Taking Your Money And Giving It To Illegal Aliens

Taking Your Money And Giving It To Illegal Aliens

A board of unelected state officials recently shocked some of us in the legislature by taking action to approve a proposal to spend taxpayer dollars in the creation of a permanent and unconditional expansion of the welfare system. This was in violation of the clear legislative intent expressed in this year's illegal immigration reform bill.

The Oklahoma Health Care Authority, which administers Oklahoma's Medicaid program, voted to approve emergency rules granting taxpayer-subsidized medical coverage to pregnant illegal aliens on the theory that the new child will be a U.S. citizen upon birth. As it is now, illegal aliens are prohibited from Medicaid prenatal services.

This is being done despite the fact that federal law dictates this action may occur only after a state's legislature has given approval. The Oklahoma Legislature has not authorized any expansion of Medicaid for illegal aliens.

Making matters worse, Governor Brad Henry indicated he will sign off on this expansion of the welfare system. In taking this action, the OHCA board and Governor Henry seem to be saying that the taxpayers of Oklahoma should be forced to act as a welfare state for the rest of the world. Oklahoma will join only 12 other states across the nation who have a program like this.

The financial impact of this decision will be about $3 million a year, with $1.19 million coming directly from state funds and the rest from our federal tax dollars. The Oklahoma Health Care Authority reports it is delivering 2,767 babies each year to illegal parents, which costs state taxpayers in excess of $8 million.

This action is likely to provide additional enticement for illegal immigration into the United States. If an illegal alien can give birth to in America, the child automatically becomes an American citizen. When the child turns 18, he or she can in turn sponsor relatives for permanent U.S. residency. By using taxpayer dollars to fund this process, state government is directly enabling those who wish to bypass immigration laws.

It is my strong belief that this is yet another example of how harmful situations are produced by big government. As citizens, we have allowed government to take so much money from us in the form of massive taxation that it has become almost impossible to hold government responsible for their decisions on how the money is spent.

I also question the timing of the emergency rule approval. I do not feel it is a coincidence that the "emergency" occurred just days before House Bill 1804, the Illegal Immigration Reform Bill, takes effect.

It appears the Health Care Authority unsuccessfully attempted to extend prenatal coverage to illegal aliens through the Legislature for the past two years. Now, however, the recent vote seems to be an end-run around the clear will of the people's elected officials.

I believe we will be successful in reversing the decision during the next session of the legislature. I will certainly support the effort to keep your tax dollars from being misused in regard to this issue.

It's Time to End the Grocery Tax

By Senator Jay Paul Gumm of Durant

Hello again, everybody! In some cases, it takes years of effort to get a good idea all the way through the Legislature. The back-to-school sales tax holiday was one of those good ideas.

Now, a new battle is looming: the effort to remove state sales taxes on groceries. It is morally wrong to tax food for families. It is even more wrong given the fact that the sales tax on groceries puts a heavier burden on middle- and lower-income families than on anyone else.

The wealthy and the not-so-wealthy all have to pay the same dollar amount on the food they need to keep their family alive. The reason the grocery tax is unfair to middle- and lower-income Oklahomans is because paying the tax costs them a greater percentage of their income.

Middle- and lower-income families also spend a greater percentage of their income on necessities like groceries than the wealthy. That creates for most Oklahoma families a “double-whammy.”

Removing the state’s sales tax on groceries will help level the playing field, ensuring no one is asked to carry more than their share of the burden of funding state government. For me, it is a matter of simple fairness.

This ought to be the most popular of tax cuts – one you see whenever you buy food for your family; but it faces an uncertain future. A strange alliance doomed it in years past; that alliance will again join forces to keep you paying the state sales tax on bread and milk.

There are some who don’t think we should cut any tax at all. Naturally, they oppose removing the state sales tax on groceries. Still, there aren’t enough of them to kill it by themselves.

They team up with those who believe the first tax we should reduce or repeal is the income tax. Reducing the income tax alone is not a bad idea – until you look at the numbers.

The wealthiest among us would unfairly benefit more by reducing the state income tax. Here’s how reducing the income tax instead of the sales tax on groceries will widen the divide between the wealthy and the not-so-wealthy.

