Last month the House of Representative’s Government Modernization Committee conducted a study to examine cost savings and efficiencies which could occur as a result of consolidating state agencies. As part of that study, we heard testimony about the unusually high number of agencies, boards and commissions (ABCs) which are a component of Oklahoma state government.
One of the reports stated that as of 2007, Oklahoma had about 520 ABCs. The report referenced a 1995 study which was commissioned by Governor Frank Keating. The 1995 study stated that Oklahoma had over 360 ABCs at that time and indicated that this diversified approach to governance made it difficult to manage related functions, and impossible to hold someone accountable for minimal results.
The Keating report was produced by a Commission of Government Performance. The Commission was comprised of business and community leaders from across the state working with a team of 50 state employees.
The Commission pointed to Oklahoma’s weak gubernatorial powers as a reason for the inefficiency of state government processes. With power spread across so many different ABCs, Oklahoma’s Governor simply isn’t empowered to make state government more accountable. By proxy, this means that Oklahomans do not have a method to hold government accountable and make it more efficient.
The report stated that other studies going back as far as 1928 have found that Oklahoma government could be more effective if the chief executive officer were given more authority to change state government. The Keating report described the current situation as a situation where the chief executive officer could call a meeting and the managers of state did not have to attend. The report opined that this is no way to run such a large enterprise.
The Commission detailed that this fragmented organization process produces a clear lack of line of authority and an “unresponsive, duplicative and costly state government.”
Unfortunately, the Keating report was ignored by Oklahoma lawmakers. Today, instead of shrinking in size, Oklahoma government is much larger than before and the Governor does not appear to have been empowered to effect change.
Due to the budget downturn and the recent changes in many of the statewide elected office positions, I believe we will have an opportunity to incorporate some of the suggested reforms this year. We must finally start to reduce the number of Oklahoma agencies, boards and commissions and we should also empower the Governor with the ability to remove members of boards and commissions.
This will finally give Oklahomans the opportunity to start downsizing state government. If these changes are accepted, when we vote for the position of Governor in the future, we will be voting for a chief executive officer who will have the ability to require Oklahoma government to use our taxpayer dollars wiser and more efficiently.
The report’s suggestions should have been followed 15 years ago. I do believe in the “better late than never” adage, and feel we should incorporate these ideas for reform as soon as possible.
Monday, December 27, 2010
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Open Record and Meeting Law for the Legislature
This past week presented the first of a series of legislative deadlines which legislators met in order to propose and advance legislation for the upcoming session. Lawmakers were required to meet a December 10 deadline when they were required to submit the first request for registering possible legislation for the 2011 session.
Throughout the year I am asked to propose any number of ideas. These requests range from those proposed by constituents who contact my office regarding a needed change in the law which directly affects them to suggested changes in the law to allow for more efficiency and transparency in Oklahoma government.
I document these suggestions when I receive them and before the first submission deadline, I begin the process of reviewing this documentation. It is my task to select from the list of possible legislation so that it comes as close as possible to meeting the rules which limit the number of bills which a Representative is allowed to sponsor.
It is my practice to see that my legislative proposals include a balance of constituent ideas and aggressive attempts to enact significant reforms and government modernization proposals which I need to sponsor as Chair of the House Government Modernization, Accountability and Transparency Committee.
I feel this balance is important because it ensures that I represent the voice of my constituents, advance new ideas for reform, while also passing legislation which makes government more accountable. This strategy has allowed me to win approval for a series of reform minded legislation in the past few years while also introducing aggressive new reform concepts which I believe will be eventually approved by the Legislature.
One of the bills I intend to sponsor and which I believe will have a significant impact on making Oklahoma government more responsible to the citizens is a proposal to require that the Oklahoma Legislature comply with Oklahoma's open record and open meeting laws.
These two very important laws require Oklahoma governing bodies to conduct business according to a set of rules which are designed to ensure your right as a citizen to know that what happens in government is upheld. However, the Legislature is exempted from these laws. In my view this is wrong, and I believe the Legislature should abide by the same laws they ask other Oklahoma governing bodies to abide by.
This is not a ground-breaking proposal. Other state governments already require that their legislative bodies follow their respective state’s open record and open meeting laws.
One of the most important aspects of this law would be the cessation of legislative caucuses discussing issues behind closed doors. An important principle of open meeting laws is the concept which dictates that a majority of a governing body should never meet behind closed doors to discuss business. This concept helps keep policy makers from taking a public stand which is different from the position taken in private.
