4-day week to save money on utility and bus costs, this bill gives them that flexibility."
However, in addition to adding time to the school calendar, the bill would reduce the number of professional development days available to teachers. Currently most teachers have about five professional development days.
Under HB 3122, those days would be reduced to two.
"The bill ... protects 15 hours of professional development for teachers each year," Jones said in a media release.
And while Jones claims the bill will "help our students compete not only nationally, but globally," area school administrators and teachers' union officials are questioning that reduction and the lack of funding for the longer school year.
The measure, union officials said, doesn't include any funding for those three extra days.
"The bill is an unfunded mandate," said Moore Association of Classroom Teachers President Jill Dudley. "They took three of our professional development days and turned those days into instruction days. So where will the money to pay for the extra time, the support staff, the extra cafeteria food and things like that come from?"
In addition, Dudley said teachers don't want to lose their professional development days.
"What those legislators don't understand is those five days are not all about professional development," she said. "We also have to accomplish many things before the beginning of the school year. We have organizational meetings, we meet with subject area coordinators, we review test scores and remediation efforts. We need time to do those things, too."
Democratic state Rep. Bill Nations agreed.
Nations, from Norman, voted against the bill. He said he, too, didn't like the idea of trading teachers' professional development days for days in the classroom.
"I voted against it because they (the House GOP) won't tell the truth," he said. "You're trading three days of professional development for three more days in the classroom. Oklahoma has some of the best teachers in America and I'm not one who wants to take those professional development days away from them."
Representative Jones, Nations said, "doesn't want to come out and say that's what they are doing and that somehow, we're going to get three extra days in the classroom. This was the cheapest way to get them."
The real cost, some administrators say, is much higher.
Norman school superintendent, Dr. Joe Siano, said each extra day of instruction would probably cost an additional $18 million, statewide.
Siano, part of a task force appointed by state school superintendent Sandy Garrett to study the issue, said the additional school days would be expensive.
"Our task force studied three areas," he said. "The quality of instruction time, the cost of instruction time and the quantity of instruction time."
And while the task force recommended adding a total of 15 days to the school year, Siano said the group also recommended those additional days be added in five day increments and that the state provide the extra funding -- between $80 million and $100 million -- to cover the costs of those additional five days.
"I think extending the school year is something we ought to consider," Siano said. "The more time with kids is going to be impactful and I like the part of the bill addressing the school year in hours instead of days."
However, like both Dudley and Nations, Siano said he, too, "was concerned" about exchange of professional development days for instructional days.
"I think that, in the end, if you begin dismissing the importance of professional development, you're going to minimize the impact of additional instruction," he said.
The Legislature, Siano said, should "fund everything they are already underfunding and meet schools' operational obligations."
"Then you're going to have to pay for the extra days," he said.
And this year, money is tight.
"One of the challenges that we've encountered is clearly the funding portion of the bill," state Rep. Scott Martin said. "There isn't just loads of extra money sitting around. If we're to expand the school year, as it has been proposed, then we're talking about millions of new dollars."
Martin, a Norman Republican, said he voted for the measure because he was "in favor of some of the changes that have been proposed."
"I don't think the change of the school days to hours impacts us too much," he said. "But I am concerned about changing professional days to instructional days."
Still, even with the measure's 67-33 vote, Martin said House members will get another chance to review the measure before it's sent to the governor's desk.
On Feb. 21, Jones moved to remove the measure's title and enacting clause. That action forces the bill back to the House of Representatives before it can be sent to Gov. Brad Henry.
"We're gong to get another look at it," Martin said. "Changing of the school days to hours was an easier sell at this time. We're going to see if we can fund it appropriately. If it comes down to it and all we can do is change from days to hours, then that's all right. We can wait until we can find the money."
However, even those changes might not prove enough to satisfy the area's school teachers.
"None of us are opposed to adding more instructional days," Dudley said. "But you gotta pay for it. You just can't push the burden off on the district."
And, Dudley said, should the measure not include funding, teachers' union officials will work to defeat HB 3122 in the state Senate.
"If we can't beat it in the Senate, then we'll ask the governor to veto it," she said. "The districts can't bear any more unfunded mandates.
Sparks trying to recover WorldCom funds for retirement systems
OKLAHOMA CITY — A Norman lawmaker is trying to pull the legislative equivalent of a quarterback sneak to reroute more than $11 million in settlement funds back to the state agencies who originally lost the money.
Norman state Sen. John Sparks, a Democrat, confirmed this week he would try to amend Senate Bill 1868 to earmark $11.7 million in WorldCom settlement funds back to the state retirement systems who originally lost the money.
“The money is in the wrong place,” Sparks said Thursday afternoon. “The money is available as a direct result of the WorldCom settlement. It represents some of what was lost by the agencies who invested in WorldCom.”
Under Sparks’ amendment, the funds — which are under the control of the Oklahoma Department of Commerce — would be shifted back to the various retirement systems who lost money in the WorldCom bankruptcy.
Sparks said his amendment would allocate:
• $4.3 million for the Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System.
• $2.8 million for the Teachers Retirement System.
• $1.7 million for firefighters retirement.
• $1 million for police officers.
The funds should be returned, Sparks said, because the agencies are “actually the victims of a crime.”
“It’s the principle of the matter,” he said. “The money was lost from our retirement system and now some of that money has been recovered. It should go back to the retirement system.”
As part of a $650 million settlement, Oklahoma received the funds following a lawsuit by Attorney General Drew Edmondson.
More than 32 such suits were filed by various companies and public retirement funds against WorldCom over investments which were made between 1998 and 2001.
WorldCom — which had assets in excess of $100 billion — filed for bankruptcy protection in July 2002 leaving all of Oklahoma’s public pension systems and a handful of state agencies with heavy financial losses.
Edmondson originally settled the fraud charges with WorldCom with an agreement to create 1,600 jobs in Oklahoma. However, those jobs never materialized and, in 2007, an $11.7 million settlement was reached in lieu of the jobs with Verizon Communications, WorldCom’s successor company.
Since the payment of that settlement, the $11.7 million has been parked in an account controlled by the Department of Commerce.
And while many legislative leaders originally agreed those funds should go back to the state’s various retirement systems, some of those lawmakers have now changed their position, Sparks said.
“I think we have an uphill fight,” he said. “I had to do an amendment to get it out of committee. Many people want to sweep this under the rug, they want to use it for other things. The only problem is it was specifically lost from retirement funds, and some was recovered. I believe that money should be returned.”
In August 2007, then-House Appropriation Chair Chris Benge agreed.
Late last summer, Benge issued a media statement saying that “money received from a settlement agreement from the WorldCom accounting fraud should be placed in state employee retirement systems.”
Benge’s statement drew praise from the Oklahoma Public Employees Association.
Benge, the OPEA said, “has shown outstanding leadership regarding this issue. We, as an association, owe him a great deal of thanks.”
Since then things have changed.
Benge is now House Speaker and the state’s budget developed a $117 million leak. Both of those problems have sent retirement system officials scrambling to protect the settlement funds.
Tom Spencer, executive director of the Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System, said the money should be returned to OPERS because it and the state’s other retirement system, were the original victims.
“We heard the state had settled for $11.7 million. What caught our attention was the funds landed at the Commerce Department,” he said. “And commerce was thinking about how to spend it. We were sorta the victims of the crime, as you will, we thought it more appropriate that those funds come back to us.”
Spencer said state retirement systems lost more than $66 million in the WorldCom bankruptcy and his fund alone lost more than $25 million.
“We have received some funds over the past couple of years,” Spencer said. “But we are nowhere near whole.”
And though some lawmakers downplay the settlement as “a drop in the bucket” when compared to the $8 billion in assets of the Teachers Retirement System, Spencer said his agency’s share — about $4.3 million — would cover his operational costs for a year.
“$4.3 million would pay a pretty good chunk of what it costs to run our office this year,” he said.
Still, both men acknowledge getting the legislation passed won’t be easy.
“Last year it looked doable,” Sparks said. “But this year things could be more difficult.”
Sparks said his proposal — which amends Senate Bill 1868 by Kingfisher Republican Mike Johnson — faces an uphill battle.
“I understand there’s some controversy,” he said. “But it’s something we should do.”
