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.

The Stimulus Nightmare

Earlier this year, I wrote about this year's state budget shortfall and explained how I thought the shortfall would provide an excellent opportunity for state government to get smaller. I felt that the shortfall would force state government to cut the most wasteful and inappropriate functions.

Many of the residents of my house district can articulate their belief that government is wasteful with our tax dollars. I agree with them and see a budget shortfall as the perfect tool to make politicians and bureaucrats cut some of this waste.

For example, during one budget committee meeting hearing this year, a state agency testified that by rearranging some office space and giving up a conference room, they were able to realize $40,000 savings per year in rent fees. The way I see it, budget shortfalls which rid state government of $40,000 conference rooms are a huge blessing.

During the next economic upturn when state revenues will once again increase, it was my hope that conservative legislative leaders would return the increased revenue back to the people in the form of tax reduction instead of using the money to once again grow government. The result of the downturn which forced spending reductions, coupled with tax relief during the upturn, would be a smaller, more efficient state government. I am convinced that over the next few years, this simple strategy would be effective in returning government to a much more limited role.

Earlier in the legislative year, it appeared that this was about to occur. As the economic shortfall worsened and state government revenues dropped, state leaders were under the gun and facing tremendous pressure to take the necessary steps to start reducing state government spending.

Then everything changed as the federal stimulus money started becoming available. Because of this funding, not only did state government not get smaller this year, it will actually spend slightly more money.

It is hard to tell how many strings are going to be attached to the stimulus funding. For instance, in order for Oklahoma to accept stimulus money for one state agency, the state had to loosen its unemployment funding eligibility criteria, even though Oklahoma's eligibility guidelines are already extremely liberal. Once a program like this is expanded, it will be very difficult to shrink it back down to the appropriate size.

This is why I maintained a policy this year of voting against budget bills where it was apparent that stimulus money was being received. Not only has the stimulus greatly harmed the future of our nation, it has also made it much more difficult to eliminate waste in state governments all across our country.

Adding Even More Debt

Last week, the House approved the issuance of new long-term debt to finance a dam project on the Arkansas River in the Tulsa area. This means that each year, more of your money will be added to the millions of tax payer dollars that are tied down to paying debt and debt interest.

You may remember that last year the Legislature approved a major debt package in the last few days of the legislative session. The Tulsa dam project was one of the issues in this bill. Since that time, the Oklahoma Supreme Court has held that the debt bill was unconstitutional because it "log-rolled" more than one issue into the bill.

I feel that the Court should have also held the bill unconstitutional because it did not allow the people to vote on the bond issuance, which I believe is probably required by our state Constitution in this instance.

In the case of the Tulsa dam project, it is especially egregious because this local project should not involve state dollars. I don't think taxpayers in Logan and Oklahoma Counties should be forced to pay for years on a project that is specific to the Tulsa area. If Tulsa taxpayers want a project in their area, they should pay local taxes for that project.

In fact, the voters in Tulsa were asked to vote on a similar project and they turned it down. So now, unlike some of the recent MAPS improvement projects in the Oklahoma City area which were been paid for with local tax dollars, this key Tulsa area improvement project will be paid for by all Oklahomans.

Adding more debt is especially unwise in a fiscal down year. This debt problem has hit especially close to home this year when the state government will be cutting agency budgets because of the downturn. Recently, agencies’ officials testified to legislative committees about where they would make cuts if the economic downturn forces them to cut their budgets by 5%. Those agencies burdened with long-term debt simply point to the fact that they cannot legally cut their bond payments. In fact, a 5% cut might be more like a 10% to 15% cut in discretionary revenue. In other words, as we have gone through time and more debt has been added to the state government, the ability to shrink government becomes inhibited.

I suppose voters might be able to find comfort in the fact that compared to the federal level counterparts, the long term debt incurrence at the state level is minuscule by comparison.

One of my favorite quotes is from ancient Roman times. "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." In today's world, a great majority of the people have bought into the philosophy that the incurrence of unnecessary debt is no longer something that should be avoided at all costs. I very much disagree with this, and believe that as a society we will pay a heavy price due to the lack of fiscal discipline of our elected officials.

I remain committed to voting against all proposals that incur new debt.

House Bill 1032 - The Modernization Bill

In previous weeks I have made the case that state government's massive budget shortfall presents an exciting opportunity to spend less money. To accomplish this, the government will be forced to make long needed changes. Instead of the downturn being a detriment to the people, I believe many of these changes will actually improve the quality of service provided to the people. The downturn is in fact a blessing, as it forces the government to do what it should have done a long time ago.

Some of these proposed changes are reflected in a bill I am authoring. House Bill 1032 has already been approved by the House Modernization Committee and is awaiting action on the House floor.

The primary focus of the bill is to make all license and permit operations accessible online. The Oklahoma web portal would be able to offer the same services as theTexasOnline.com web site. From that web site, you can participate in such tasks as renewing your occupational license or license plate.

The obvious benefit to this reform is cutting through cumbersome state bureaucracy and allowing direct access to these services without having to use government resources. This should put an end to the old practice of waiting in long lines to get a license or permit.

This benefit recently became very obvious in the California when part of the state government was forced on a furlough because of a massive money shortfall. Normally this would be a huge problem because people were unable to go to the tag office to renew their licenses. But since they could renew online, online registrations increased by about 20% during that time.

The Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure is already saving $20,964 per year because of an online professional license renewal system. Staff time was cut by fifty percent. It also appears that 99% of license renewals now occur online.