An open records law would also establish a clear set of criteria which would govern which legislative records should be kept private and which should be made public.
I know that passing this particular proposal will be a difficult challenge, but I am convinced that it is the right thing to do.
Throughout the year I am asked to propose any number of ideas. These requests range from those proposed by constituents who contact my office regarding a needed change in the law which directly affects them to suggested changes in the law to allow for more efficiency and transparency in Oklahoma government.
I document these suggestions when I receive them and before the first submission deadline, I begin the process of reviewing this documentation. It is my task to select from the list of possible legislation so that it comes as close as possible to meeting the rules which limit the number of bills which a Representative is allowed to sponsor.
It is my practice to see that my legislative proposals include a balance of constituent ideas and aggressive attempts to enact significant reforms and government modernization proposals which I need to sponsor as Chair of the House Government Modernization, Accountability and Transparency Committee.
I feel this balance is important because it ensures that I represent the voice of my constituents, advance new ideas for reform, while also passing legislation which makes government more accountable. This strategy has allowed me to win approval for a series of reform minded legislation in the past few years while also introducing aggressive new reform concepts which I believe will be eventually approved by the Legislature.
One of the bills I intend to sponsor and which I believe will have a significant impact on making Oklahoma government more responsible to the citizens is a proposal to require that the Oklahoma Legislature comply with Oklahoma's open record and open meeting laws.
These two very important laws require Oklahoma governing bodies to conduct business according to a set of rules which are designed to ensure your right as a citizen to know that what happens in government is upheld. However, the Legislature is exempted from these laws. In my view this is wrong, and I believe the Legislature should abide by the same laws they ask other Oklahoma governing bodies to abide by.
This is not a ground-breaking proposal. Other state governments already require that their legislative bodies follow their respective state’s open record and open meeting laws.
One of the most important aspects of this law would be the cessation of legislative caucuses discussing issues behind closed doors. An important principle of open meeting laws is the concept which dictates that a majority of a governing body should never meet behind closed doors to discuss business. This concept helps keep policy makers from taking a public stand which is different from the position taken in private.
An open records law would also establish a clear set of criteria which would govern which legislative records should be kept private and which should be made public.
I know that passing this particular proposal will be a difficult challenge, but I am convinced that it is the right thing to do.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Getting Specific
One of my favorite stories about Oklahoma history involves the Oklahoma Constitutional Convention which met in Guthrie and the development of the preamble to the Oklahoma Constitution.
You may recall that the preamble reads as follows: “Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessing of liberty; to secure just and rightful government; to promote our mutual welfare and happiness, we, the people of the State of Oklahoma, do ordain and establish this Constitution.”
The initial drafting of the preamble was assigned to a committee of the convention. That committee created a first draft which initially referred to God only as “the Supreme Ruler of the Universe."
The draft was met with opposition and the members of the committee were asked if their mothers had taught them to pray to “the Supreme Ruler of the Universe.”
The chair of the convention strongly insisted that the delegates could not leave “God” out of the constitution and the next day he introduced a substitute which included the words “Almighty God” -- which we use as our constitutional preamble to this day.
The founders of our state wanted very specifically to acknowledge the existence of God and our need for His guidance.
This specificity was also reflected in our nation’s Declaration of Independence when our founding fathers declared that our rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness come from our Creator and it is the responsibility of government to preserve these rights. By acknowledging God’s existence and attributing our unalienable rights to His providence, our founding fathers were memorializing an important definition of the true purpose of government which we acknowledge to this day.
I was reminded of this story after a recent meeting of Republican legislators where the attendees were asked to develop a document declaring the principles by which Republican House members will govern during the upcoming year.
Republican legislators had a choice to make. They could have expressed support for traditional values by making a generic statement to this effect. This approach would provide values voters with the comfort of a token gesture -- and is all too often the "safe" approach to take because it provides acknowledgment of important principles while not running the risk of offending those who are embarrassed by the faith-based principles with which Oklahoma has been so identified.
However, rather than providing this level of token support, Republican policy makers chose to amend their platform to include a much more specific statement which affirmed that we will support policies which defend Judeo-Christian values.
This action made the clear statement that we know this specific values framework is the basis for our legal system and we are not afraid of pointing to the importance of recognizing and preserving this values system.