Right now, Sparks said he’s awaiting committee action on SB 1868 and hopes to offer his amendment soon.
In the meantime, retirement officials have crossed their fingers.
With many of the state’s public systems underfunded by millions of dollars, every dollar, they say, adds stability.
“It’s something we’d like to see happen,” Spencer said. “Every few million helps.”
Norman state Sen. John Sparks, a Democrat, confirmed this week he would try to amend Senate Bill 1868 to earmark $11.7 million in WorldCom settlement funds back to the state retirement systems who originally lost the money.
“The money is in the wrong place,” Sparks said Thursday afternoon. “The money is available as a direct result of the WorldCom settlement. It represents some of what was lost by the agencies who invested in WorldCom.”
Under Sparks’ amendment, the funds — which are under the control of the Oklahoma Department of Commerce — would be shifted back to the various retirement systems who lost money in the WorldCom bankruptcy.
Sparks said his amendment would allocate:
• $4.3 million for the Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System.
• $2.8 million for the Teachers Retirement System.
• $1.7 million for firefighters retirement.
• $1 million for police officers.
The funds should be returned, Sparks said, because the agencies are “actually the victims of a crime.”
“It’s the principle of the matter,” he said. “The money was lost from our retirement system and now some of that money has been recovered. It should go back to the retirement system.”
As part of a $650 million settlement, Oklahoma received the funds following a lawsuit by Attorney General Drew Edmondson.
More than 32 such suits were filed by various companies and public retirement funds against WorldCom over investments which were made between 1998 and 2001.
WorldCom — which had assets in excess of $100 billion — filed for bankruptcy protection in July 2002 leaving all of Oklahoma’s public pension systems and a handful of state agencies with heavy financial losses.
Edmondson originally settled the fraud charges with WorldCom with an agreement to create 1,600 jobs in Oklahoma. However, those jobs never materialized and, in 2007, an $11.7 million settlement was reached in lieu of the jobs with Verizon Communications, WorldCom’s successor company.
Since the payment of that settlement, the $11.7 million has been parked in an account controlled by the Department of Commerce.
And while many legislative leaders originally agreed those funds should go back to the state’s various retirement systems, some of those lawmakers have now changed their position, Sparks said.
“I think we have an uphill fight,” he said. “I had to do an amendment to get it out of committee. Many people want to sweep this under the rug, they want to use it for other things. The only problem is it was specifically lost from retirement funds, and some was recovered. I believe that money should be returned.”
In August 2007, then-House Appropriation Chair Chris Benge agreed.
Late last summer, Benge issued a media statement saying that “money received from a settlement agreement from the WorldCom accounting fraud should be placed in state employee retirement systems.”
Benge’s statement drew praise from the Oklahoma Public Employees Association.
Benge, the OPEA said, “has shown outstanding leadership regarding this issue. We, as an association, owe him a great deal of thanks.”
Since then things have changed.
Benge is now House Speaker and the state’s budget developed a $117 million leak. Both of those problems have sent retirement system officials scrambling to protect the settlement funds.
Tom Spencer, executive director of the Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System, said the money should be returned to OPERS because it and the state’s other retirement system, were the original victims.
“We heard the state had settled for $11.7 million. What caught our attention was the funds landed at the Commerce Department,” he said. “And commerce was thinking about how to spend it. We were sorta the victims of the crime, as you will, we thought it more appropriate that those funds come back to us.”
Spencer said state retirement systems lost more than $66 million in the WorldCom bankruptcy and his fund alone lost more than $25 million.
“We have received some funds over the past couple of years,” Spencer said. “But we are nowhere near whole.”
And though some lawmakers downplay the settlement as “a drop in the bucket” when compared to the $8 billion in assets of the Teachers Retirement System, Spencer said his agency’s share — about $4.3 million — would cover his operational costs for a year.
“$4.3 million would pay a pretty good chunk of what it costs to run our office this year,” he said.
Still, both men acknowledge getting the legislation passed won’t be easy.
“Last year it looked doable,” Sparks said. “But this year things could be more difficult.”
Sparks said his proposal — which amends Senate Bill 1868 by Kingfisher Republican Mike Johnson — faces an uphill battle.
“I understand there’s some controversy,” he said. “But it’s something we should do.”
Right now, Sparks said he’s awaiting committee action on SB 1868 and hopes to offer his amendment soon.
In the meantime, retirement officials have crossed their fingers.
With many of the state’s public systems underfunded by millions of dollars, every dollar, they say, adds stability.
“It’s something we’d like to see happen,” Spencer said. “Every few million helps.”
Wesselhoft authors academic "sunshine" bill
OKLAHOMA CITY — While many state legislators are struggling with issues such as reduced state revenue and problems with the Department of Corrections, state Rep. Paul Wesselhoft has a different worry.
Wesselhoft is concerned about free speech at the state’s colleges and universities.
Wesselhoft, a Moore Republican, is asking Oklahoma college students to “contact him if they feel their free-speech rights are being taken away” in the classroom. He made the announcement in an e-mailed news release sent to the state’s three largest universities — the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State University and the University of Central Oklahoma.
“This is an important issue that guarantees freedom of speech but also impacts a student’s freedom to express personal choices — whether religious views or political ideas or general moral beliefs,” Wesselhoft said.
Wesselhoft said he became concerned after attending legislative conferences in Phoenix, Ariz., and Philadelphia, Pa.
“I attended these national conferences and it came to my attention at both of these places that some universities are having problems,” he said.
Wesselhoft claimed that at some of the country’s universities, professors are “not getting tenure because they might be on the wrong side of issues such as global warming.”
The professors, he said, are having promotions and tenure withheld because of their beliefs. And students in class, he said, are being graded harshly because they might disagree with a professor’s view.
“Even though they have credentials and they publish in academic journals, they are not being treated fairly. And I’ve heard of many students who feel like they have been unfairly treated.”
Because of that, the Moore Republican has authored House Bill 2600 — the Higher Education Sunshine Act — which would require public higher education institutions to file an annual report with the Legislature detailing how they encouraged intellectual diversity and “the free exchange of ideas.”
Wesselhoft could not cite any examples of the problem in Oklahoma.
“I don’t known of anything like that right now,” he said. “I am hearing from professors at OU, OSU and UCO. And most of them are saying, ‘Mind your own business, leave us alone in the classroom.’”
But Wesselhoft said he believes the issue is a “legitimate concern.”
“It may very well be there is not a pattern here,” he said. “Right now, I’m only collecting anecdotal information. All I’m asking for is for the presidents of our state’s colleges and universities to detail how they handle diversity issues.”
Wesselhoft’s claims, however, don’t sit well with the national organization that represents university professors.
In a posting on the American Association of University Professors Web site, the AAUP “sharply criticized” efforts to create an academic bill of rights or which push for intellectual diversity.
Those efforts, the AAUP said, are “unnecessary and almost certain to compromise academic freedom rather than defend it. At their core, these measures would place decisions about faculty appointments and the content of academic programs in the hands of political officials, thereby jeopardizing not only the independence of faculty members and their institutions but also their capacity to advance knowledge and educate our students.”
At OU students and faculty members also criticized the idea.
In a story published recently in the OU Daily — the university’s student newspaper — OU chemistry professor Phillip Klebba, said intellectual diversity already exists at OU.
“Diversity is already a, if not the, defining characteristic of institutions of higher education,” he said. “Are state legislators better qualified to evaluate intellectual diversity than the individuals in this chain of authority? Most of whom have spent their entire careers seeking to optimize the learning environment of colleges and universities.”
Klebba told the OU Daily that “requiring OU to report to the Legislature duplicates existing policy; OU already conducts comprehensive annual reviews of all academic activities.”
Student congress chair Jordan McGee agreed.
“I haven’t ever had the experience of being censored in the classroom,” McGee said. “The discussions in my classes have always been for the pursuit of academic knowledge.”
McGee, an Edmond senior, said he didn’t see how Wesselhoft’s bill would help.
“I don’t see how a bill could ever change that,” he said. “That type of information is not objectively verifiable.”
Still, Wesselhoft said the issue is worth exploring.
“I think it’s a legitimate question that needs to be asked,” he said. “I don’t have a deadline. And I hope to hear from students and professors. I’m not on a witch hunt, but I suspect that (some) colleges and universities are indoctrinating students.”