Another important reform contained in HB 1032 is transparency. The bill requires more state spending be made available for public review through the state's online portal. As the state institutes more reforms geared towards public accountability, there will be more and more opportunities for greater transparency. It is this transparency that will discourage abusive spending practices.

HB 1032 would also convert state payroll to a bi-weekly system. State government appears to be one of the few organizations that still issue monthly payroll. This leads to any number of problems: from hindering the recruitment of employees to what appears to be the unnecessary need for a supplemental payroll system. The conversion to the bi-weekly system could save the state millions, as man hours are freed up from recalculating and issuing supplemental payroll.

HB 1032 joins HB 1410, HB 1704 and SB 980 as part of the effort to modernize government this legislative session.

Stopping your Vital Information from being at Risk

Knowing what you know about the ineffectiveness of the government, do you really trust the government to protect your most vital information?

This year, state government must cut state spending by about 600 million dollars (closer to 900 million, if you count spend that will be offset by previously mandated increases). This forces state leaders to enact needed reforms that should have occurred many years ago.

One of these reforms is the centralization of the state's massive and (up until now) rather chaotically managed information technology (IT) functions.

Each year, state government has been spending $340,577,938 of your hard-earned tax dollars on IT and telecommunications. This does not count the salaries of the hundreds of state employees who are assigned to IT departments. These IT functions are spread out on an agency-by-agency basis, with each agency capable of creating their own IT empire.

Can you imagine what would happen to a private business that did not efficiently coordinate the actions of a department that spent in excess of 340 million dollars?

This year I am working with Senate Pro Tem Glenn Coffee as the House author of his Senate Bill 980, and State Representative David Derby as the co-author of House Bill 1704 to craft a plan that will break down these barriers and allow for the direct coordination of state government IT functions.

The obvious reason for this reform is savings. Let's consider how much the state spends on energy costs associated with duplicative server capacity. While private businesses are taking advantage of cloud computing and blade servers with shared power sources, too many antiquated government servers are using too much energy. How much sense does it make for Agency A to use a different server system than Agency B when they easily use the same storage device? Millions of taxpayers dollars could probably be saved each year if duplicated servers were eliminated and new technology was used to maximize speed and space.

A second very important reason for reform is that of security. Today, government computers contain everything from your tax returns to your biometric description. State computer systems are constantly under attack from those who would like to steal this information. State officials must constantly guard against these attacks. One of the most frequent originators of these attacks is from Communist China, where there is no way for our law enforcement officials to bring those responsible to justice. The fact that the Chinese are working so hard to steal our information is very concerning. One of the more disturbing incidents includes the successful compromise about two years ago of a local law enforcement database known as OLETS, which Oklahoma law enforcement agencies use to access information pertinent to the security of our communities.

Under current state law, as is all too often the case in government, potential security issues must be mitigated through a long, complicated, multi-step bureaucratic process. In today's rapidly changing technology, we no longer have the luxury of letting a bureaucratic, slow-moving government put our vital information at risk.

Senate Bill 980 and House Bill 1704 are part of the agenda of both the House and Senate leadership and I have been honored to work with Senator Coffee and Representative Derby in advancing this important reform.

Opposing Debt in a Debt-Happy Society

If you are like me, you are very upset by the recent actions of the federal government. Under the false pretense of an economic stimulus, they are using the economic downturn to approve yet another nearly trillion dollars of debt! The latest "stimulus" bill consists of a tremendous amount of political pork, some of which is no doubt designed to help the organizations that put the current office holders in power. This is just the latest (and worst) in a series of actions taken by the federal government over the past few years that are unimaginably irresponsible.

We have come to a time in our nation's history when our leaders are actually purporting to be able to partially eliminate a downturn in the market. Markets naturally have ebbs and flows and it is to be expected that every few years there will be another downturn. There are many who are now in power who seem to have put aside the perspective provided by hundreds of years of history to such an extent that they really believe the government is powerful enough to prevent an economic downturn. Do we really want a government that views itself like that?

I believe this attitude has been reflected in recent years by British Prime Minister Gordan Brown who, while not one of our government officials, has received much attention for his reported pronouncement that the cycle of boom and bust had been brought to a halt in his country. Today, instead of admitting he was wrong in talking about the economic downturn, Brown points to the fact that this is a global recession. Brown's claims bring forward the frightening spectacle that in order to truly end boom and bust, governmental action on a global scale may be necessary.

In the meantime, gone are the days when it seemed that our leaders were willing to talk about balancing the budget, cutting spending, and addressing the looming crisis of the depleted social security fund. As national politicians have recently demonstrated all too well, it is very easy for politicians to spend now what will be someone else's debt in the future.

In Oklahoma, state officials have unfortunately given in to the same temptation. Issuing long-term debt is often considered by state officials as a way to handle short-term concerns. For years, Oklahoma officials have issued new debt and have done so by using the excuse, "Everyone else is doing it and we don't have as much debt as they do."

This issue hit especially close to home when agencies' officials testified recently to legislative committees about where they would make cuts if the economic downturn forces them to cut their budgets by 5%. Those agencies burdened with long-term debt simply point to the fact that they cannot cut their bond payments, and in fact, a 5% cut might be more like a 10% to 15% cut in discretionary revenue. In other words, as we have gone through time and more debt has been added to the state government, the ability to shrink government becomes inhibited.

This is why I have maintained and will continue to maintain a strict policy of voting against all new issuance of debt.