This specificity was copied throughout the Republican Representatives’ policy document as the attendees took clear stands on a number of issues which are important to Oklahomans.
I certainly appreciated this, as all too often politicians are not courageous enough to take clear stands on the issues of today. Even if all voters do not agree on every one of these specific topics, I believe that citizens do appreciate when political leaders have the courage to take a clear stand and stop playing the tired political game of making token vague and general statements on issues of importance to Oklahomans.
You may recall that the preamble reads as follows: “Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessing of liberty; to secure just and rightful government; to promote our mutual welfare and happiness, we, the people of the State of Oklahoma, do ordain and establish this Constitution.”
The initial drafting of the preamble was assigned to a committee of the convention. That committee created a first draft which initially referred to God only as “the Supreme Ruler of the Universe."
The draft was met with opposition and the members of the committee were asked if their mothers had taught them to pray to “the Supreme Ruler of the Universe.”
The chair of the convention strongly insisted that the delegates could not leave “God” out of the constitution and the next day he introduced a substitute which included the words “Almighty God” -- which we use as our constitutional preamble to this day.
The founders of our state wanted very specifically to acknowledge the existence of God and our need for His guidance.
This specificity was also reflected in our nation’s Declaration of Independence when our founding fathers declared that our rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness come from our Creator and it is the responsibility of government to preserve these rights. By acknowledging God’s existence and attributing our unalienable rights to His providence, our founding fathers were memorializing an important definition of the true purpose of government which we acknowledge to this day.
I was reminded of this story after a recent meeting of Republican legislators where the attendees were asked to develop a document declaring the principles by which Republican House members will govern during the upcoming year.
Republican legislators had a choice to make. They could have expressed support for traditional values by making a generic statement to this effect. This approach would provide values voters with the comfort of a token gesture -- and is all too often the "safe" approach to take because it provides acknowledgment of important principles while not running the risk of offending those who are embarrassed by the faith-based principles with which Oklahoma has been so identified.
However, rather than providing this level of token support, Republican policy makers chose to amend their platform to include a much more specific statement which affirmed that we will support policies which defend Judeo-Christian values.
This action made the clear statement that we know this specific values framework is the basis for our legal system and we are not afraid of pointing to the importance of recognizing and preserving this values system.
This specificity was copied throughout the Republican Representatives’ policy document as the attendees took clear stands on a number of issues which are important to Oklahomans.
I certainly appreciated this, as all too often politicians are not courageous enough to take clear stands on the issues of today. Even if all voters do not agree on every one of these specific topics, I believe that citizens do appreciate when political leaders have the courage to take a clear stand and stop playing the tired political game of making token vague and general statements on issues of importance to Oklahomans.
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Our Opportunity
This next legislative session will represent the first session during which Republicans will have control of both the legislative and executive branches of state government. As you might imagine this has raised the expectations of Oklahoma conservatives who desire the reform of state government.
In the past, even though Republicans controlled the Legislature, the Democrats remained in charge of the executive branch and that fact was used as a crutch that was baked into time-delaying processes utilized by Republican legislators who were less inclined to aggressively advocate for needed reforms.
For instance, reform legislation could be held up in committee with the argument that the governor would veto it and it would be wrong to make Republicans take a tough vote on it.
In a more complex example, Republican legislators were placed under heavy pressure to agree to fee and tax increases because the agreement had been negotiated with the Democrats in the executive branch. We were told that we risked a special legislative session if we did not vote for these increases and honor the agreement which had been negotiated. We were also told that a special session would risk exposing Republicans to defeat at the polls.
I never thought my vote should be influenced by the fact that our legislative leaders had negotiated a deal with the Democrats, or theoretical political ramifications, so I voted my conscience and did not play the political game. I figured that if enough of us voted according to the principles we campaigned on and actually defeated the government-expanding compromise agreement, the Democrats would be forced to deal with the political reality that Oklahoma's conservative populace demanded true reforms.
In my view, those compromises thwarted that day of reckoning, and to this day many of the needed institutional transforming reforms of state government have never taken place.
However, I do understand why so many of my Republican colleagues accepted this pragmatism and don’t hold it against them for buying into the status-quo arguments. After all, they were basically being told that we had to agree to hold our noses and vote for the status-quo so that Republicans could be elected to office and then we could reverse the fee increases and institute true reform. Well, that time is now! With a solid Republican majority in the Oklahoma House and Senate and a Republican in the governor’s office, there are no more excuses for not doing the right thing.