Wesselhoft is concerned about free speech at the state’s colleges and universities.
Wesselhoft, a Moore Republican, is asking Oklahoma college students to “contact him if they feel their free-speech rights are being taken away” in the classroom. He made the announcement in an e-mailed news release sent to the state’s three largest universities — the University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State University and the University of Central Oklahoma.
“This is an important issue that guarantees freedom of speech but also impacts a student’s freedom to express personal choices — whether religious views or political ideas or general moral beliefs,” Wesselhoft said.
Wesselhoft said he became concerned after attending legislative conferences in Phoenix, Ariz., and Philadelphia, Pa.
“I attended these national conferences and it came to my attention at both of these places that some universities are having problems,” he said.
Wesselhoft claimed that at some of the country’s universities, professors are “not getting tenure because they might be on the wrong side of issues such as global warming.”
The professors, he said, are having promotions and tenure withheld because of their beliefs. And students in class, he said, are being graded harshly because they might disagree with a professor’s view.
“Even though they have credentials and they publish in academic journals, they are not being treated fairly. And I’ve heard of many students who feel like they have been unfairly treated.”
Because of that, the Moore Republican has authored House Bill 2600 — the Higher Education Sunshine Act — which would require public higher education institutions to file an annual report with the Legislature detailing how they encouraged intellectual diversity and “the free exchange of ideas.”
Wesselhoft could not cite any examples of the problem in Oklahoma.
“I don’t known of anything like that right now,” he said. “I am hearing from professors at OU, OSU and UCO. And most of them are saying, ‘Mind your own business, leave us alone in the classroom.’”
But Wesselhoft said he believes the issue is a “legitimate concern.”
“It may very well be there is not a pattern here,” he said. “Right now, I’m only collecting anecdotal information. All I’m asking for is for the presidents of our state’s colleges and universities to detail how they handle diversity issues.”
Wesselhoft’s claims, however, don’t sit well with the national organization that represents university professors.
In a posting on the American Association of University Professors Web site, the AAUP “sharply criticized” efforts to create an academic bill of rights or which push for intellectual diversity.
Those efforts, the AAUP said, are “unnecessary and almost certain to compromise academic freedom rather than defend it. At their core, these measures would place decisions about faculty appointments and the content of academic programs in the hands of political officials, thereby jeopardizing not only the independence of faculty members and their institutions but also their capacity to advance knowledge and educate our students.”
At OU students and faculty members also criticized the idea.
In a story published recently in the OU Daily — the university’s student newspaper — OU chemistry professor Phillip Klebba, said intellectual diversity already exists at OU.
“Diversity is already a, if not the, defining characteristic of institutions of higher education,” he said. “Are state legislators better qualified to evaluate intellectual diversity than the individuals in this chain of authority? Most of whom have spent their entire careers seeking to optimize the learning environment of colleges and universities.”
Klebba told the OU Daily that “requiring OU to report to the Legislature duplicates existing policy; OU already conducts comprehensive annual reviews of all academic activities.”
Student congress chair Jordan McGee agreed.
“I haven’t ever had the experience of being censored in the classroom,” McGee said. “The discussions in my classes have always been for the pursuit of academic knowledge.”
McGee, an Edmond senior, said he didn’t see how Wesselhoft’s bill would help.
“I don’t see how a bill could ever change that,” he said. “That type of information is not objectively verifiable.”
Still, Wesselhoft said the issue is worth exploring.
“I think it’s a legitimate question that needs to be asked,” he said. “I don’t have a deadline. And I hope to hear from students and professors. I’m not on a witch hunt, but I suspect that (some) colleges and universities are indoctrinating students.”
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Facing the "real" issues of the 2008 legislative session
OKLAHOMA CITY -- After all the players have left the stage, and the dust settles from this week's Shakesperian-type drama about who will become the next speaker of the House, the 149 members of the Oklahoma Legislature still have a great deal of work to do.
And they won't have much time to do it.
Issues such as slow economic growth, increased funding for the Departments of Corrections and Transportation, a pay increase for state employees and schoolteachers and the possibility of yet another tax decrease all haunt the Capitol like vengeful spirits.
Spirits which been around for a while.
Take for example, ethics legislation.
Oklahoma City Republican David Dank said his ethics proposal, introduced last year, would "remove the clouds" caused by political fundraising in Oklahoma.
"The Oklahoma Clean Campaign Act (will) assure that the process of raising money for political campaigns is open, honest and divorced from the legislative process," he said.
Last year, the bill didn't get very far.
But, this year, things could change.
"It wouldn't surprise me if we did something on ethics in the first week," said state Rep. Wallace Collins, D-Norman. "It's come up pretty big right now and it may be a pretty good segue into some type of legislation."
Lawmakers, Collins said, now have "a great opportunity" to pass stronger ethics legislation.
"If we don't do it right now, at this time, when will we?" Collins said.
Collins' prediction was echoed this week by the House's Democratic leader.
State Rep. Danny Morgan, D-Suphur, said House Democrats would make ethics legislation a priority this session.
"First and foremost, at the top of the list is ethics," Morgan said. "We need an ethically and fiscally sound government. We owe that to the voters of Oklahoma."
Ethics, Morgan said, "is the one thing that our members have heard about back home."
"We had a speaker under an ethics investigation," he said. "We have to make sure we have the trust of the public. Strong ethics legislation is a way to clean up the process and show the people of Oklahoma we are truly here for the right reasons."
But ethics won't be lawmakers' only challenge -- as usual, the state's budget will be the main topic of debate.
While financial experts say state revenue will grow by about $198 million right now, most of that money -- all but $32 million -- is already spoken for, officials with the state treasurer's office said.
"A good portion of that money is going to fund previous legislative commitments," said Tim Allen, Scott Meacham's deputy state treasurer. "But there could be additional money available sometime during session."
Those funds, Allen said, could be as high as $100 million.
And those funds could go quickly. Already, some lawmakers want to use a portion of that money to pay for another tax reduction.
The Senate's Republican leader -- Sen. Glenn Coffee -- told The Associated Press his long-term goal is to cut the income tax, now at 5.5 percent, to 3.5 percent or less.
"Tax rates higher than this serve as an impediment to job growth," he said.
Coffee favors legislation to make sure a previously approved income tax cut to 5.25 percent takes effect as scheduled. He has said tax cuts should be paid for through elimination of yet-to-be-determined tax credits and sales tax exemptions.
Tax cuts also are on the minds of some Democrats.
Sen. J. Paul Gumm, D-Durant, is pushing again to end the sales tax on groceries.
"With a sluggish economy, there is no better time to move this proposal forward to put real money back into the pockets of working and middle class families as soon as possible," Gumm said. "Not only will we directly help them, we give the Oklahoma economy an extra boost."
Lawmakers also want to raise the pay of state employees and bring teachers' pay in line with the regional average.
In a media release sent out this week, state Sen. Kenneth Corn, D-Poteau, announced he'd filed legislation to authorize a $2,700 pay raise for Oklahoma state employees. Corn said state employees provide valuable and indispensable work, and should be at the top of the list when state funds are dispersed.
"From those who care for our elderly and children to those who ensure the safety of our highways and police our prisons, state employees provide essential services around the clock for Oklahomans," he said. "Every segment of our society is touched by these dedicated workers, and it's time for us to take care of them."
Corn said the need for a state employee pay increase has been made even more essential as the Legislature has been under-funding various state agencies in recent years.
"Many state employees have had to perform the work of two or three people when a vacancy is left unfilled," he said.
And with more than 2,000 pieces of legislation filed and ready to be reviewed in a 90-day period, state legislators face three months of intense work.
The second session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature begins Monday.
And they won't have much time to do it.
Issues such as slow economic growth, increased funding for the Departments of Corrections and Transportation, a pay increase for state employees and schoolteachers and the possibility of yet another tax decrease all haunt the Capitol like vengeful spirits.
Spirits which been around for a while.
Take for example, ethics legislation.
Oklahoma City Republican David Dank said his ethics proposal, introduced last year, would "remove the clouds" caused by political fundraising in Oklahoma.
"The Oklahoma Clean Campaign Act (will) assure that the process of raising money for political campaigns is open, honest and divorced from the legislative process," he said.