Reducing the state income tax by one percent would cut taxes by $10,000 for someone making a million dollars a year. A family getting by on $20,000 would save only $200. That’s terribly unfair.

Now, let’s look at the grocery tax. Say a family has to spend $500 a month at the grocery store. Over the course of a year, every family – wealthy or not-so-wealthy – would save $270. That’s fair, and helps those who need it most.

If we are going to cut taxes, let’s cut one that will make a real difference in the budgets of real families. The state grocery tax needs to end, and it needs to end now.

Thanks again for reading the “Senate Minute,” have a great week, and may God bless you all.

Cutting The Size of State Government

Cutting The Size of Oklahoma Government

This fall the House will impanel what I believe to be one of the most important studies of the legislative interim. Representative Ken Miller from Edmond, Vice-Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, will lead a study into consolidating state government agencies.

Last week in my constituent update, I wrote that in order for Oklahoma to compete with Texas for economic development, I believe we must eliminate the state income tax. Eliminating this tax can occur in much faster order if we also do the right thing and cut the size of state government.

Miller's committee is charged with making recommendations to do just that. Speaker of the House Lance Cargill has indicated he is determined to incorporate the findings of Miller's committee into legislation next year.

In order to lay the groundwork for the consolidation study, Speaker Cargill commissioned the House Staff to compare the size of Oklahoma government to the government in surrounding states.

This was not the easiest job, because believe it or not, no official count of the number of state agencies, boards and commissions (ABCs) is even kept by state government. Can you imagine what would happen to a private business in the free market if it could not provide an official accounting of its organizational structure?

In fact, the size of Oklahoma government is so big that the only way to count the number of Oklahoma state agencies is to use a publication of the Oklahoma Department of Libraries which lists contact information for state officials.

The house study returned some shocking results. When Oklahoma was compared with 5 other states of similar size, it was determined that Oklahoma had 515 ABCs, while the other five states of Kentucky, Arkansas, Iowa, Oregon and Kansas averaged 210 ABCs each. The number of ABCs in Oklahoma is almost two and one half times the size of comparable states.

Not surprisingly, the study found that Oklahoma's ABCs have grown at a steady pace over time. In 1957 there were 115 ABCs, in 1977 there were 215 and in 1997 there were 470.

Since 1928 there have been no less than seven statewide studies that recommended reorganization of state government and a reduction of ABCs. Yet there is little record that any action was taken on those reports.

It is my hope that Representative Miller's study will be the first such study to be acted on in a significant manner. I believe it is our duty as legislators to honor the desire of Oklahomans for smaller government. I am committed to helping Miller and Cargill make this desire become reality.

Eliminating The Income Tax

Eliminating The Income Tax

One of the issues I have long advocated is the need for state government to eliminate the progressive state income tax. I think it is bad policy for the government to tax someone for earning money. I believe this takes away incentive for individuals to work hard and be productive, especially when the benefits of relying on welfare are so substantial. I also believe it is difficult for Oklahoma to compete with Texas for economic growth when there is no income tax in Texas.

This year the legislature cut the uppermost income tax percentage to 5.5%. However, this number was far short of the effort launched by the Chairman of the House Revenue and Tax Committee, Representative Randy Terrill of Moore. Terrill, who has been one of the foremost advocates for eliminating the income tax originally sought to lower the top tax rate to 4.65% by 2009. While the Terrill effort was approved by the House Revenue and Tax Committee, it was later sidelined in favor of the 5.5% rate.

Terrill is continuing the effort to reduce the income tax by holding a series of hearings with his committee.

During one of the recent hearings, Phil Kerpen, the national policy director for Americans for Prosperity told the committee that Oklahoma cannot afford to stop the effort to lower the income tax if Oklahoma wants to continue to attract new citizens and businesses. He explained that Oklahoma is not just competing with other states, but is competing in a global economy. There is a 6% corporate tax rate in Oklahoma on top of a 35% federal rate, for a combined 41% corporate tax rate. When the state franchise tax is added in, there is a 43% effective tax rate on companies that do business in Oklahoma - all this before their officers even have to consider paying personal income tax.

Kerpen said that in Europe the average corporate tax is about 25%. In some Asian countries it is even lower. The idea that people can be taxed at whatever rate the government wants and continue to stay and pay high taxes is an antiquated one. People are very mobile and capital is even more mobile. If Oklahoma is going to compete in the global economy and succeed, we need a much lower tax rate.