This is the time when we will see if the story that we were being told at that time was true.
It is my hope that we will be able to aggressively seek to bring reform to those state government processes into which generations of Democrat office holders have allowed so many inefficiencies and waste to accumulate.
I certainly intend to keep you informed as to whether or not this is the case as this year’s session gets underway.
In the past, even though Republicans controlled the Legislature, the Democrats remained in charge of the executive branch and that fact was used as a crutch that was baked into time-delaying processes utilized by Republican legislators who were less inclined to aggressively advocate for needed reforms.
For instance, reform legislation could be held up in committee with the argument that the governor would veto it and it would be wrong to make Republicans take a tough vote on it.
In a more complex example, Republican legislators were placed under heavy pressure to agree to fee and tax increases because the agreement had been negotiated with the Democrats in the executive branch. We were told that we risked a special legislative session if we did not vote for these increases and honor the agreement which had been negotiated. We were also told that a special session would risk exposing Republicans to defeat at the polls.
I never thought my vote should be influenced by the fact that our legislative leaders had negotiated a deal with the Democrats, or theoretical political ramifications, so I voted my conscience and did not play the political game. I figured that if enough of us voted according to the principles we campaigned on and actually defeated the government-expanding compromise agreement, the Democrats would be forced to deal with the political reality that Oklahoma's conservative populace demanded true reforms.
In my view, those compromises thwarted that day of reckoning, and to this day many of the needed institutional transforming reforms of state government have never taken place.
However, I do understand why so many of my Republican colleagues accepted this pragmatism and don’t hold it against them for buying into the status-quo arguments. After all, they were basically being told that we had to agree to hold our noses and vote for the status-quo so that Republicans could be elected to office and then we could reverse the fee increases and institute true reform. Well, that time is now! With a solid Republican majority in the Oklahoma House and Senate and a Republican in the governor’s office, there are no more excuses for not doing the right thing.
This is the time when we will see if the story that we were being told at that time was true.
It is my hope that we will be able to aggressively seek to bring reform to those state government processes into which generations of Democrat office holders have allowed so many inefficiencies and waste to accumulate.
I certainly intend to keep you informed as to whether or not this is the case as this year’s session gets underway.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Are Traditional Values a Frivolous Distraction?
In last week’s article I commented on the fact that this is the time of year when policy is already starting to be established for the upcoming session of the Oklahoma Legislature.
I noted that the important issue of property tax reform is set to be discussed as Representative David Dank has once again filed the property tax reform proposal. I also pointed to the encouraging sign that perhaps important legislative process reforms will be initiated following the convening of a task force by House Speaker-elect Kris Steele for that purpose.
I view these as positive first signs and I enjoy writing about them because it is has been my intent to use these articles to provide a special emphasis on positive news as a counter to all of the discouraging news we hear about in politics these days.
However, I feel an obligation to communicate all of the facts both good and bad and a Thanksgiving day news article about this year’s upcoming legislation destroyed some of this optimism and started a firestorm within the House Republican caucus. The article indicated that Steele and other Republican leaders want to place an emphasis on economic issues while reducing focus from frivolous distractions such as the defense of traditional values, immigration reform, second amendment issues, and presumably the related states’ rights legislation. Since when have Republicans considered traditional values issues to be frivolous?
Until now, this type of rhetoric has been used by the Democrats to demonize traditional values legislation and the courageous legislators who advanced it. To have this attitude now being seemingly being endorsed by our own Speaker of the House is devastating.
A follow-up article indicated that one of the issues on which Steele does want us to focus is his proposal to allow government entities to regulate smoking within privately owned businesses. Very few voters voted for the Republicans in order to empower Republicans to allow government to get bigger. It was a shock to realize that our leadership would seem to suggest that we should not focus on the issues which have defined our party but instead should consider allowing government regulation to expand.
Republicans were elected to head up both the legislative and executive branches of state government for first time in state history because the people of Oklahoma desperately want state government to stand up to the federal government. Oklahomans want us to assert our rights under the tenth amendment, stop the insanity being propagated in Washington DC, roll back mountains of government waste and inefficiencies which generations of Democrat office holders allowed to become institutions of state government and which are costing Oklahoma taxpayers so much money in waste, shrink the state tax code so that Oklahoma can compete with states who do not have an income tax for economic growth, defend against the assault on the traditional values which have made our nation great, and remove the government regulations which have built up over the years against our important freedoms such as our second amendment rights.