Last year, the bill didn't get very far.
But, this year, things could change.
"It wouldn't surprise me if we did something on ethics in the first week," said state Rep. Wallace Collins, D-Norman. "It's come up pretty big right now and it may be a pretty good segue into some type of legislation."
Lawmakers, Collins said, now have "a great opportunity" to pass stronger ethics legislation.
"If we don't do it right now, at this time, when will we?" Collins said.
Collins' prediction was echoed this week by the House's Democratic leader.
State Rep. Danny Morgan, D-Suphur, said House Democrats would make ethics legislation a priority this session.
"First and foremost, at the top of the list is ethics," Morgan said. "We need an ethically and fiscally sound government. We owe that to the voters of Oklahoma."
Ethics, Morgan said, "is the one thing that our members have heard about back home."
"We had a speaker under an ethics investigation," he said. "We have to make sure we have the trust of the public. Strong ethics legislation is a way to clean up the process and show the people of Oklahoma we are truly here for the right reasons."
But ethics won't be lawmakers' only challenge -- as usual, the state's budget will be the main topic of debate.
While financial experts say state revenue will grow by about $198 million right now, most of that money -- all but $32 million -- is already spoken for, officials with the state treasurer's office said.
"A good portion of that money is going to fund previous legislative commitments," said Tim Allen, Scott Meacham's deputy state treasurer. "But there could be additional money available sometime during session."
Those funds, Allen said, could be as high as $100 million.
And those funds could go quickly. Already, some lawmakers want to use a portion of that money to pay for another tax reduction.
The Senate's Republican leader -- Sen. Glenn Coffee -- told The Associated Press his long-term goal is to cut the income tax, now at 5.5 percent, to 3.5 percent or less.
"Tax rates higher than this serve as an impediment to job growth," he said.
Coffee favors legislation to make sure a previously approved income tax cut to 5.25 percent takes effect as scheduled. He has said tax cuts should be paid for through elimination of yet-to-be-determined tax credits and sales tax exemptions.
Tax cuts also are on the minds of some Democrats.
Sen. J. Paul Gumm, D-Durant, is pushing again to end the sales tax on groceries.
"With a sluggish economy, there is no better time to move this proposal forward to put real money back into the pockets of working and middle class families as soon as possible," Gumm said. "Not only will we directly help them, we give the Oklahoma economy an extra boost."
Lawmakers also want to raise the pay of state employees and bring teachers' pay in line with the regional average.
In a media release sent out this week, state Sen. Kenneth Corn, D-Poteau, announced he'd filed legislation to authorize a $2,700 pay raise for Oklahoma state employees. Corn said state employees provide valuable and indispensable work, and should be at the top of the list when state funds are dispersed.
"From those who care for our elderly and children to those who ensure the safety of our highways and police our prisons, state employees provide essential services around the clock for Oklahomans," he said. "Every segment of our society is touched by these dedicated workers, and it's time for us to take care of them."
Corn said the need for a state employee pay increase has been made even more essential as the Legislature has been under-funding various state agencies in recent years.
"Many state employees have had to perform the work of two or three people when a vacancy is left unfilled," he said.
And with more than 2,000 pieces of legislation filed and ready to be reviewed in a 90-day period, state legislators face three months of intense work.
The second session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature begins Monday.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Speaker selection creates pre-session drama
OKLAHOMA CITY -- Earlier this week, had you asked your typical House Republican who they thought would be the next Speaker, you would have probably been told, "Gus Blackwell."
If you had asked that same question two weeks ago, your answer would have been "Lance Cargill."
Ask it today and you won't get an answer.
With just three days to go before the beginning of the 2008 legislative session, most pundits, experts and even the legislators, themselves, aren't talking about tax policy or education funding.
Instead, the focus is on who will lead the House.
And right now the race is wide open.
With Thursday's announcement that Speaker Pro Tempore Gus Blackwell was dropping out of the race because he, too, had failed to pay his property taxes on time, all bets are off on who serve as the next leader of the Oklahoma House of Representatives.
Considered the third most powerful position in state governorment -- following the governor and Senate president pro tempore -- the job of speaker is much like runing a multi-million dollar company with several hundred workers, many of whom are absolutely sure they could run things better.
"Being speaker is a tough job," said Don Hoover an Oklahoma City political consultant. "All eyes are focused on the speaker. They are the face of their party."
Just a few weeks ago, that face was of a 35-year-old attorney from Harrah.
Earlier this week, the face changed to that of a 53-year-old former campus minister.
By Thursday evening, the face had changed again.
The surprises continued.
"I was shocked and surprised," Blackwell told The Associated Press Thursday, after he announced his withdrawl. "I have never been told that my taxes were late in any way, shape or form. I'm not blaming anyone but myself."
Up until Thursday afternoon, Blackwell had been the assumed front runner. In fact, the House's GOP floor leader, Greg Piatt of Ardmore, told the AP that Blackwell had secured enough votes to be designated the next House speaker by Republican House members.
That afternoon, things changed.
Word got out that Blackwell had paid property taxes in Texas County late for the past 13 years and shortly thereafter, Blackwell withdrew his name from consideration.
Blackwell said he made the move to prevent becoming a distraction that might interfere with passage of Republican-backed legislation.
"In the present political atmosphere of search and destroy, I wish for the new speaker to go in without any excess baggage so we can have a productive session," he said.
But Blackwell's problems are far from other.
Thursday evening, at least one Republican House member questioned whether Blackwell should keep his position as speaker pro tempore.
Moore Republican Rep. Paul Wesselhoft told an Oklahoma City television station Thursday night the next question GOP legislators face is, "Should Gus Blackwell remain our speaker pro tem?"
Wesselhoft answered the question saying, "I think not."
With Blackwell gone, the race for speaker took a turn toward the dramatic.
Representatives Susan Winchester, Chris Benge, Dale DeWitt and John Wright have all announced they are running for speaker.
On the Democratic side, minority leader Danny Morgan said that he, too, would be a candidate for the top post.
Of course, Morgan's election is unlikely, given that the Republicans hold 57 of the Houses 101 seats.
Still, even with the entry and exit of House leaders becoming an almost daily occurrence, one fact remains certain: By next Tuesday, someone will be serving as speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives.
But right now, no one knows just who that will be.
If you had asked that same question two weeks ago, your answer would have been "Lance Cargill."
Ask it today and you won't get an answer.
With just three days to go before the beginning of the 2008 legislative session, most pundits, experts and even the legislators, themselves, aren't talking about tax policy or education funding.
Instead, the focus is on who will lead the House.
And right now the race is wide open.
With Thursday's announcement that Speaker Pro Tempore Gus Blackwell was dropping out of the race because he, too, had failed to pay his property taxes on time, all bets are off on who serve as the next leader of the Oklahoma House of Representatives.
Considered the third most powerful position in state governorment -- following the governor and Senate president pro tempore -- the job of speaker is much like runing a multi-million dollar company with several hundred workers, many of whom are absolutely sure they could run things better.
"Being speaker is a tough job," said Don Hoover an Oklahoma City political consultant. "All eyes are focused on the speaker. They are the face of their party."
Just a few weeks ago, that face was of a 35-year-old attorney from Harrah.
Earlier this week, the face changed to that of a 53-year-old former campus minister.
By Thursday evening, the face had changed again.
The surprises continued.
"I was shocked and surprised," Blackwell told The Associated Press Thursday, after he announced his withdrawl. "I have never been told that my taxes were late in any way, shape or form. I'm not blaming anyone but myself."
Up until Thursday afternoon, Blackwell had been the assumed front runner. In fact, the House's GOP floor leader, Greg Piatt of Ardmore, told the AP that Blackwell had secured enough votes to be designated the next House speaker by Republican House members.
That afternoon, things changed.
Word got out that Blackwell had paid property taxes in Texas County late for the past 13 years and shortly thereafter, Blackwell withdrew his name from consideration.
Blackwell said he made the move to prevent becoming a distraction that might interfere with passage of Republican-backed legislation.
"In the present political atmosphere of search and destroy, I wish for the new speaker to go in without any excess baggage so we can have a productive session," he said.
But Blackwell's problems are far from other.
Thursday evening, at least one Republican House member questioned whether Blackwell should keep his position as speaker pro tempore.