Between 1980 and 2006, Oklahoma’s real Gross Domestic Product growth lagged behind all neighboring states, according to figures referenced by Kerpen. Oklahoma’s real GDP growth during that period was less than half the rate experienced in New Mexico, Texas and Colorado. Private job growth in Oklahoma lagged far behind Texas, New Mexico and Colorado from 1990 to 2006 as well.

Kerpen also stated that the individual income tax rate is one of the real drivers that determine where people decide to live, how many hours they work and how many businesses they start. It has an incentive effect on all sorts of economic activity. The more you tax people, the less reward they have for working, saving and investing. The result is that they do less in all of those areas. Legislators claim to understand the link between taxes and behavior when it comes to things like cigarette taxes, which are touted as a way to reduce smoking. But for some reason, many lawmakers ignore the fact that taxes on income have the same effect.

The House Revenue and Taxation Subcommittee is expected to conduct several more meetings on the tax issue through November and hear from other national experts. Hopefully, these hearings will continue to bring attention to the need for true state tax reform.

Believing in Oklahoma; Fighting for the Next Generation

By Senator Jay Paul Gumm of Durant

Hello again, everybody! Over the next several weeks, the celebration of Oklahoma’s Centennial will be in full swing.

Compared to most of our neighboring states, Oklahoma is young. In fact, most communities in my Senate district are older than Oklahoma. As young as Oklahoma is, it is remarkable what we have achieved.

During my recent tour of area schools, one question almost always came up. “What do you think is the biggest challenge facing Oklahoma?”

For me, the answer is simple. Our biggest challenge is simply believing in ourselves and our state. For much of our short history, Oklahomans have been convinced that our state cannot compete and win – except on the football field.

That thinking has its roots in the dark days of the Dust Bowl, when thousands of Oklahomans were forced off the land and had to make their way to what they hoped would be greener pastures in other states. Our struggles dampened our spirit, and that was difficult to overcome.

In fact, a recent governor spent a great deal of time and effort telling everything that was wrong with our state, both in travels around Oklahoma and across the nation. I see our state as being kind of like a family; you don’t air your dirty laundry where everyone can see it.

Certainly, our state has challenges; we can do better in so many areas. But, to focus on the negative at the expense of the positive has a troubling affect.

Our achievements as a state can get overshadowed by efforts at partisan politics – and neither side is completely innocent in that effort. Sometimes in politics, the trick is to make the other side look so bad that your side gets the votes by default. While that sometimes might be a good political strategy, it is a poor foundation on which to base a state’s future.

More important than the political fortunes of either party is the futures of the children who will live most, if not all, of their lives in Oklahoma’s second century. We all have a responsibility to fight for policies we believe will give that new generation of Oklahomans more opportunity and a better chance to become everything God intended for them to become.

This is an unusual “Senate Minute”; I am not writing about any specific issue, nor am I taking a stand on any particular subject. My point is this: as we debate how best to build a bright future, I believe we have a responsibility to conduct those debates in an environment that moves us forward as much as the policies we consider.

While that may be a tall order, I believe a state that accomplished as much as we have in only 100 years is more than up to the challenge.

Thanks again for reading the “Senate Minute,” have a great week, and may God bless you all.

Effort Launched To Diver Lottery Money From Education

Effort Launched To Divert Lottery Money From Education

In 2002, while campaigning for Governor, Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry campaigned on a platform of financing Oklahoma public education through creation of the Oklahoma lottery. The lottery concept appears to have been presented to Oklahomans as a magic bullet to cure Oklahoma's education challenges, not unlike the House Bill 1017 sales tax increase, which was also presented to Oklahoma voters as an education solution. The lottery was to provide $500 million to the education system.

It is in fact generating only about $70 million per year for public education. This represents about 14% of the money originally predicted. For instance, in fiscal year 2008 lottery revenue will make up only around 2% - 3% of the amount state government gives to the local school districts in Crescent, Guthrie and Edmond. Worse still, Oklahoma politicians, in their haste to spend the money, have incurred millions of dollars of long term debt that must be paid back out of those revenues.