Along with Oklahomans, I maintain that these issues are not frivolous distractions. Rather, they are the core principles which resulted in Republicans being elected to office. It appears these principles are now under an all-out assault and in the next few months it will be our responsibility as officer holders to stand up and defend them despite efforts by our leadership to do otherwise.
This will be a fight to preserve honestly and integrity. Nearly every Republican campaigned for office on these principles (especially those who represent rural areas where traditional values are extremely important). It is shocking to think that once elected, Republican office holders would break their word and abandon the principles espoused in their campaign materials simply because the powerful special interests in Oklahoma City view them as embarrassing frivolous distractions.
Next week I will provide some insights as to why conservative office holders are especially frustrated by this turn of events.
I noted that the important issue of property tax reform is set to be discussed as Representative David Dank has once again filed the property tax reform proposal. I also pointed to the encouraging sign that perhaps important legislative process reforms will be initiated following the convening of a task force by House Speaker-elect Kris Steele for that purpose.
I view these as positive first signs and I enjoy writing about them because it is has been my intent to use these articles to provide a special emphasis on positive news as a counter to all of the discouraging news we hear about in politics these days.
However, I feel an obligation to communicate all of the facts both good and bad and a Thanksgiving day news article about this year’s upcoming legislation destroyed some of this optimism and started a firestorm within the House Republican caucus. The article indicated that Steele and other Republican leaders want to place an emphasis on economic issues while reducing focus from frivolous distractions such as the defense of traditional values, immigration reform, second amendment issues, and presumably the related states’ rights legislation. Since when have Republicans considered traditional values issues to be frivolous?
Until now, this type of rhetoric has been used by the Democrats to demonize traditional values legislation and the courageous legislators who advanced it. To have this attitude now being seemingly being endorsed by our own Speaker of the House is devastating.
A follow-up article indicated that one of the issues on which Steele does want us to focus is his proposal to allow government entities to regulate smoking within privately owned businesses. Very few voters voted for the Republicans in order to empower Republicans to allow government to get bigger. It was a shock to realize that our leadership would seem to suggest that we should not focus on the issues which have defined our party but instead should consider allowing government regulation to expand.
Republicans were elected to head up both the legislative and executive branches of state government for first time in state history because the people of Oklahoma desperately want state government to stand up to the federal government. Oklahomans want us to assert our rights under the tenth amendment, stop the insanity being propagated in Washington DC, roll back mountains of government waste and inefficiencies which generations of Democrat office holders allowed to become institutions of state government and which are costing Oklahoma taxpayers so much money in waste, shrink the state tax code so that Oklahoma can compete with states who do not have an income tax for economic growth, defend against the assault on the traditional values which have made our nation great, and remove the government regulations which have built up over the years against our important freedoms such as our second amendment rights.
Along with Oklahomans, I maintain that these issues are not frivolous distractions. Rather, they are the core principles which resulted in Republicans being elected to office. It appears these principles are now under an all-out assault and in the next few months it will be our responsibility as officer holders to stand up and defend them despite efforts by our leadership to do otherwise.
This will be a fight to preserve honestly and integrity. Nearly every Republican campaigned for office on these principles (especially those who represent rural areas where traditional values are extremely important). It is shocking to think that once elected, Republican office holders would break their word and abandon the principles espoused in their campaign materials simply because the powerful special interests in Oklahoma City view them as embarrassing frivolous distractions.
Next week I will provide some insights as to why conservative office holders are especially frustrated by this turn of events.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Changes in Oklahoma Government
Last week the new members of the Oklahoma Legislature took their oath of office. This action officially commenced the term of the 53rd Legislature which will last for the next two years.
Unlike Congress, the Oklahoma legislature does not have much opportunity to conduct business as a lame duck legislature. The new legislators are taking office just two weeks after being elected.
This sets in motion a series of legislative deadlines as in the upcoming few weeks legislation will be filed, new leadership teams will be appointed, the committee structure will be reviewed and new committee chairmen and vice-chairman will assume their new roles.
Compounding this level of rapidly occurring change is the fact that not only will new leadership teams take office in both the House and Senate due to the term limits of the House Speaker and Senate Speaker Pro-Temp but almost all statewide officials will leave office and, as of January 10th, a new team of statewide elected officials will start their terms.