Moore Republican Rep. Paul Wesselhoft told an Oklahoma City television station Thursday night the next question GOP legislators face is, "Should Gus Blackwell remain our speaker pro tem?"
Wesselhoft answered the question saying, "I think not."
With Blackwell gone, the race for speaker took a turn toward the dramatic.
Representatives Susan Winchester, Chris Benge, Dale DeWitt and John Wright have all announced they are running for speaker.
On the Democratic side, minority leader Danny Morgan said that he, too, would be a candidate for the top post.
Of course, Morgan's election is unlikely, given that the Republicans hold 57 of the Houses 101 seats.
Still, even with the entry and exit of House leaders becoming an almost daily occurrence, one fact remains certain: By next Tuesday, someone will be serving as speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives.
But right now, no one knows just who that will be.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
CARGILL RESIGNS AS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE
OKLAHOMA CITY — Less than a week after he spoke in Norman touting his achievements as House speaker, state Rep. Lance Cargill resigned his post as House leader under pressure from his own caucus.
Cargill, 35, made the announcement Monday afternoon, during a conference call with members of the House’s Republican caucus. Cargill did not appear personally before caucus members; and later, made a public statement from the House lounge.
In an e-mailed statement to The Norman Transcript, Cargill said he wanted his ideas to be moved forward “without the burden” of personal stories.
“I have decided to step aside today as speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives,” Cargill said. “I want nothing more than to have good ideas to move forward without the burden of being weighed down by personal stories about me. I have always said my leadership has been about good ideas, and this move will allow those ideas to flourish as they should.”
Cargill — the nation’s youngest House speaker — has been under fire after published reports indicated he submitted late property tax payments on his Harrah law office six years in a row.
Cargill also reportedly failed to file state personal income tax returns in 2005 and 2006.
Additionally, questions have been raised about fundraising activities in 2004 by a House GOP political action committee headed by Cargill. The Ethics Commission has opened an investigation into the issue.
And last year, Cargill was criticized after he summoned lobbyists to one-on-one meetings at a political consultant’s office to seek contributions to Republican political action committees and for the speaker’s “100 Ideas Initiative.”
“For several weeks, our policies heading into the session have been buried in the newspapers,” he said. “While personal stories have remained on the front pages. I take full responsibility for that, and hope that a new speaker can shift the focus back to the future of this great state.”
Cargill said he made the decision over the weekend, after polling members of the House GOP caucus.
“This decision came after I spoke with most of my colleagues over the weekend. I am humbled and honored by the outpouring of support the caucus has shown me and their continued endorsement in my leadership. But one of the responsibilities of a leader is putting the needs of the whole before the needs of my own,” he said.
While Cargill did not resign from his elected House seat, his resignation as speaker — just one week before the legislative session — put Republicans on the defensive, and sent the House’s leadership team scurrying to find a new leader before the legislative session begins.
Published reports indicate that Rep. Gus Blackwell, a Goodwell Republican, will take over the role of speaker temporarily.
“Rep. (Gus) Blackwell will be acting speaker for right now,” state Rep. Paul Wesselhoft said. “But we will have a new speaker by the time session starts. I know that Rep. Susan Winchester and Rep. John Wright are going to run and maybe someone else who’s not expected.”
Both Wright and Winchester sought the position four years ago. Neither House member could be reach for comment.
State Rep. Scott Martin, R-Norman, said he is hopeful the Republicans can now move forward to the state’s pressing issues.
“Lance did the right thing and I’m hopeful we can move beyond this and redirect our focus to the issues facing our state,” Martin said.
Martin said the resignation caught him by surprise even though he had heard “lots of talk” about the speaker’s tax problems. “No one person is bigger than the process,” he said.
Wesselhoft, R-Moore, said he was saddened by Cargill’s resignation, but added the act was necessary.
“It’s sad but necessary and I graciously accept his resignation,” Wesselhoft said. “My prayers are with Lance and his wife, Amber. But I think things will be smoother now. This was an obstacle that had to be resolved. Now the pavement should be smoother.”
Cargill’s tax problems, he said, had been an issue for caucus members “for some time.”
“Here’s the bottom line,” Wesselhoft said. “Most people don’t relate to everything we do up here. But everyone, and I mean everyone, can relate to paying taxes. That’s why it (Cargill’s resignation) had to be done.”
State Republican leaders agreed.
Republican State Chairman Gary Jones told an Oklahoma City radio station that Cargill’s resignation was “the right thing to do.”
He did the honorable thing in stepping aside, Jones said.
Cargill said House Republicans will spend the next few days working on a transition for a new speaker.
“I know there are a lot of questions about how this move will impact the upcoming session,” he said. “Our caucus is working out the details and we will have more answers in the coming days.”
Cargill, 35, made the announcement Monday afternoon, during a conference call with members of the House’s Republican caucus. Cargill did not appear personally before caucus members; and later, made a public statement from the House lounge.
In an e-mailed statement to The Norman Transcript, Cargill said he wanted his ideas to be moved forward “without the burden” of personal stories.
“I have decided to step aside today as speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives,” Cargill said. “I want nothing more than to have good ideas to move forward without the burden of being weighed down by personal stories about me. I have always said my leadership has been about good ideas, and this move will allow those ideas to flourish as they should.”
Cargill — the nation’s youngest House speaker — has been under fire after published reports indicated he submitted late property tax payments on his Harrah law office six years in a row.
Cargill also reportedly failed to file state personal income tax returns in 2005 and 2006.
Additionally, questions have been raised about fundraising activities in 2004 by a House GOP political action committee headed by Cargill. The Ethics Commission has opened an investigation into the issue.
And last year, Cargill was criticized after he summoned lobbyists to one-on-one meetings at a political consultant’s office to seek contributions to Republican political action committees and for the speaker’s “100 Ideas Initiative.”
“For several weeks, our policies heading into the session have been buried in the newspapers,” he said. “While personal stories have remained on the front pages. I take full responsibility for that, and hope that a new speaker can shift the focus back to the future of this great state.”
Cargill said he made the decision over the weekend, after polling members of the House GOP caucus.
“This decision came after I spoke with most of my colleagues over the weekend. I am humbled and honored by the outpouring of support the caucus has shown me and their continued endorsement in my leadership. But one of the responsibilities of a leader is putting the needs of the whole before the needs of my own,” he said.
While Cargill did not resign from his elected House seat, his resignation as speaker — just one week before the legislative session — put Republicans on the defensive, and sent the House’s leadership team scurrying to find a new leader before the legislative session begins.
Published reports indicate that Rep. Gus Blackwell, a Goodwell Republican, will take over the role of speaker temporarily.
“Rep. (Gus) Blackwell will be acting speaker for right now,” state Rep. Paul Wesselhoft said. “But we will have a new speaker by the time session starts. I know that Rep. Susan Winchester and Rep. John Wright are going to run and maybe someone else who’s not expected.”
Both Wright and Winchester sought the position four years ago. Neither House member could be reach for comment.
State Rep. Scott Martin, R-Norman, said he is hopeful the Republicans can now move forward to the state’s pressing issues.
“Lance did the right thing and I’m hopeful we can move beyond this and redirect our focus to the issues facing our state,” Martin said.
Martin said the resignation caught him by surprise even though he had heard “lots of talk” about the speaker’s tax problems. “No one person is bigger than the process,” he said.
Wesselhoft, R-Moore, said he was saddened by Cargill’s resignation, but added the act was necessary.
“It’s sad but necessary and I graciously accept his resignation,” Wesselhoft said. “My prayers are with Lance and his wife, Amber. But I think things will be smoother now. This was an obstacle that had to be resolved. Now the pavement should be smoother.”
Cargill’s tax problems, he said, had been an issue for caucus members “for some time.”
“Here’s the bottom line,” Wesselhoft said. “Most people don’t relate to everything we do up here. But everyone, and I mean everyone, can relate to paying taxes. That’s why it (Cargill’s resignation) had to be done.”
State Republican leaders agreed.
Republican State Chairman Gary Jones told an Oklahoma City radio station that Cargill’s resignation was “the right thing to do.”
He did the honorable thing in stepping aside, Jones said.
Cargill said House Republicans will spend the next few days working on a transition for a new speaker.