Since the lottery is performing so badly, in a move to cut costs, the Oklahoma Lottery Commission has moved its offices upstairs, turned the first floor of their building into rental space and opted not to refill four vacant staff positions.

Director Jim Scroggins and other officials with the Lottery Commission have announced that in order to cope with these issues, they will ask lawmakers to cut education funding by diverting some of the lottery revenue from education. Commission officials want part of the money spent for administrative costs and promotional efforts instead of public schools. Commission officials have been arguing for the diversion since last March.

The plan has met with strong opposition from leadership in the House of Representatives. Representative Chris Benge from Tulsa, who chairs the Appropriations and Budget Committee stated that "The voters of Oklahoma were told lottery profits would go to our schools and any effort to divert that money is a violation of the voters' trust."

In explaining the shortfall, Scroggins said the Oklahoma lottery competes with Indian gaming for revenue. According to the Office of State Finance, gross revenue from casinos in fiscal year 2007 was $777 million, compared to the approximate gross of $215 million spent on the Oklahoma lottery (with $70 million being sent to education).

I appreciate and support the leadership shown by Chairman Benge in keeping our commitment to the voters.

I expect that the failure of the lottery will lead lottery proponents to continue to propose various forms of lottery expansion, such as the addition of video lottery, Keno and pull-tabs. I also believe an effort will be made for the State of Oklahoma to compete with the tribes by getting into the casino business through the operation of state owned casinos.

In my view, growth of state sponsored gambling, combined with tribal gambling, will encourage Oklahoma politicians to call for expanding the welfare safety net for the poor, the largest societal group negatively affected by gambling losses.

We saw the results of similar expansion this year as legislators increased Medicaid eligibility limits, spending millions of your tax dollars in the process. How much sense does it make for government to seek to enhance government revenue by growing a gambling system that takes money from the poor, while at the same time spending millions on an increasing welfare system?

It appears to me that the primary net result of this bizarre, circular chain of events is an increase of government spending and government influence over people's lives.

Rather than conniving new ways to make money for government, state leaders should focus on diminishing the size and influence of government. I believe we all win when government interference in our lives is lessened. I am committed to supporting policies that achieve this goal.

Passing the Torch

By Senator Jay Paul Gumm of Durant

Hello again, everybody! This week, as part of the celebration of Constitution Day, I again made my trip to schools across southern Oklahoma to talk with students about representative democracy.

Since becoming your senator, the week of Constitution Day has been one to which I most look forward. Every year, the National Conference of State Legislatures sponsors “America’s Legislators Back to School” during the week we celebrate the signing of the U.S. Constitution.

This week was chosen because it is when we celebrate the signing of the U.S. Constitution on September 17, 1787. During the week, I try to visit as many schools as possible across my district, and I’ve been on the road every day traveling from one school to another. Our Constitution is nothing short of a miraculous document. It established a government that for the first time on Earth put political power in the hands of the people rather than those who govern. As I tell the students, that means you are the boss and I work for you.

With that power, I remind the students, come serious responsibilities. The most important of those responsibilities is to register to vote when they turn 18, and then to exercise that right whenever the polls open. That is how they give instructions to those of us who serve in public office.

Constitution Day 2007 is a special one for us here in Oklahoma. September 17, 2007 not only marked the 220th anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution, it marked the 100th anniversary of the ratification of Oklahoma’s Constitution.

My first stop in my district this week – appropriately – was in Tishomingo, hometown of “Alfalfa Bill” Murray. Alfalfa Bill was the president of the Oklahoma Constitutional Convention. Few individuals left a more indelible mark on Oklahoma’s history than Alfalfa Bill.

The first three words of the U.S. Constitution – “We the People” – and in Oklahoma’s Constitution the words “All political power is inherent in the people” reflect the heart of representative democracy. Those words remind all of in elective office that we work for you.

More than 30 years ago, when I was a student at Robert E. Lee Elementary School in Durant, an elected official visited my classroom. It has been so long, I cannot even remember who it was, but I do remember something he said. He told us that his job in public service was “to make things better.”

That was the first spark that led me to one day wanting to serve in public office. I consider that simple but eloquent description of public service the most important message I can deliver to the students with whom I visit. It is my way to “pass the torch to a new generation.”

Thanks again for reading the "Senate Minute"; have a great week and may God bless you all.