These new officials are now seeking to establish their team of employees. This has created a talent vacuum as many of the individuals who will influence the shaping and implementation of policy are are now being retained by the new state officials and legislative leaders.
The newly elected officials are now making some of the most important decisions that they will ever make because the quality of their service will be extremely dependent on the work of the people whom they choose to operate their offices.
This presents opportunities for those who have worked hard over the past few years and have developed a reputation for having conservative values, interacting well with the public and being dependable and efficient. Their services are now in high demand. As an example, one of my former legislative assistants received three invitations to apply for work with a new office holder in just the last few days alone.
The first new policy proposals are also starting to take shape. Last week, House of Representatives Speaker-elect Kris Steele commissioned a committee to consider reforms in the legislative process with a goal of enhancing legislative transparency. Two of these possible reforms will include the requirement for House conference committees to meet in public before approving legislation and eliminating the loophole by which legislation presented to the House in the last two days of the legislative session does not have to be posted to public purview for a certain amount of time prior to consideration by the House.
You may recall my past updates in which I described how a substantial amount of legislation is presented in these last two days which greatly leads to the opportunity for changes to be placed into law without the ability of legislators or the public to know or understand the impact of the change.
These reforms, if enacted, will go a long way in making the legislative process more transparent and would continue a series of recent reforms which is transforming the legislative process to being much more open.
Property tax reform is one of the most demanded reforms by House District 31 constituents. Representative David Dank has already filed HJR 1001 and HJR 1002 which once again seek to implement property tax reform.
This is also the time when new legislative office assignments occur and as an item of note my office will be moving from office number 400B to office number 437 starting as of this week. Please direct all future written correspondence to Office 437, 2300 North Lincoln Blvd., Oklahoma City, 73105.
Unlike Congress, the Oklahoma legislature does not have much opportunity to conduct business as a lame duck legislature. The new legislators are taking office just two weeks after being elected.
This sets in motion a series of legislative deadlines as in the upcoming few weeks legislation will be filed, new leadership teams will be appointed, the committee structure will be reviewed and new committee chairmen and vice-chairman will assume their new roles.
Compounding this level of rapidly occurring change is the fact that not only will new leadership teams take office in both the House and Senate due to the term limits of the House Speaker and Senate Speaker Pro-Temp but almost all statewide officials will leave office and, as of January 10th, a new team of statewide elected officials will start their terms.
These new officials are now seeking to establish their team of employees. This has created a talent vacuum as many of the individuals who will influence the shaping and implementation of policy are are now being retained by the new state officials and legislative leaders.
The newly elected officials are now making some of the most important decisions that they will ever make because the quality of their service will be extremely dependent on the work of the people whom they choose to operate their offices.
This presents opportunities for those who have worked hard over the past few years and have developed a reputation for having conservative values, interacting well with the public and being dependable and efficient. Their services are now in high demand. As an example, one of my former legislative assistants received three invitations to apply for work with a new office holder in just the last few days alone.
The first new policy proposals are also starting to take shape. Last week, House of Representatives Speaker-elect Kris Steele commissioned a committee to consider reforms in the legislative process with a goal of enhancing legislative transparency. Two of these possible reforms will include the requirement for House conference committees to meet in public before approving legislation and eliminating the loophole by which legislation presented to the House in the last two days of the legislative session does not have to be posted to public purview for a certain amount of time prior to consideration by the House.
You may recall my past updates in which I described how a substantial amount of legislation is presented in these last two days which greatly leads to the opportunity for changes to be placed into law without the ability of legislators or the public to know or understand the impact of the change.
These reforms, if enacted, will go a long way in making the legislative process more transparent and would continue a series of recent reforms which is transforming the legislative process to being much more open.
Property tax reform is one of the most demanded reforms by House District 31 constituents. Representative David Dank has already filed HJR 1001 and HJR 1002 which once again seek to implement property tax reform.
This is also the time when new legislative office assignments occur and as an item of note my office will be moving from office number 400B to office number 437 starting as of this week. Please direct all future written correspondence to Office 437, 2300 North Lincoln Blvd., Oklahoma City, 73105.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Defending an Important Principle
The events of the most recent election cycle have reminded me of the importance of what I believe to be one of the important governing principles established by our nation’s and state’s founding fathers.
When I sought election to office in 2006, one of the key components of my message to prospective voters was my opposition to efforts in the Legislature to increase State Representatives’ term of office to four years.