“I know there are a lot of questions about how this move will impact the upcoming session,” he said. “Our caucus is working out the details and we will have more answers in the coming days.”
Nations: Cargill's resignation expected
OKLAHOMA CITY — While some of the state’s political leaders were caught off guard by House Speaker Lance Cargill’s resignation Monday, some members of Cleveland County’s legislative delegation said they weren’t too surprised.
Monday, Cargill resigned as speaker, following published stories that indicated he had failed to pay his property tax on time, did not file state personal income tax returns and is under an Ethics Commission investigation because of his fundraising activities.
State Rep. Bill Nations, D-Norman, said Cargill’s tax problems had been the “topic of discussion” among House members for several months. “Personally, I’m not surprised,” he said. “I know there’s been a lot of discussion (over this) for a while.”
And while Nation said he “hated to see anything bad” happen to Cargill, he said Cargill’s resignation “might be the best thing for the GOP caucus this legislative session.”
“Him continuing as speaker would have made it very difficult for the GOP to operate in the House,” he said. “There would have been a cloud over him. With the welfare of the citizens of the State of Oklahoma in mind, (the) resignation is probably the best thing.”
Moore Republican Paul Wesselhoft agreed.
“Rep. Cargill is not a victim of the media,” Wesselhoft said. “He brought some of these problems on himself and now he’s having to face the full responsibility of that. I’m sure it was a tough decision for him to make.”
Cargill’s resignation, Wesselhoft said, makes for a “brighter future” for the GOP. “We can move forward now that we have this resolved.”
But other political experts say Cargill’s resignation — coming just a week before the beginning of the next legislative session — could hamper some of the GOP’s legislative agenda.
Don Hoover, an Oklahoma City Democratic campaign consultant said Cargill had no choice but to resign because House Republicans had spent “a great deal of time” talking about tax issues and tax cuts.
“The Speaker of the House is the face of the Oklahoma Republican Party right now,” Hoover said. “They’ve talked a lot about tax cuts and tax polity. So I’m not surprised there’s pressure to make a change.”
And that change, Hoover said, is going to throw Republicans “off their game.”
“The timing is unfortunate for Republicans,” he said. “Mainly because it’s the beginning of the legislative session. Now there’s lots of dust in the air and it will take some time for it to settle.”
Still, Hoover said the House Republicans should survive with their majority intact.
“I would say it will have minimal impact on maintaining control of the House,” he said. “The Republicans have a solid majority. They are not in control because of Lance Cargill, they are in control because for years Oklahoma has been trending in the GOP’s direction.”
Cargill is the second House leader to be forced out of his position in recent history. Eighteen years ago, on May 17, 1989, then-Speaker Jim Barker, a Democrat from Muskogee, was forced out the speaker’s office following a 72-25 vote.
Monday, Cargill resigned as speaker, following published stories that indicated he had failed to pay his property tax on time, did not file state personal income tax returns and is under an Ethics Commission investigation because of his fundraising activities.
State Rep. Bill Nations, D-Norman, said Cargill’s tax problems had been the “topic of discussion” among House members for several months. “Personally, I’m not surprised,” he said. “I know there’s been a lot of discussion (over this) for a while.”
And while Nation said he “hated to see anything bad” happen to Cargill, he said Cargill’s resignation “might be the best thing for the GOP caucus this legislative session.”
“Him continuing as speaker would have made it very difficult for the GOP to operate in the House,” he said. “There would have been a cloud over him. With the welfare of the citizens of the State of Oklahoma in mind, (the) resignation is probably the best thing.”
Moore Republican Paul Wesselhoft agreed.
“Rep. Cargill is not a victim of the media,” Wesselhoft said. “He brought some of these problems on himself and now he’s having to face the full responsibility of that. I’m sure it was a tough decision for him to make.”
Cargill’s resignation, Wesselhoft said, makes for a “brighter future” for the GOP. “We can move forward now that we have this resolved.”
But other political experts say Cargill’s resignation — coming just a week before the beginning of the next legislative session — could hamper some of the GOP’s legislative agenda.
Don Hoover, an Oklahoma City Democratic campaign consultant said Cargill had no choice but to resign because House Republicans had spent “a great deal of time” talking about tax issues and tax cuts.
“The Speaker of the House is the face of the Oklahoma Republican Party right now,” Hoover said. “They’ve talked a lot about tax cuts and tax polity. So I’m not surprised there’s pressure to make a change.”
And that change, Hoover said, is going to throw Republicans “off their game.”
“The timing is unfortunate for Republicans,” he said. “Mainly because it’s the beginning of the legislative session. Now there’s lots of dust in the air and it will take some time for it to settle.”
Still, Hoover said the House Republicans should survive with their majority intact.
“I would say it will have minimal impact on maintaining control of the House,” he said. “The Republicans have a solid majority. They are not in control because of Lance Cargill, they are in control because for years Oklahoma has been trending in the GOP’s direction.”
Cargill is the second House leader to be forced out of his position in recent history. Eighteen years ago, on May 17, 1989, then-Speaker Jim Barker, a Democrat from Muskogee, was forced out the speaker’s office following a 72-25 vote.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Cargill says state needs more ambition
Saying Oklahomans need to be more ambitious and “set their sights higher,” House Speaker Lance Cargill praised the “historic reforms” passed by the GOP-controlled House of Representatives. Those reforms, Cargill said, have brought “hope, growth and opportunity” to the Sooner State.
Cargill made the remarks Thursday evening at the Cleveland County Republican Club’s Helen Cole Awards Banquet. More than 150 people attended the event at the J.D. McCarty Center, which also featured a presidential campaign announcement by retired Major General Jerry Curry.
“Maybe it was our dustbowl mentality,” Cargill said. “But Oklahomans have not always set their sights high enough. I want the 21st century to be Oklahoma’s. I think this can be our century.”
And Republicans, he said, are leading the way.
“The historic reforms passed by Republicans have brought hope, growth and opportunity. We are experiencing a renaissance time.”
Cargill said those reforms include lowering the state’s income tax, adopting a pro-life agenda and investing in state infrastructure.
“There is probably no area of which I am more proud, than our pro-life agenda,” he said. “Until there was a Republican majority, Oklahoma didn’t have some of the most basic protections for life that other states had passed.”
In addition, Cargill said Democrats are misleading voters about the state’s revenue picture.
“The liberals are misleading you about the amount of revenue,” he said. “Did you know that the taxes paid into government this year are going to go up, this year by $200 million, maybe $300 million?”
Speaking to the GOP’s faithful, Cargill said elections in Oklahoma “have consequences” and the consequences have been “good for Oklahoma.”
Following his review, Cargill introduced Mina Hibdon who received the club’s Pioneer Award. Hibdon, the first Cleveland County woman elected to the Oklahoma House of Representatives, thanked all those who supported her 1973 campaign.
“I have a lot of memories,” she said. “At that time we were in trouble with Watergate, that was a big problem nationally for our party. But here in Norman, I very quietly filed in a district that never had a Republican.”
Word got out quickly, she said.
“Well, everything begin to happen then, and the rest of my campaign is history.”
Following Hibdon’s award, state Rep. Paul Wesselhoft and Sen. Jonathan Nichols thanked the group for their efforts.
Wesselhoft, serving his second term in the House of Representatives, said he was excited by the upcoming legislative session.
“I have a full plate of bills that I’m going to be working on,” he said.
Nichols predicted the GOP would take control of the state Senate. “We can take over the Senate this year and I look forward to working toward that goal.”
A former staffer for Congressman Tom Cole, state Rep. T.W. Shannon, a Lawton Republican, introduced a video by Cole. Cole praised the group and said his late mother, Helen, would be pleased by their work.
“My mother would be honored,” he said. “She was a selfless, strong woman.”
The group also honored Don and Pat Allen for with a Lifetime Achievement Award and named former House member Thad Balkman as the Republican of the Year.
Cargill made the remarks Thursday evening at the Cleveland County Republican Club’s Helen Cole Awards Banquet. More than 150 people attended the event at the J.D. McCarty Center, which also featured a presidential campaign announcement by retired Major General Jerry Curry.
“Maybe it was our dustbowl mentality,” Cargill said. “But Oklahomans have not always set their sights high enough. I want the 21st century to be Oklahoma’s. I think this can be our century.”
And Republicans, he said, are leading the way.
“The historic reforms passed by Republicans have brought hope, growth and opportunity. We are experiencing a renaissance time.”
Cargill said those reforms include lowering the state’s income tax, adopting a pro-life agenda and investing in state infrastructure.
“There is probably no area of which I am more proud, than our pro-life agenda,” he said. “Until there was a Republican majority, Oklahoma didn’t have some of the most basic protections for life that other states had passed.”
In addition, Cargill said Democrats are misleading voters about the state’s revenue picture.
“The liberals are misleading you about the amount of revenue,” he said. “Did you know that the taxes paid into government this year are going to go up, this year by $200 million, maybe $300 million?”
Speaking to the GOP’s faithful, Cargill said elections in Oklahoma “have consequences” and the consequences have been “good for Oklahoma.”
Following his review, Cargill introduced Mina Hibdon who received the club’s Pioneer Award. Hibdon, the first Cleveland County woman elected to the Oklahoma House of Representatives, thanked all those who supported her 1973 campaign.
“I have a lot of memories,” she said. “At that time we were in trouble with Watergate, that was a big problem nationally for our party. But here in Norman, I very quietly filed in a district that never had a Republican.”
Word got out quickly, she said.
“Well, everything begin to happen then, and the rest of my campaign is history.”
Following Hibdon’s award, state Rep. Paul Wesselhoft and Sen. Jonathan Nichols thanked the group for their efforts.
Wesselhoft, serving his second term in the House of Representatives, said he was excited by the upcoming legislative session.
“I have a full plate of bills that I’m going to be working on,” he said.
Nichols predicted the GOP would take control of the state Senate. “We can take over the Senate this year and I look forward to working toward that goal.”
A former staffer for Congressman Tom Cole, state Rep. T.W. Shannon, a Lawton Republican, introduced a video by Cole. Cole praised the group and said his late mother, Helen, would be pleased by their work.
“My mother would be honored,” he said. “She was a selfless, strong woman.”
The group also honored Don and Pat Allen for with a Lifetime Achievement Award and named former House member Thad Balkman as the Republican of the Year.
Curry signs, then announces for president
In what can only be billed as one of the country’s more unusual political announcements, retired Major General Jerry Curry launched his bid for the Republican presidential nomination Thursday night at the Cleveland County Republican Club’s Helen Cole Awards Banquet.
For about 10 minutes Curry delivered a scathing attack on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and said Illinois Senator Barack Obama might make a good presidential candidate several years from now.
But prior to that speech, Curry did something few other national candidates have attempted.
He sang.
Listed on the program under “music,” Curry — without the aid of music or microphone — sang a chorus of the songs “God Bless America” and “My Country ’tis of Thee” for the 150-plus audience.
“I’ve been asked to sing a patriotic song,” he said. “So I’m going to do that even though I did graduate from the University of Nebraska.”
Following the song, Curry switched to campaign mode.
Blasting Mrs. Clinton, Curry said the former First Lady “could not fulfill the duties” of Commander in Chief because she “called General Petraus a liar last year” in front of the U.S. Senate.
“She did this with no cause,” he said. “And no facts to back her up, without even paying him the respect of having a private conversation with him. It was a cheap political stunt and it undermined our military leadership’s loyalty and confidence in the office of president — should she be elected.”
Saying Mrs. Clinton acted “cowardly” Curry said she had “forfeited her right to ever become the Commander in Chief of our military forces.”
Referring to Mrs. Clinton again, Curry then quoted the country’s first president, George Washington, saying “congressmen who wilfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs that should be arrested, exiled or hanged.”
Acknowledging he was seen as a dark horse candidate in the race, Curry said Americans are seeking a candidate who will “capture their imagination” and gain their respect as the “person best able to lead the country.”
“I am running for president because I am convinced that none of the current candidates — of either party — can fix America’s problems.”
Curry said he chose to make the announcement in Oklahoma because the people here “have already responded so favorably” to him.
“Oklahoma is a proving ground for my message,” he said. “If it resonates in this state, it will resonate with the American people everywhere.”
A former deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Carter administration, Curry also served as press secretary to the secretary of defense in the Reagan administration and as the administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the Bush Sr. administration.
Married, Curry and his wife, Charlene, have four children. He said his “mixed racial and cultural ancestry is as colorful as America itself.” Curry said he will be campaigning throughout the state Jan. 22-29.
For about 10 minutes Curry delivered a scathing attack on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and said Illinois Senator Barack Obama might make a good presidential candidate several years from now.
But prior to that speech, Curry did something few other national candidates have attempted.
He sang.
Listed on the program under “music,” Curry — without the aid of music or microphone — sang a chorus of the songs “God Bless America” and “My Country ’tis of Thee” for the 150-plus audience.
“I’ve been asked to sing a patriotic song,” he said. “So I’m going to do that even though I did graduate from the University of Nebraska.”
Following the song, Curry switched to campaign mode.
Blasting Mrs. Clinton, Curry said the former First Lady “could not fulfill the duties” of Commander in Chief because she “called General Petraus a liar last year” in front of the U.S. Senate.
“She did this with no cause,” he said. “And no facts to back her up, without even paying him the respect of having a private conversation with him. It was a cheap political stunt and it undermined our military leadership’s loyalty and confidence in the office of president — should she be elected.”
Saying Mrs. Clinton acted “cowardly” Curry said she had “forfeited her right to ever become the Commander in Chief of our military forces.”
Referring to Mrs. Clinton again, Curry then quoted the country’s first president, George Washington, saying “congressmen who wilfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs that should be arrested, exiled or hanged.”
Acknowledging he was seen as a dark horse candidate in the race, Curry said Americans are seeking a candidate who will “capture their imagination” and gain their respect as the “person best able to lead the country.”
“I am running for president because I am convinced that none of the current candidates — of either party — can fix America’s problems.”
Curry said he chose to make the announcement in Oklahoma because the people here “have already responded so favorably” to him.
“Oklahoma is a proving ground for my message,” he said. “If it resonates in this state, it will resonate with the American people everywhere.”
A former deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Carter administration, Curry also served as press secretary to the secretary of defense in the Reagan administration and as the administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the Bush Sr. administration.
Married, Curry and his wife, Charlene, have four children. He said his “mixed racial and cultural ancestry is as colorful as America itself.” Curry said he will be campaigning throughout the state Jan. 22-29.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
COMMENTARY: King's speech still rings true
It was August 1963.
JFK was president and America still believed in Camelot.
In Washington, the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and hundreds of his supporters marched to the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
There, in the shadow of Lincoln, King reshaped American’s civil rights debate with a single speech.
In just a few minutes, he spoke eloquently of the need for peace, and brotherhood.
He spoke of the dream of equality which is found the hearts of all good men.
Kennedy would be assassinated in November.
Dr. King would be killed by James Earl Ray in 1968.
But his speech, that wonderful essay on hope, trust and equality, lives on. Forty years later, King’s evangelical call still rings in our ears:
“I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal.”
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together...”
Our country has come a long way since Dr. King spoke in Washington, D.C. We have, in some ways, become better stewards of the good doctor’s legacy. Yet, King’s dream remains, still, a dream.
The truth is in America, not all men are seen as equal.
In our country, hatred and bigotry remain.
And, in many places, thousands still struggle for simple equality.
But King’s dream lives on.
And for those who choose to hear and live those famous words, they desire to make their country a better place burns deep.
Perhaps this year, our leaders will remember Dr. King’s dream and, once again, fight to make it a reality.
The directions are there.
The road lies before us.
We simply need to continue the journey.
JFK was president and America still believed in Camelot.
In Washington, the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and hundreds of his supporters marched to the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
There, in the shadow of Lincoln, King reshaped American’s civil rights debate with a single speech.
In just a few minutes, he spoke eloquently of the need for peace, and brotherhood.
He spoke of the dream of equality which is found the hearts of all good men.
Kennedy would be assassinated in November.
Dr. King would be killed by James Earl Ray in 1968.
But his speech, that wonderful essay on hope, trust and equality, lives on. Forty years later, King’s evangelical call still rings in our ears:
“I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal.”
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together...”