Currently, Oklahoma Representatives serve for two-year terms. I have observed that this makes the House of Representatives very responsive to the values of the people of Oklahoma. Each Representative must treat his constituents’ concerns with respect because the Representative knows he will be subject to a vote within a 24-month time period.
I also believe this is the reason that the House is likely to be the branch of the Legislature to generate new ideas for reform. Being forced to campaign for re-election every two years means the Representatives must talk to their constituents and listen to the latest ideas for change. This means that the House is more likely to sponsor these new ideas sooner rather than later.
The concept that the lower House of the Legislature (in this case, the House of Representatives) should be the closest to the people dates back many years and can be tied to the British governing principle where the lower House is known as the House of Commons and represents the values of regular citizens.
This important principle was copied by our nation’s founding fathers when they designed the lower House of the American Congress to be subject to re-election every two years. The writer of the 55th Federalist Paper (either Alexander Hamilton or James Madison) opined that it would be difficult for a member of the House of Representatives to dare to betray the trust committed to him by the voters within the short span of two years.
This policy was subsequently copied by our state’s founding fathers when they determined that members of the Oklahoma House of Representatives should stand for re-election every two years.
Also, much the same as our federal Congress, the Oklahoma Senate was designed to have longer serving terms because this policy insulates Senators from the sentiment of the moment and provides that they can afford to be a more deliberative legislative body.
The recent election cycle is a fantastic demonstration of the wisdom of our founding fathers. A historic number of Representatives were defeated this year because all the members of the federal House of Representatives were subject to re-election and because there was a significant consensus that Congress was not representing the values of the people. The Senate did not experience this same changeover because only a third of the Senators were eligible for re-election. Should Congress continue to not represent the values of the people, it is very likely that the leadership of the Senate will also change in upcoming years.
This is just one of many important and time tested principles that have been handed down to us through the years. Defending the application of this wise principle to Oklahoma governance became an important part of my desire to seek office in 2006. I am glad to report that after that election, efforts to change the terms of office of Oklahoma Representatives were abandoned. I believe this was in part because of the strong message sent by local voters.
When I sought election to office in 2006, one of the key components of my message to prospective voters was my opposition to efforts in the Legislature to increase State Representatives’ term of office to four years.
Currently, Oklahoma Representatives serve for two-year terms. I have observed that this makes the House of Representatives very responsive to the values of the people of Oklahoma. Each Representative must treat his constituents’ concerns with respect because the Representative knows he will be subject to a vote within a 24-month time period.
I also believe this is the reason that the House is likely to be the branch of the Legislature to generate new ideas for reform. Being forced to campaign for re-election every two years means the Representatives must talk to their constituents and listen to the latest ideas for change. This means that the House is more likely to sponsor these new ideas sooner rather than later.
The concept that the lower House of the Legislature (in this case, the House of Representatives) should be the closest to the people dates back many years and can be tied to the British governing principle where the lower House is known as the House of Commons and represents the values of regular citizens.
This important principle was copied by our nation’s founding fathers when they designed the lower House of the American Congress to be subject to re-election every two years. The writer of the 55th Federalist Paper (either Alexander Hamilton or James Madison) opined that it would be difficult for a member of the House of Representatives to dare to betray the trust committed to him by the voters within the short span of two years.
This policy was subsequently copied by our state’s founding fathers when they determined that members of the Oklahoma House of Representatives should stand for re-election every two years.
Also, much the same as our federal Congress, the Oklahoma Senate was designed to have longer serving terms because this policy insulates Senators from the sentiment of the moment and provides that they can afford to be a more deliberative legislative body.
The recent election cycle is a fantastic demonstration of the wisdom of our founding fathers. A historic number of Representatives were defeated this year because all the members of the federal House of Representatives were subject to re-election and because there was a significant consensus that Congress was not representing the values of the people. The Senate did not experience this same changeover because only a third of the Senators were eligible for re-election. Should Congress continue to not represent the values of the people, it is very likely that the leadership of the Senate will also change in upcoming years.
This is just one of many important and time tested principles that have been handed down to us through the years. Defending the application of this wise principle to Oklahoma governance became an important part of my desire to seek office in 2006. I am glad to report that after that election, efforts to change the terms of office of Oklahoma Representatives were abandoned. I believe this was in part because of the strong message sent by local voters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)