Our country has come a long way since Dr. King spoke in Washington, D.C. We have, in some ways, become better stewards of the good doctor’s legacy. Yet, King’s dream remains, still, a dream.
The truth is in America, not all men are seen as equal.
In our country, hatred and bigotry remain.
And, in many places, thousands still struggle for simple equality.
But King’s dream lives on.
And for those who choose to hear and live those famous words, they desire to make their country a better place burns deep.
Perhaps this year, our leaders will remember Dr. King’s dream and, once again, fight to make it a reality.
The directions are there.
The road lies before us.
We simply need to continue the journey.
Wesselhoft wants to expand DNA database
OKLAHOMA CITY — Any person arrested for a felony would be required to provide a DNA sample, under a bill filed this week by a Cleveland County lawmaker.
State Rep. Paul Wesselhoft, R-Moore, said his proposal — House Bill 2603 — could help police solve “many unresolved crimes.”
In a media statement sent to The Transcript, Wesselhoft said the measure, “would require all individuals arrested on felony charges to provide a DNA sample for a state database.”
Should it pass, Wesselhoft said the bill would be known as “Katie’s Law,” in honor of a New Mexico crime victim.
“In August 2003, 22-year-old Katie Sepich was brutally attacked outside her home in New Mexico. She was raped and strangled, and her body was set on fire and abandoned at an old dump site. No suspects were immediately identified, but skin and blood samples were found under her fingernails, leaving the attacker’s DNA sample. The DNA samples were sent to the national DNA database system,” he said.
Wesselhoft said most states do not currently allow law enforcement to take DNA samples for felony arrests, making it more difficult to identify suspects through the national database.
“If there was a swab of the person who killed Katie, they would now be in prison and unable to harm someone else,” he said. “By expanding the DNA database, we can catch more bad guys who would otherwise remain free.”
Officials with the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation say they support the idea.
“We have a statewide DNA database and the more people and samples we have in it the more crimes we can solve,” said Jessica Brown, OSBI public information officer. “Many states have already done this — it’s a good situation for everyone. It will help us solve more crimes and prevent other crimes from happening, and it will help victims’ families find closure.”
However, some defense attorneys disagree.
Norman attorney David Smith, who serves as Cleveland County’s public defender, said Wesselhoft’s bill “was a terrible idea.”
“Beyond the obvious privacy issues, people who are arrested for a felony haven’t been convicted of anything,” Smith said. “And each year thousands of people are arrested on a felony charge.”
It’s that huge amount, he said, that could cause errors in processing and handling the DNA samples.
“The thing that bothers me most is this: There’s gonna’ be an awful lot of felony arrests, and everyone one is going to have to provide a sample,” he said. “In some places, in the smaller counties, consider the idea you’re going to have people who may not be very well trained or who may very well have no training at all. With that many samples, the potential for error is huge.”
Statistics support Smith’s claim.
Data included in Norman’s 2006 Community Report Card show the Norman Police Department made 3,635 arrests for the “eight most serious crimes” for 2006.
“When you look at the number of felony arrests on a county level, well the numbers would be huge,” Smith said.
In addition, Smith said he has “real concerns” about residents being forced to turn over personal information — such as DNA — to the government.
“People think DNA profiling is very routine, they see it all the time,” he said. “But when you are talking about giving the government the power to take a piece of your body, the potential for abuse is real. I’m sure at some we’re going to be able to look at person’s DNA profile. I know insurance companies want that type of information now, because it lets them hedge their bets on who they would provide coverage for.”
Wesselhoft’s bill, he said, would give government “too much” information about a person who hasn’t been convicted of a crime.
“It’s terrible, and the potential problems with it are enormous,” he said.
Wesselhoft downplayed the bill’s controversy.
“DNA profiles generated by crime labs contain no private medical or genetic information. This protects privacy,” he said. “There has been no instance of misuse of the DNA database. But there is evidence of its success—already the data has been used to solve nearly 50,000 crimes nationwide, according to the FBI.”
Wesselhoft said all states require DNA for felony convictions, and 26 of those states have considered bills to require DNA samples from individuals arrested on felony charges.
“This should be an easy measure to pass,” he said. “It is a measure that could prevent what happened to Katie from happening again by identifying criminals based on DNA before they are able to strike again.”
No so, Smith said.
“You are always going to be able to find anecdotal evidence like that. A single situation is not a good enough reason to give the government that authority,” he said. “A mistake could have horrible consequences.”
State lawmakers will have the chance to review Wesselhoft’s proposal in two weeks, when the Legislature reconvenes in Oklahoma City.
State Rep. Paul Wesselhoft, R-Moore, said his proposal — House Bill 2603 — could help police solve “many unresolved crimes.”
In a media statement sent to The Transcript, Wesselhoft said the measure, “would require all individuals arrested on felony charges to provide a DNA sample for a state database.”
Should it pass, Wesselhoft said the bill would be known as “Katie’s Law,” in honor of a New Mexico crime victim.
“In August 2003, 22-year-old Katie Sepich was brutally attacked outside her home in New Mexico. She was raped and strangled, and her body was set on fire and abandoned at an old dump site. No suspects were immediately identified, but skin and blood samples were found under her fingernails, leaving the attacker’s DNA sample. The DNA samples were sent to the national DNA database system,” he said.
Wesselhoft said most states do not currently allow law enforcement to take DNA samples for felony arrests, making it more difficult to identify suspects through the national database.
“If there was a swab of the person who killed Katie, they would now be in prison and unable to harm someone else,” he said. “By expanding the DNA database, we can catch more bad guys who would otherwise remain free.”
Officials with the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation say they support the idea.
“We have a statewide DNA database and the more people and samples we have in it the more crimes we can solve,” said Jessica Brown, OSBI public information officer. “Many states have already done this — it’s a good situation for everyone. It will help us solve more crimes and prevent other crimes from happening, and it will help victims’ families find closure.”
However, some defense attorneys disagree.
Norman attorney David Smith, who serves as Cleveland County’s public defender, said Wesselhoft’s bill “was a terrible idea.”
“Beyond the obvious privacy issues, people who are arrested for a felony haven’t been convicted of anything,” Smith said. “And each year thousands of people are arrested on a felony charge.”
It’s that huge amount, he said, that could cause errors in processing and handling the DNA samples.
“The thing that bothers me most is this: There’s gonna’ be an awful lot of felony arrests, and everyone one is going to have to provide a sample,” he said. “In some places, in the smaller counties, consider the idea you’re going to have people who may not be very well trained or who may very well have no training at all. With that many samples, the potential for error is huge.”
Statistics support Smith’s claim.
Data included in Norman’s 2006 Community Report Card show the Norman Police Department made 3,635 arrests for the “eight most serious crimes” for 2006.
“When you look at the number of felony arrests on a county level, well the numbers would be huge,” Smith said.
In addition, Smith said he has “real concerns” about residents being forced to turn over personal information — such as DNA — to the government.
“People think DNA profiling is very routine, they see it all the time,” he said. “But when you are talking about giving the government the power to take a piece of your body, the potential for abuse is real. I’m sure at some we’re going to be able to look at person’s DNA profile. I know insurance companies want that type of information now, because it lets them hedge their bets on who they would provide coverage for.”
Wesselhoft’s bill, he said, would give government “too much” information about a person who hasn’t been convicted of a crime.
“It’s terrible, and the potential problems with it are enormous,” he said.
Wesselhoft downplayed the bill’s controversy.
“DNA profiles generated by crime labs contain no private medical or genetic information. This protects privacy,” he said. “There has been no instance of misuse of the DNA database. But there is evidence of its success—already the data has been used to solve nearly 50,000 crimes nationwide, according to the FBI.”
Wesselhoft said all states require DNA for felony convictions, and 26 of those states have considered bills to require DNA samples from individuals arrested on felony charges.
“This should be an easy measure to pass,” he said. “It is a measure that could prevent what happened to Katie from happening again by identifying criminals based on DNA before they are able to strike again.”
No so, Smith said.
“You are always going to be able to find anecdotal evidence like that. A single situation is not a good enough reason to give the government that authority,” he said. “A mistake could have horrible consequences.”
State lawmakers will have the chance to review Wesselhoft’s proposal in two weeks, when the Legislature reconvenes in Oklahoma City.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
